6 minutes ago, MLH said:

To me the whole Lucy rape storyline was why they had to break up Holly and Roger in the first place. 

Brent was not a good villain.  It would take two seconds to figure out that was a man dressing as a woman. If we the audience could tell right off the bat, the characters would too. 

I would have killed off Fletcher over Nadine though.  He was a horrible reporter.  I would have stuck him to the editorial page in the first place.  He had no place reporting anything as he was always way too emotionally triggered. 

@Contessa Donatella Exactly!  But, I really don't think they wanted to get rid of Alexandra nor Fletcher.  I really do think that Alexandra wasn't acting any worse than any other character on the show had done.  Did Bev say what specifically she wanted changed?

Bev talked about basically 2 things: working hours & story. She felt overworked & she didn't like the part of her story where she was giving Nick & Mindy a hard time. Bev thought that Alex would not have cared about the things her story was making it seem she cared about. She thought the Alex would have been accepting of Nick with Mindy, romantically. In fact I don't think she wanted Alex to have ANY opinion about Nick's love life. 

And, she wanted to work less, or fewer, hours per day, with the understanding that she always worked at least  4 days each week. 

I think giving her a break on either one would have helped immeasurably. Instead going by what she herself said, Jill ignored her concerns. We have no reason to doubt her account & also it sounds just like Jill. 

 

The Brent/Marian storyline had problems but it at least gripped viewers. It got attention, and unlike most of GL's storylines from this period, it was memorable. People were turning into see what would happen. They weren't doing that for so much of what happened on GL. It shows that good acting and a somewhat compelling story can lure in viewers despite plotting problems and all the viciousness. Compare that to all the stunts that JFP kept advertising during her tenure that did nothing to lure in viewers.

 

2 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

I'd like to nominate this really remarkable post for the post of the month for GL! Is there a second?

1 hour ago, MLH said:

Me!  It was a great job of explaining all those storylines.

Oh wow. Thank you both! 😊

46 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Now, fans hate it when a new EP comes in & starts firing people. One thing they've learned to do is to kind of cherry pick. So, instead of doing away with a whole family or community group, they'll take one each from ALL.

That could explain why some soaps were doing serial killer stories. I never understood that. It always seemed very unsoap-like.

17 minutes ago, MLH said:

If we the audience could tell right off the bat, the characters would too. 

Well, yes and no.

The audience is trying to figure storylines out. Characters in a story are living it.

I would argue a lot of people IRL wouldn't figure it out so fast because of a phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance. In the old West when some women dressed and lived as men, quite a few were not discovered until they died. And we would look at a picture now and say how could they not tell? But the idea of a woman dressed as a man was so foreign to them that that was enough to convince people they were men.

Nowadays it would probably be a lot less likely that people wouldn't question it. But even 30 years ago--especially in a podunk town like SF, where people freaked out about Jackson's earring for three solid years--if someone presented themselves as a woman, they would probably believe it. If you don't expect a man to dress as a woman, you're more likely to accept it when he says he's a woman.

Then there is suspension of disbelief,  where we wouldn't accept something IRL but will tolerate it in a story. Because it's a story and it's absorbing and compelling. 

Which, IIRC, is what happened when the story initially aired. It was not without controversy, but was also praised.

2 hours ago, chrisml said:

The Brent/Marian storyline had problems but it at least gripped viewers. It got attention, and unlike most of GL's storylines from this period, it was memorable. People were turning into see what would happen. They weren't doing that for so much of what happened on GL. It shows that good acting and a somewhat compelling story can lure in viewers despite plotting problems and all the viciousness. Compare that to all the stunts that JFP kept advertising during her tenure that did nothing to lure in viewers.

 

I do think that for those that really hadn't started watching until that storyline, it would seem interesting. 

I wouldn't have had Holly and Roger together in late 94 into early 95 in the first place. That whole Dinah thing wasn't well done, IMO. I couldn't stand her from the start. The second Fifth Street fire thing was a bore, IMO. I wasn't into the whole Matt/Vanessa storyline.  Bridget was stuck storyline wise, IMO. Nola was too. 

Amanda didn't really kick in for me until late 1996 when she and Roger teamed up to talk over Spaulding and Annie and Alan teamed up too. 

I wouldn't have had Holly be the one to help Roger after he got shot. It would have been Bridget and then tying in David into the story. Bridget witnesses Billy shoot Roger. However, she keeps quiet about seeing it, but helps Roger get mended up.  Creating a better connection between both characters & her ending up wanting Hart to return.  Her helping Roger also creates more friction between her Vanessa/Billy/Lewis family (as well as Matt) and create a better bond with Nola. Dylan wouldn't have returned and David has to make a decision about his friendship with Bridget. 

If the show wanted Holly with Fletcher, then they should have teamed up at that time to find out where Roger was and who shot him (I would have had Gilly end up breaking the story) and carried into the Brent/Marian storyline while WSPR is in competition in breaking the story with Tangie stuck in between. 

It should have been a Dinah/Amanda/Vanessa/Matt storyline that drew in Ross helping Amanda when the whole Madam thing came out. Causing friction between Ross and Blake already on thin ice with Dinah. 

I would have had Amanda date Marcus for the initial period of time she first arrived.  It would have an older woman/younger man with race, and class aspect of the Spaulding family and would have created more reasons for Amanda and Dinah to be friends (especially against Blake). 

Roger likes independent, feisty women and notices that about Amanda. Drawing him into her world when he asks to have an exclusive interviews with her and eventually starts to woe her to getting revenge on the Spaulding family. 

Then that is when I would have the triangle aspect between Roger/Holly/Fletcher happen.  

Lastly, I would have had more of a Giallo type aspect to the Brent/Marian story or no rape at all. 

Edited July 24Jul 24 by MLH

@MLHMore ... 

I don't understand what you meant about Lucy's rape being why they had to part Roger & Holly. They had a complicated relationship that also was on, at times, and off at other times. But, bottom line, Roger raped Holly. 

She didn't want to be a mother who meddled. I completely get that! Then, about the work schedule, she was about to have a vacation which automatically affords some relief  if someone is feeling overworked, or burned out, etc. But the worst is that obviously Jill did not make Bev feel heard & that is really being a poor manager of people. And, I have to remind myself that applied to both the work issue & the story issue. 

 

Some episodes on the Internet archive: Wayback Machine. No idea if they are extant. 1991-1992, Nick, Alex ... Just watched one where Alex had presents wrapped for Christmas, which is appropriate as this is a December show, but they all seem to relate to LuJack. Nick explodes & shouts & then leaves in a huff. 

"I am NOT your son. You are NOT my mother. Lady, I'm sorry, but you are NOBODY to me!"

https://archive.org/details/guidinglight-1992/GL-16Dec1991.mpg

 

1 hour ago, Contessa Donatella said:

@MLHMore ... 

I don't understand what you meant about Lucy's rape being why they had to part Roger & Holly. They had a complicated relationship that also was on, at times, and off at other times. But, bottom line, Roger raped Holly. 

She didn't want to be a mother who meddled. I completely get that! Then, about the work schedule, she was about to have a vacation which automatically affords some relief  if someone is feeling overworked, or burned out, etc. But the worst is that obviously Jill did not make Bev feel heard & that is really being a poor manager of people. And, I have to remind myself that applied to both the work issue & the story issue. 

 

I didn't think them having Roger and Holly basically living together made sense to begin with.  I think they paired her up with Fletcher, because he was the only guy available to pair her up with. I may be wrong though. I don't recall Holly interacting with Lucy at all during this.  Or very little, if she did.

That is so wrong for the show to treat Bev that way.  Her leaving really crippled the show. 

Thanks for posting the link.  There goes Nick...looking for Mindy.  LOL

I liked the tension between Alan Michael and Vanessa. Vanessa isn't falling for his BS.

 

 

Edited July 25Jul 25 by MLH

5 minutes ago, MLH said:

I didn't think them having Roger and Holly basically living together made sense to begin with.  I think they paired her up with Fletcher, because he was the only guy available to pair her up with. I may be wrong though. I don't recall Holly interacting with Lucy at all during this.  Or very little, if she did.

I have to admit that my dislike of Sonia Satra at least as Harley Lite, I do not pay good attention to anyone interacting with Lucy. Obviously that doesn't extend to her being a rape victim, then, I care. 

But, Roger & Holly is a problem. There always have been, or now I should say were, fans that wanted them to be an ongoing romantic pairing, which wouldn't have been possible. They share awful domestic history but they also share Christina/Chrissy/Blake & they have a push/pull dynamic. They are attracted to each other but they repel each other & the temptation might always be there between them to hurt each other intentionally. 

Fletcher, I think it is fair to consider him a default position, all the time, not just with Holly. Holly with Ed makes more sense to me but then most of the time I want to kick Ed in the shins, just once, to pay him back for Lillian. He really skated. Lillian was the one who paid. What am I saying? Mo was the one who paid the most. 

5 minutes ago, MLH said:

That is so wrong for the show to treat Bev that way.  Her leaving really crippled the show.

And, also it was a huge waste & one that didn't have to happen.

5 minutes ago, MLH said:

Thanks for posting the link.  There goes Nick...looking for Mindy.  LOL

Makes sense to me. 

5 minutes ago, MLH said:

I liked the tension between Alan Michael and Vanessa. Vanessa isn't falling for his BS.

As soon as I saw who was sitting to his left, I perked right up. Van does not suffer fools, at all.

On 7/23/2025 at 3:39 PM, DeeVee said:

Most of what we know about Alex and Alan's mother was revealed during the Barbados story:

Her name was Penelope Winthrop. Brandon was already involved with Sharina (Victoria's mother). But of course, he couldn't marry her, at least not if he remained in the U.S. So he married Penelope instead, who was a socialite and rich.

Sharina's brother was incensed that she and her child were living in SF as Brandon's secret family. In Barbados they were a respectable family and did not experience the kind of prejudice that they encountered in the U.S. But Brandon and Sharina persuaded him to live with his sister and niece so he could pretend he was Sharina's husband and Victoria's father. 

While pregnant with Alan, Penelope discovered Brandon's affair with Sharina. She threatened them with a gun but killed Sharina's brother instead. She immediately went into labor. While giving birth to Alan, she died.

The cottage Tony and Anabelle bought after they got married was the cottage Brandon bought for Sharina. It's where her brother was killed. Anabelle had some psychic abilities and knew someone had died in the cottage. That's how they started investigating what happened and ended up in Barbados, where it was revealed Brandon had faked his death and was living there with Sharina. 

After all was revealed, Brandon and Sharina died together while looking out on the ocean side by side.

There was some stuff about a letter that would have given Victoria part of Spaulding, but she decided she didn't want it. The crazed real estage agent Susan Piper was trying to get the letter back. She almost killed Anabelle and she ended up killing Hillary, and if you expect me to explain why she did it, sorry, I have no idea because this story never made any sense to me. 😂

This summary finally helps me understand. I watched GL at the time and didn't pick up the thing about Brandon/Sarina events in Annabelle's cottage. This story sounds like the worst of Long/Ryder collaboration. My understanding from interviews is that Ryder was a plot guy and Long had the sweeping themes (mostly ripped off from Hollywood movies).

@P.J.   Do you have any idea where I could find any shots of CoCo, Jackson's girlfriend on GL?  I can't find any photos of Monica Hylande, the actress.   Thanks in advance if you can help!

 

4 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

I have to admit that my dislike of Sonia Satra at least as Harley Lite, I do not pay good attention to anyone interacting with Lucy. Obviously that doesn't extend to her being a rape victim, then, I care. 

But, Roger & Holly is a problem. There always have been, or now I should say were, fans that wanted them to be an ongoing romantic pairing, which wouldn't have been possible. They share awful domestic history but they also share Christina/Chrissy/Blake & they have a push/pull dynamic. They are attracted to each other but they repel each other & the temptation might always be there between them to hurt each other intentionally. 

Fletcher, I think it is fair to consider him a default position, all the time, not just with Holly. Holly with Ed makes more sense to me but then most of the time I want to kick Ed in the shins, just once, to pay him back for Lillian. He really skated. Lillian was the one who paid. What am I saying? Mo was the one who paid the most. 

And, also it was a huge waste & one that didn't have to happen.

Makes sense to me. 

As soon as I saw who was sitting to his left, I perked right up. Van does not suffer fools, at all.

This is the scene between Holly and Roger on July 22, 1994.  They act like a couple that Ed/Maureen should have been. Don't get me wrong, I thought the scenes between them were great since the car accident in 1990 where Roger admits to being allergic to skunks. 

I just think building all that only to make them start from square one made no sense. 

 

2 hours ago, MLH said:

This is the scene between Holly and Roger on July 22, 1994.  They act like a couple that Ed/Maureen should have been. Don't get me wrong, I thought the scenes between them were great since the car accident in 1990 where Roger admits to being allergic to skunks. 

I just think building all that only to make them start from square one made no sense. 

 

I don't understand that at all. Is it a fantasy?

 

7 hours ago, slick jones said:

@P.J.   Do you have any idea where I could find any shots of CoCo, Jackson's girlfriend on GL?  I can't find any photos of Monica Hylande, the actress.   Thanks in advance if you can help!

 

I'll be happy to tonight after work!

18 minutes ago, P.J. said:

I'll be happy to tonight after work!

Thanks! I appreciate it.

8 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

I don't understand that at all. Is it a fantasy?

 

The storyline was wonky to me. Just didn't seem like good writing.  

@P.J. Who did Monica play?  Was she on the show later on?

Speaking of attorneys.  I wish this divorce attorney stayed around.  He was so funny.

 

Edited July 25Jul 25 by MLH