10 hours ago, DeeVee said:

Why not show Meg growing up on the show? People with Down Syndrome go to school, they have hobbies, they work, they fall in love, they get married. So many opportunities for great stories missed because they decided to sweep her under the rug.

Well, this was a misguided story from the start, developed by an earlier lamented group (McLaibey) and did not fit the character of Holly...However she existed and it would have been good to bring her back for visits played by an older actress. I wanted Ed and Holly reunited before the last episode...two supremely damaged people who somehow work, and could form a basis for a different king of core couple ( I can't see Holly sitting around the Bauer kitchen listening to peoples bullshit problem without rolling her eyes.) and I can see Ed talking her into forming a relationship with her. Maybe Fletch marries another woman who really is better for whatever her name was. 

The problem is when you introduce a clone the whole concept of reality goes out the window (Michael can grow a fetus but did not put research into some real developmental issue?)

And yes Sean had a great chest and he was good with Dinah, but he came off as Reva and Dinah's gay muscle boy bestie..I never bought the dead wife story Sean..sorry!

 

 

17 minutes ago, Mitch64 said:

. I wanted Ed and Holly reunited before the last episode...two supremely damaged people who somehow work, and could form a basis for a different king of core couple

Yes, I get that completely. But for me, the final reunion felt all the more satisfying because of the long wait.

When I started watching in the late ’80s, Ed never struck me as particularly romantic.  Loyal, yes, and reliably messy, but not someone who swept anyone off their feet. That’s why that last scene with Holly landed so beautifully. He felt like the romantic lead as he had been before my time, and I was all in. It was such a lovely note to end on.

23 hours ago, P.J. said:

Well, in his defense, he was only 45 (and younger than Eileen Fulton) when Alan-Michael was born on screen. Given the way grandfathers on soaps were portrayed (gray-haired, escorting other older ladies to restaurants and never having romance again, I can understand his point of view.

What he probably should've done is asked for Mike to have an unknown son dropped into his life.

The unknown son could have worked. If Ben hadn't been in a previous relationship with Hope, maybe he could have been revealed as Mike's long-lost son. 

19 hours ago, DRW50 said:

I don't think anyone liked his exit, or the story in general. Fletcher hadn't really felt like himself for several years before he left (I say that as maybe the only Fletcher fan on here) and as you said, his exit should have had more immediate consequences than it did. 

I know what you meant about the Beth and Carl story but at the time I thought it at least laid some type of groundwork for Beth's behavior and I thought there was a certain menace in Carl.

At this point most of my view of the show was background junk food. I think if I'd had to stop and think about stuff like the clone story I would have stopped watching.

Good to hear it, sounds like most felt the same way I did with his exit. 

You're definitely right in that the Carl storyline made you realize where Beth was coming from and gave a little more depth on her side. 

Hahaha... I know, I'm starting to get to the point where I feel like I'm watching a different GL now. I'm going to keep going, because like I've said, I want to see Holly's kidnapping story just to see how it was executed and then WHY she did what she did, especially now knowing she's lost Meg. That would be my guess as to why, she's trying to replace the whole Meg left, but why ALL the children? LOL. Otherwise, I'll be excited soon to go back to early 90s.

12 hours ago, DeeVee said:

Not only was that wildly un-Fletcher like, I think what always bothered me about this is they took the opportunity to write out Meg because they didn't want to deal long-term with a disabled character. 

I HATE when soaps do this kind of story only for the short-term. If you're going to do this kind of story, COMMIT to it.

I believe Meg had Down Syndrome, correct? Well, there have been working actors with Down Syndrome as far back as the 1990s. There was that show with Patti Lupone (Life Goes On, was that the name?) that had a major character with Down Syndrome. Call the Midwife has had a character with Down Syndrome as a regular character for years.

Why not show Meg growing up on the show? People with Down Syndrome go to school, they have hobbies, they work, they fall in love, they get married. So many opportunities for great stories missed because they decided to sweep her under the rug.

It's not quite the same thing, but I give General Hospital major kudos for totally committing to a character living with HIV, especially since she was played by an actress who literally grew up on the show.

I didn't mean to get all preachy this early in the morning, but this is the kind of thing that helped kill the show, IMO. Focusing on dumb crap like the clone instead of this character right under their noses who could have centered some truly memorable stories. 

Yep she had Down's syndrome and you're totally right. 

The weird thing about Meg is they didn't even build on it. They started that storyline when Fletcher/Holly were barely on. After they got married in '95, they dropped off the canvas and were barely featured, and this pregnancy only got them screen time maybe 2-3 times a month, if that. And that lasted the entire time leading up to her birth... and then from there, it was really nothing until Roger focused on Holly again to close out their storyline, knowing Roger was going to get written out with the recast... so they just randomly showed Fletcher be jealous once a month for a few months and then boom, he leaves town with her and essentially kidnaps Meg.  I just don't get it, it was so awful. If I were Jay and had the history with GL like he had, I would have been so upset.

1 hour ago, Mitch64 said:

And yes Sean had a great chest and he was good with Dinah, but he came off as Reva and Dinah's gay muscle boy bestie..I never bought the dead wife story Sean..sorry!

Oh yes, like you and @DRW50 said - man, he had the best chest on GL!  He was walking around that island for weeks without a shirt and I was just like gosh, who is this man... Josh could never   

I'm interested in seeing how he comes back to Springfield - I'm assuming I haven't seen the last of him... Reva visited him in jail and then left to go back home... but I'm pretty sure he pops up again later.

20 hours ago, DRW50 said:

 

At this point most of my view of the show was background junk food. I think if I'd had to stop and think about stuff like the clone story I would have stopped watching.

Junk food is about right. It's weird, I was so into ATWT because Maura had returned, and remember it so clearly. I remember some broader strokes, but most of GL is a blank. 

 

12 hours ago, DeeVee said:

I didn't mean to get all preachy this early in the morning, but this is the kind of thing that helped kill the show, IMO. Focusing on dumb crap like the clone instead of this character right under their noses who could have centered some truly memorable stories. 

Another bandwagon type story that Guiding Light tried to jump on, and it didn't really work. Meg always felt like a stunt that they had no real intention of following through on. 

 

2 hours ago, Spoon said:

Its a shame Peter never returns as s teen or adult, considering how much plot was around him for a few years.  Same with Meg and the other kids born in the 90s kids that weren't Coopers.

They really missed the boat on Peter/Maureen/Kevin/Jason/Jude/Zach/Leah. Legacy kids that we actually would've cared about vs the Rafes, Ashleys, Avas, etc....kids of characters only briefly tied to the canvas by their more obnoxious parents. I guess things got out of whack when Marina and Lizzie are out of order aged, and I'm sure younger kids in Peapack wouldn't have been ideal. (Except of course, that little matchmaker Emma...or devil incarnate Will...rme) but those kids should've been more than blips on the canvas.

7 hours ago, SanCristobelsFinest said:

I may have mentioned that I’m a little new to Springfield, and so far I have a deep love for the show because of such a well kept narrative with a few continuity snarls (really, Ed was out there with Alan and the Carruthers girl?), I guess I’m just asking the OGs about stuff I can’t learn from SoapCentral Who’s Who, (RIP), classicGL on YouTube (also RIP), and Spauldingfield. 
 

It’s a lofty goal, but I’d love to write a continuation with all the spawn of the original characters after September 2009. I know there was a Mindy official Twitter thread at one point, but in an age where we can do what we want irrespective of budget mostly, I’d love to give it a stab.

Give it a whirl. Start with who/what you like and build out. Trying to write for everyone at once is a lot to ask of yourself.

45 minutes ago, P.J. said:

Another bandwagon type story that Guiding Light tried to jump on, and it didn't really work. Meg always felt like a stunt that they had no real intention of following through on. 

I've never seen a soap that has actually told the story. EastEnders and Emmerdale had children born into the show with Down's and they have both been on their shows, off and on, for 15-20 years, but they are rarely seen. 

Neighbours brought in a young woman with Down's soon before their show ended in 2022. In real life she is a friend of Guy Pearce's so they cast her as his daughter. When the show was revived in 2023 (it's ending again in a few months), they brought her back, and she pops up every once in a while for some light comedy or background moments, not much else. 

I just don't think this is a story soaps want to tackle, especially not in such an exploitive time for the genre. They will tell "issue-based storylines," but that tends to be giving 10 different characters cancer or diabetes or infertility or depression.

It would probably take a soap on public television, and that era of public television is long gone. 

On paper, this could have been a strong story for Holly, especially when you add in Holly's career, regrets over keeping a baby she hadn't planned, her history of depression (it was implied in 1992 at least, IIRC), but I don't think it was ever going to happen.

The best I can say is the show didn't kill Meg off for awards and misery.

Lots to comment on here....

>  I liked Floyd Parker.  A lot.  Tom was great in the role and deserved more and better material.  Floyd and Katie were a very believable brother and sister combo, too.  A full-blown story centered on the two of them as siblings had potential.

>  I agree that the Meg non-story was a big, missed opportunity.  So was Abby regaining her hearing.  Since GL liked to brag about its social consciousness (and its PSAs), I remain flummoxed that the show didn't center more on Abby's hearing.  Amy Ecklund had a cochlear implant during her time on the show - it would have been highly illuminating to explore that.  Perhaps it was discussed and Ecklund didn't want to proceed?  

>  AlwaysAMC, if you think GL is bad in 1998, just wait until 1999.  It gets much worse.  (As Mitch mentioned, the departure of Watros and The Dawn of the CIone was the true jump the shark moment). 

I suggest you watch through the end of 1999 (if you can stand it), then start watching GL from 1989 through end of 1994.  Why?  Because of the contrast between the two eras.  You'll be astonished, which is part of the fun.  (To reiterate, GL starts improving in fall of 1989, with the most serious leaps coming in Spring 1990.  And it continues to improve...and witnessing the improvement is great fun).  If you start early 1989, you'll be somewhat disappointed, but knowing that things improve.  The promise of what's to come might be enticing to you.

That you haven't seen much of Beverlee McKinsey in action vs Zaslow blows my mind.  And Melissa Hayden/Bridget has plenty of story from mid 1991 through end of 1993!  Lots of great acting all around, lots of solid scripting/dialogue, including the quietly delivered yet significant one-offs.  There are plenty of non-hysterical, seemingly pedestrian moments that are excellent.

>  Tony was always a pain in the behind.

>  Don Stewart "a bit egotistical"?  You don't say, LOL.  Don's condescending personality flew off the screen! 

>  Reva stopping Holly from committing suicide was the straw that broke the camel's back.  Sickening.  By that time, I was watching GL maybe once a week (and as other mentioned, as background noise).  Turning off the show was easy to do.

>  I continue to love the humor on this board.  Thanks, everyone.

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Speed Racer said:

Lots to comment on here....

>  I liked Floyd Parker.  A lot.  Tom was great in the role and deserved more and better material.  Floyd and Katie were a very believable brother and sister combo, too.  A full-blown story centered on the two of them as siblings had potential.

>  I agree that the Meg non-story was a big, missed opportunity.  So was Abby regaining her hearing.  Since GL liked to brag about its social consciousness (and its PSAs), I remain flummoxed that the show didn't center more on Abby's hearing.  Amy Ecklund had a cochlear implant during her time on the show - it would have been highly illuminating to explore that.  Perhaps it was discussed and Ecklund didn't want to proceed?  

>  AlwaysAMC, if you think GL is bad in 1998, just wait until 1999.  It gets much worse.  (As Mitch mentioned, the departure of Watros and The Dawn of the CIone was the true jump the shark moment). 

I suggest you watch through the end of 1999 (if you can stand it), then start watching GL from 1989 through end of 1994.  Why?  Because of the contrast between the two eras.  You'll be astonished, which is part of the fun.  (To reiterate, GL starts improving in fall of 1989, with the most serious leaps coming in Spring 1990.  And it continues to improve...and witnessing the improvement is great fun).  If you start early 1989, you'll be somewhat disappointed, but knowing that things improve.  The promise of what's to come might be enticing to you.

>  Don Stewart "a bit egotistical"?  You don't say, LOL.  Don's condescending personality flew off the screen! 

  I continue to love the humor on this board.  Thanks, everyone

They would need to start at the beginning of 1989 in order to get to the good stuff in the 2nd half of 1989.  

So what if Don Stewart was a bit egotistical, what performer isn't?  Mckinsey was certainly a bit egotistical herself.. same as Zimmer.   

Floyd/Katie were a good sibling team and I'm surprised Marland didn't really explore the sibling relationship/backstory of the two.  I know he came in during the last months of the Dobson era so who knows what they would have done with him had they stayed on beyond December 1979.

1 hour ago, Speed Racer said:

>  I liked Floyd Parker.  A lot.  Tom was great in the role and deserved more and better material.  Floyd and Katie were a very believable brother and sister combo, too.  A full-blown story centered on the two of them as siblings had potential.

Floyd is pretty much the only character created by the Dobsons that Marland improved. The cynic in me wants to say it was because he was needed for his Kelly/Nola story.

There were a few hints dropped that Katie and Floyd came from a harsh, even abusive background. They definitely could have done more with that.

Denise Pence (Katie) has a YT channel with some candid videos about her GL tenure. She clearly is still a tad bitter about her dismissal from the show. 

1 hour ago, Speed Racer said:

I agree that the Meg non-story was a big, missed opportunity.  So was Abby regaining her hearing.

Oh, yes, I agree with that.

In that case they had a deaf actress playing a deaf character who actually went through with getting a cochlear implant. (Which, back then, was somewhat controversial). And good for them, and for writing that into the show.

But...using that as an excuse to break up Abby and Rick? Saying she didn't want to have kids because of it?

I thought that was awful and didn't seem in character for Abby.

Edited October 15Oct 15 by DeeVee

18 hours ago, alwaysAMC said:

Yep she had Down's syndrome and you're totally right. 

The weird thing about Meg is they didn't even build on it. They started that storyline when Fletcher/Holly were barely on. After they got married in '95, they dropped off the canvas and were barely featured, and this pregnancy only got them screen time maybe 2-3 times a month, if that. And that lasted the entire time leading up to her birth... and then from there, it was really nothing until Roger focused on Holly again to close out their storyline, knowing Roger was going to get written out with the recast... so they just randomly showed Fletcher be jealous once a month for a few months and then boom, he leaves town with her and essentially kidnaps Meg.  I just don't get it, it was so awful. If I were Jay and had the history with GL like he had, I would have been so upset.

This is about the time I really started to lose interest in Guiding Light. I thought there was a lot more that could have been done with Roger, Holly, Fletcher, and Meg, but all of these characters were thrown to the wayside. It was frustrating to watch in real time. 

Annette

I think Zaslow being escorted out really threw a wrench into whatever plans the writers had in place in 1997 for Roger/Holly/Fletcher/Amanda.  There was a few months where the recast was with Amanda, making eyes at Holly, while Holly/Fletcher had tensions because she kept letting Roger back into their lives.

I even remember during the Annie Dutton trail where Holly and Roger were arguing about Blake and her role in the whole mess.. and he quickly kissed her leaving Holly visibly shocked/shaken before he left.   I have a feeling that the writers at the time were still writing Roger with the belief that eventually Zaslow might return.. or that the recast would be accept.

At the time, I also remember that the Vicky story was being talked about in 1997 before Vicky was introduced.. and it looked as though Roger/Amanda was going to play a part in it.  In fact, I did enjoy the Amanda vs Annie scenes that did end up airing... but most of 1997 for those characters seemed like it was just scenes with no follow through.

 

Edited October 15Oct 15 by Soaplovers

9 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

I agree that the Meg non-story was a big, missed opportunity.  So was Abby regaining her hearing.  Since GL liked to brag about its social consciousness (and its PSAs), I remain flummoxed that the show didn't center more on Abby's hearing.  Amy Ecklund had a cochlear implant during her time on the show - it would have been highly illuminating to explore that.  Perhaps it was discussed and Ecklund didn't want to proceed?  

I agree that Zaz's illness (well really his firing) through a wrench in part of the Meg story, they wrote that really great scene where after Holly and Fletcher argue over the Ross/Blake twin's thing, and Holly says "Roger is right in this, family comes first, even over honesty,"  and then  Holly overhear's Roger having a moment with Meg talking about being different. I think the intention was for Roger to bond with Meg leading Holly to break her walls down (she always thought she was a terrible mother and having a special needs kid really pushed her neurosis over) Roj NOT Fletch, which would piss off our sanctimonious bore to no end...and then have Holly and Roger take sides with Blake, would have been a good story that they were headed to (I just couldn't take the Roger and Holly are TWU luv thing...) I think that is why I think Ed was better for Holly, she gets screwed up guys...and Fletch was just too shallow to be screwed up in the way Holly is attracted to. 

The Abby transplant thing got short shift because it was the Bauers...Rauch didn't know how to do a "real" story, and remember, this was the summer of San Christobel and  RESCUE REVA that he and TPTB thought would skyrocket the show to  the top...remember Kimmer in her usual b.s. touting her storyline (until it collapsed) that said viewers wanted "Calgone take me away" fantasy..(not if your in the tub Reva thanks!) There was no room..that was the summer there was no Bauer BBQ..the boards were lit up over both those things at the time.