Jump to content


Paul Raven

Guiding Light discussion thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Franko said:

I see your Jane Eyre and raise you a Great Expectations ... would there be room for a Miss Havisham-style older aunt? (Alas, Grayson Hall was already long dead.)

YES!!! Accidents keep happening to Reva...er..what the hell did they call her, and we think its Eddie and Liv who are always caught conspiring behind a palm tree, but it is really the crazy Aunt, and it all just because Reva annoys the hell out of her! I see Robin Strasser in a wig but I don't think you could have Zimmer and Strasser on the same set without huge chunks being devoured. 

3 hours ago, Dan said:

Ugh Noah. Yeah let's put the larger-than-life Reva Shayne with the most boring slab of beef known to man. Great idea. But at least it was better than the Buzzard. 

He was absolutely the WORST..I mean, Reva went for annoying sometimes...(Buzzard) but never boring! It was made worse that he of course was part of the San Crud clan, and he went from a doctor with a fine taste in art (though played by a guy who made Grillo look like a scientist) and then a secret agent???

 

1 hour ago, DramatistDreamer said:

I wondered why no one ever brought back the Kyle Sampson character either.

 

Question: what happened to Bridget and Hart's son Peter?  What happened to him?  I had fallen away from GL in it's last 15 years but I don't remember hearing or reading about him as a teen or anything.

Yea, it was weird, again instead of San Crud it could have been Kyle who found Reva and kept her hidden all those years... and Liv could be the woman he married once he thought Reva was dead..again...Alan at that time had run his course, not only because of RR's bombastic air but he was just done. I would have killed Alan off and had Phillip move up to patriarch and have Kyle be the thorn in the Spaulding side, uniting them with the Lewis clan to fight off his attacks. 

 

Or maybe Kyle's new wife is Amanda..(what do we think of CC as Amanda, still too young?) who is using Kyle to help her make her rightful claim on Spaulding.

 

Peter came back with RealDylan for H.B.'s funeral and Van hugged him but it seemed more like a doting Aunt then his Mom. I wish they had addressed that as it was such a big plot point, but I could see Van letting Peter go with Bridge but staying in his life.

1 hour ago, DramatistDreamer said:

thought about this last weekend while watching vintage episodes from Christmas 1986, New Years 1987 and ended up trying to find out what happened to the kid that Simon Hall and Jessie Matthews had?

Good God no.Jessie and Simon needed to fade in the past as they rightfully did,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Mitch said:

 

Good God no.Jessie and Simon needed to fade in the past as they rightfully did,

 

They wouldn't have to bring back either of the parents though.  I wouldn't have minded grandma Calla dropping in, every now and again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2019 at 4:04 PM, Franko said:

Simon and Alex's dynamic seemed to be all over the place in 1986. Also, enjoy Bev making a sound that defies description.

 

LOL...Warren seems waayyy too happy to be introduced to Simon in that clip!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2019 at 11:29 AM, DramatistDreamer said:

Although, I know every new writing regime seems to relish the chance to create their own characters, I can't understand why they couldn't just create characterizations from existing characters, they'd likely be able to do virtually the same thing.

 

This has been one of my biggest issues for just about all the soaps for a long time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, KMan101 said:

 

This has been one of my biggest issues for just about all the soaps for a long time

 

No doubt, part of it stems from their own personal desire to create a brand-new character whose history they can totally make up without having to regard the show's history--but then they end up making up some silly connection to a longtime character anyway to "anchor" the new character.  What's the point of this if you're going to connect to a longtime character in the end?? To mess up the longtime character's history by inserting events that never existed?

The other part, I suspect, stems from sheer laziness and belligerence- not wanting to do any research about the existing characters' connection to other longtime characters.  Had they got it right though, it would actually enrich the show's canvas, but I realize asking these writers and production folk to get things right is probably a big ask.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gotten through all of 1993 and I'm planning to watch 1994 until Nancy Curlee leaves the writing team. I know Alan returned in summer 1994, and Annie Dutton arrived in fall/winter 1994, but are any of the post-Curlee 1994 storylines worth watching?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kalbir said:

I've gotten through all of 1993 and I'm planning to watch 1994 until Nancy Curlee leaves the writing team. I know Alan returned in summer 1994, and Annie Dutton arrived in fall/winter 1994, but are any of the post-Curlee 1994 storylines worth watching?  

Everything after Curlee  is a boring mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2009 at 8:57 AM, Paul Raven said:

I think it was Lenore's choice to leave,to give Hollywood a try.She was also a new mother and her husband was an actor also.

 

Possibly,GL didn't pressure her too much to stay as Marland may have been more interested in his own characters at that point,and Rita had had a lot of story in her time on the show.

 

She showed up on DOOL in 83 as Veronica-a non contract role.It was hinted that it would become contract,but Veronica simply vanished.

 

On 9/23/2009 at 8:57 AM, Paul Raven said:

 

Rita could have returned to Springfield at some point,but succeeding writers showed little interest in the past-a big mistake.

 

On 9/23/2009 at 12:57 PM, DRW50 said:

I found Rauch's GL to be entertaining, at least more often than not (I didn't think the Lucky Gold stories were entertaining, aside from Lorelei, and minus the increased airtime for the wonderful Meta, the Labine year annoyed me more than anything else), but I do think he dumbed the women down. There was a lot of very insulting material for women, especially when B&E were there. The women existed just to fight over men or to have babies. I really hated what they did with Beth. The story which made me see red was when she chased after Matt and kept telling Vanessa she was old and unattractive. Rauch was obviously not hiding his Maeve Kinkead hate. What was done to Vanessa in those years was just sad. Then again, Laibson and McTavish also thoroughly weakened and marginalized Vanessa, and they had no bad blood with Maeve, so what can I say.

 

I will say that I thought Rauch did a better job of giving Wendy Moniz material than Laibson/McTavish did. Wendy was not a heroine, she wasn't even that believable as an antiheroine, so making her a crazy b!tch was the way to go. I still laugh at the memory of Dinah unknowingly hitting on her uncle or Dinah running around town wearing a napkin on her face to hide her scar. I don't accept that as being what Dinah should have been, but I preferred her in that role compared to the Dinah who was supposed to be our heroine even though she gave Roger electroshock therapy.

 

I also thought that the early Cassie, very tough and bitter but with a good heart, was much better than the one who gave her tiara to the poor.

 

I think the biggest failure with GL in terms of women, in their later years, was what they did to Marah. Not just the Lindsey McKeon recast, but the writing for her. The memory of her showing her "strength", or whatever Rauch and Taggart called it, by ripping off her clothes and demanding Tony go through with his rape attempt ::shudder::

On 9/23/2009 at 8:57 AM, Paul Raven said:

 

The fact that the Bauers didn't really have a next generation was a problem.

 

Mike,after 4 marriages only had Hope.It would have been smart to have Leslie give Mike a child.Ed only had Rick and later Michelle,despite numerous marriages also.

 

On 9/23/2009 at 8:57 AM, Paul Raven said:

I think it was Lenore's choice to leave,to give Hollywood a try.She was also a new mother and her husband was an actor also.

 

Possibly,GL didn't pressure her too much to stay as Marland may have been more interested in his own characters at that point,and Rita had had a lot of story in her time on the show.

 

She showed up on DOOL in 83 as Veronica-a non contract role.It was hinted that it would become contract,but Veronica simply vanished.

 

Rita could have returned to Springfield at some point,but succeeding writers showed little interest in the past-a big mistake.

 

The fact that the Bauers didn't really have a next generation was a problem.

 

Mike,after 4 marriages only had Hope.It would have been smart to have Leslie give Mike a child.Ed only had Rick and later Michelle,despite numerous marriages also.

 

38 minutes ago, victoria foxton said:

Everything after Curlee  is a boring mess.

I loved Curlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Pam Long wanted to bring Rita back.. but the actress turned down the offer to return.

 

And while I enjoyed early 90s GL.... on second viewing, while it is structurally sound and strong story-wise under Curlee.... there is a lack of spirit/warmth/energy that populated GL in the late 80s when Curlee/Long were co-head writing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kalbir said:

I know Alan returned in summer 1994, and Annie Dutton arrived in fall/winter 1994, but are any of the post-Curlee 1994 storylines worth watching?  

 

For several months during the fall and winter of '97-'98, GL appeared to rally again with James Harmon Brown and Barbara Esensten as HW.  It wasn't anywhere as brilliant as the Curlee/Demorest era had been, but it was still entertaining (if, at times, simplistic).  Unfortunately, it didn't last.

Edited by Khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Khan I always viewed Harmon Brown and Esensten as turnaround writers... meaning that they could steer a direction less ship onto the right path.. but weren't capable of steering the ship to greener pastures.  I viewed their work in 1994-1995 on Loving & 1997 on GL as examples of how they managed to rescue a sinking ship and direct it the ship onto the right path... but the reigns should have than been handed to a strong head-writer that could steer the ship  (For example, Bedsoe Horgan did wonders for ATWT so that when Marland took over, the ship was already on the right path).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just about a year behind in those early '90s episodes on YouTube - well, slightly less now, after I binged the episodes surrounding Maureen's death today.  All of the cast turnover in 1992 had definitely taken its toll, although unlike some on this board, I always loved Liz Keifer as Blake and have enjoyed seeing her first months on the show.  I know Ellen Parker's departure will only add to the bleeding of talent, but I must admit I'm also glad to get to see a year or so with Nancy Curlee back at the helm of the writing team.

 

Watching full episodes now, I can totally see why Beverlee McKinsey singled Curlee out with praise in her exit interview.  There was plenty of high-stakes drama as 1992 drew to a close - and I am inclined to credit Stephen Demorest, Lorraine Broderick, and Wisner Washam, not to mention the dialogue writers for staying (mostly) true to the overall tone that Curlee and Co. had previously set.  But the intelligence in the writing declined noticeably throughout the year that Curlee was gone, while cliched soap opera plot devices and glimpses of the kind of misogyny I have come to associate with several of their collaborators in the decades since were cropping up more and more in the writing.  The 1991 episodes were just sooo much better, IMO, and despite the loss of some major talent while Curlee was on leave, I recall there is a lot of good stuff still to come in 1993.

 

Speaking of the writing credits, I started Googling Bill Elverman, who was credited with the other dialogue writers, several months ago.  I was intrigued by several of the episodes he scripted (including the Alex/Mindy hair-pulling episode, and several others with strong material for Vanessa, Maureen, etc.) and didn't recognize his name from other work in the soap biz.  He was on the writing team for at least a year, apparently right up until he died in 1992 - of AIDS, at 40 years old. :( He wrote an off-Broadway play that was reviewed by Frank Rich in the New York Times (not favorably, but this was a good ten years before his work on GL and I tend to think he honed his craft in the interim), as well as several other plays that sound interesting - what a loss.  The recent discussion in this thread of Beverlee McKinsey doing a cameo on GH to keep her union insurance makes me wonder (hope) that someone working at GL helped Elverman get some work that would ensure he had coverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...