5 hours ago, chrisml said:

My memory of GL starts from around 1986. I found post-Reva plunge GL (in Calhourn's tenure and a bit into JFP's) so compelling because a lot of the canvas was being used. There were long-term storylines that had actual ramifications rather than storylines for dramatic shock. However, I think Justin Deas and Tom Pelphrey did much more damage to GL than Kim Zimmer did.  

Both men made me take breaks from the show for a while (especially Pelphrey, who was unwatchable to me), which I can't say Zimmer did. 

 

1 hour ago, P.J. said:

Thanks, everyone. I have the ATWT 40th anniversary book, and found it very useful. I wouldn't be expecting complete accuracy.

I thought Harley was great---until the Gus Aitoro years. Ugh.

Something about Ehlers' portrayal of Harley lost all warmth for me around the late '90s. At the time I wasn't sure if it was down to the pairing with Philip, as he was such a draining presence, but even post-Philip, what I enjoyed most about Ehlers in her first run never really came back. 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by DRW50

1 hour ago, P.J. said:

Thanks, everyone. I have the ATWT 40th anniversary book, and found it very useful. I wouldn't be expecting complete accuracy.

I thought Harley was great---until the Gus Aitoro years. Ugh.

I found the GL books better for me than the ATWT book only because they did offer specific years for events, even if it was wrong a lot of the time, which made it easier to locate specific episodes I wanted. But, other than that, the ATWT book and the GL books are of similar quality and good. 

12 hours ago, Mitch64 said:

And it makes no sense..TPTB especially in these cost conscious times should be able to let an actor go if they demand too much.  GL let Kimmer's ego and Rauch's stupidity make Reva the "star" so she could write her own check.  They should have done as ATWT did in the late 70s..slowly reemphasize Reva (like they did Lisa) so she is not the center of the universe.  Lisa was always important (well until the time of the Gautman) and in the mix, but not the star. 

Anyone who wants to dis LW either on GL or GH is good with me! 

TPTB went too far in the opposite direction when they de-emphasized Lisa. Reducing her almost to the status of a disposable day player under Hogan Sheffer felt like personal contempt for the actress. No one actor should hold a show hostage, but if they are going to remain on the canvas, characters should at least be used effectively.

On 4/28/2024 at 8:41 PM, Reverend Ruthledge said:

They are good but have a lot of inaccuracies. In particular, when it comes to dates. 

Constrast the history books to the Soaps & Serials novelizations which were neither accurate NOR good. ((Shudder))

As usual, I agree with Reverend Ruthledge: the history books are good, and entertaining reads, but the inaccuracies are distracting.

11 hours ago, TEdgeofNight said:

Remember, if it’s in a book or an interview, it’s fact. lol So many books have wrong facts. Same with interviews. Public relations idiots made it sound like everyone loved everyone on every show all the time. 

In 1983-ish, a friend's brother bought a non-fiction book dealing with the history of television. It falsely claimed that Coronation Street was "the longest-running television series in the world." I pointed out that CS began in 1960, but currently-running American series like TGL (1937 on radio, 1952 on TV), Search for Tomorrow (1951), The Edge of Night and As the World Turns (1956) were older, and out-ranked Coronation Street in terms of longevity. The brother got curiously angry at my contradiction of his book's "fact," and insisted that the writer could not be wrong because, "It's printed in a book!" You can't reason with folks who are convinced that anything in print must be undisputed gospel.

7 hours ago, chrisml said:

My memory of GL starts from around 1986. I found post-Reva plunge GL (in Calhourn's tenure and a bit into JFP's) so compelling because a lot of the canvas was being used. There were long-term storylines that had actual ramifications rather than storylines for dramatic shock. However, I think Justin Deas and Tom Pelphrey did much more damage to GL than Kim Zimmer did.  

I can't disagree about the harm Deas, in particular, wreaked onto the show. We didn't need more ham in a can.

6 hours ago, GL Oldtimer said:

My favorite years of the show were between 1990 to 1994 as I felt like it was very much an ensemble at that point. It seemed to me that most characters had a least some sort of storyline, and I thought the writers did a nice job of having multiple characters interact with each other. Springfield felt like an actual community to me. I watched religiously for a nearly 12-year span, and the early 90s were just awesome.

I think many, if not most, viewers consider the early 1990s to be TGL's last, great hurrah.

6 hours ago, GL Oldtimer said:

Like most of you on this board, I didn't just watch one soap opera. I was also a fan of As the World Turns and One Life to Life. While I certainly had my favorite characters on each, I do think soap operas were a better viewing experience when they focused on multiple storylines involving multiple characters. I realize that there are going to be ebbs and flows with storylines and characters, but it's never good when one or two characters monopolize a show. I think Guiding Light was one of the worst examples of allowing that to happen.

One of the aspects I love best about soaps is the sense of community, with many different characters and storylines interacting and weaving together. Harping on one character to the detriment of many others is a turn-off.

 

 

Reading a 1975 Daily TV Serials I saw a letter from a GL fan who complained that a Mike and Leslie love story article used  photos of Don Stewart and Lynne Adams. They forcefully pointed out that those story moments were with Barbara Rodell, not Lynne Adams. The editors explained that they used a photo of Adams because she was currently in the role. 

It reminded me, not for the first time, of what a chilly reception Adams seemed to get from a number of fans on her return, even though she had originated the role. I'm not sure if that is down to her, or if a lot of fans just loved Rodell (given her number of well-received soap roles). It's rare to have that happen with recasts and original actors returning to roles. The only other one I immediately remember is David Tom.

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by DRW50

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Both men made me take breaks from the show for a while (especially Pelphrey, who was unwatchable to me), which I can't say Zimmer did. 

Something about Ehlers' portrayal of Harley lost all warmth for me around the late '90s. At the time I wasn't sure if it was down to the pairing with Philip, as he was such a draining presence, but even post-Philip, what I enjoyed most about Ehlers in her first run never really came back. 

I think  by the time Jonathan was introduced, I had become so disillusioned with the show, and given up any hope of its recovery, that I didn't watch much of Pelphrey. My mistake had been to actually endure scenes with other characters I loathed (like Buzz and eventually Harley) for far longer than I should have. By the time TP's Jonathan was being focused on, I was fast-forwarding through most of the show. I only kept recording TGL and ATWT at all, just to catch glimpses of the few remaining characters I still cared about. I know I should have abandoned both soaps long before The End, but a decades-long addiction was hard to break, LOL.

 

5 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

I think  by the time Jonathan was introduced, I had become so disillusioned with the show, and given up any hope of its recovery, that I didn't watch much of Pelphrey. My mistake had been to actually endure scenes with other characters I loathed (like Buzz and eventually Harley) for far longer than I should have. By the time TP's Jonathan was being focused on, I was fast-forwarding through most of the show. I only kept recording TGL and ATWT at all, just to catch glimpses of the few remaining characters I still cared about. I know I should have abandoned both soaps long before The End, but a decades-long addiction was hard to break, LOL.

I think I was already pretty checked out by that point so seeing all this godawful hamming on day after day - and of course we were meant to think this was phenomenal and wonderful and saving the show - that I just fully gave up. I know GL had had anti-heroes before, but there was more of an honesty with them. Even with Roger during the period the show was trying to write him in a serious pairing with Holly, there was more honesty (like Adam refusing to have anything to do with him when he gave away Blake). 

I did see Pelphrey in some of his post-soap work and enjoyed his performances more, but that whole period was a steaming pile. I don't know how I'd feel if I went back and watched that time again, with more distance and less visceral disgust over so many of the choices made (like what they did to Ben Reade), but...life's too short. 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by DRW50

8 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

Reading a 1975 Daily TV Serials I saw a letter from a GL fan who complained that a Mike and Leslie love story article used  photos of Don Stewart and Lynne Adams. They forcefully pointed out that those story moments were with Barbara Rodell, not Lynne Adams. The editors explained that they used a photo of Adams because she was currently in the role. 

It reminded me, not for the first time, of what a chilly reception Adams seemed to get from a number of fans on her return, even though she had originated the role. I'm not sure if that is down to her, or if a lot of fans just loved Rodell (given her number of well-received soap roles). It's rare to have that happen with recasts and original actors returning to roles. The only other one I immediately remember is David Tom.

I loved Rodell in the role and accepted her immediately when she was cast. She projected a sweetness and a vulnerability that was not as apparent under Adams.  Count me in as one of those viewers who would have preferred to see Rodell continue on as Leslie.

Another recast I appreciated more than the original was John Reilly as Dan Stewart on ATWT. John Colenback was fine, don't get me wrong, but Reilly came across as more charming, more affable, more masculine, and had wonderful chemistry with Kathryn Hays. To me, Colenbeck always seemed more aloof, less passionate.

Just now, vetsoapfan said:

I loved Rodell in the role and accepted her immediately when she was cast. She projected a sweetness and a vulnerability that was not as apparent under Adams.  Count me in as one of those viewers who would have preferred to see Rodell continue on as Leslie.

Another recast I appreciated more than the original was John Reilly as Dan Stewart on ATWT. John Colenback was fine, don't get me wrong, but Reilly came across as more charming, more affable, more masculine, and had wonderful chemistry with Kathryn Hays. To me, Colenbeck always seemed more aloof, less passionate.

Thanks. That was another I couldn't remember. I definitely get the feeling viewers weren't thrilled about the Dan return (and as others have mentioned, he also seemed to have aged quite a bit). He seemed night and day to Reilly, who started the whole story with Kim, IIRC.

All I've seen of Rodell in her ATWT and AW bits is very compelling. I can see where she might have won over GL viewers at a time when the show was having a lot of transition or compared to the more neurotic heroines so prevalent (like Holly introduced around the same time).

5 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

I don't know how I'd feel if I went back and watched that time again, with more distance and less visceral disgust over so many of the choices made (like what they did to Ben Reade), but...life's too short. 

UGH! I could write a thesis on how disgusting the Ben Reade debacle was.😡

1 minute ago, DRW50 said:

Thanks. That was another I couldn't remember. I definitely get the feeling viewers weren't thrilled about the Dan return (and as others have mentioned, he also seemed to have aged quite a bit). He seemed night and day to Reilly, who started the whole story with Kim, IIRC.

Reilly was so handsome, so charming and so endearing as Dan's relationship with Kim blossomed. Sigh. *I* would have married him!😊 IMHO, the chemistry between Kim and Colenbeck's Dan was noticeably more muted. (Though, to be fair, I enjoyed Colenbeck with Jane House's Liz Talbot.)

1 minute ago, DRW50 said:

All I've seen of Rodell in her ATWT and AW bits is very compelling. I can see where she might have won over GL viewers at a time when the show was having a lot of transition or compared to the more neurotic heroines so prevalent (like Holly introduced around the same time).

The vast majority of the time, I am resistant to recasting major soap roles; it diminishes my investment in the characters. Sometimes, however, the talent, charisma and "je ne sais quoi" of replacements cannot be denied. Along with Rodell and Reilly, Maureen Garrett was another example of a replacement who took over a role and made it more compelling than it had been under the original actress. And while I loved Robert Gentry as Ed Bauer, Mart Hulswit ended up being the perfect and definitive Ed for me.

Count me as one who loved Tom Pelphrey on GL and then on OZARK.

I happened to read an article in which Matt Bomer tried to describe his role on GL & not only was it a perfect example of how convoluted soap stories sound when you try to tell them that way but, my god, how awful they were to Ben Reade!!!! My least favorite PTB of the end days, ConWest was trying to kill me, as a fan.

9 hours ago, vetsoapfan said:

 And while I loved Robert Gentry as Ed Bauer, Mart Hulswit ended up being the perfect and definitive Ed for me.

Oh no! We finally have a difference of opinion! LOL. While I definitely think Hulswit was much more likable than Gentry, I never thought of the character of Ed as being likable so Gentry was more the definitive Ed for me. 

2 hours ago, Reverend Ruthledge said:

Oh no! We finally have a difference of opinion! LOL. While I definitely think Hulswit was much more likable than Gentry, I never thought of the character of Ed as being likable so Gentry was more the definitive Ed for me. 

This is a first! Yikes!😱

Still, our opinions are not completely out of sync. I did say how much I liked Gentry in the role, and you agree that Hulswit was more likeable. Plus, we both agree that neither Peter Simon nor Richard Van Vleet gelled well during their tenures on the show. 

I don't see a contentious board war on the horizon. 😁

 

24 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

This is a first! Yikes!😱

Still, our opinions are not completely out of sync. I did say how much I liked Gentry in the role, and you agree that Hulswit was more likeable. Plus, we both agree that neither Peter Simon nor Richard Van Vleet gelled well during their tenures on the show. 

I don't see a contentious board war on the horizon. 😁

 

Well, I will enter in. Peter Simon was my favorite Ed! 

But, I note you haven't answered my question about whether you watch GH. The thing is, you see, I am regularly seeing people give opinions about GH when in fact they are not watching the show! And, that happens to matter. 

6 hours ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Well, I will enter in. Peter Simon was my favorite Ed! 

He was your favorite but did you think he was the actor who most definitively captured the essence of the character of Ed? 

Edited April 30, 20241 yr by Reverend Ruthledge