Jump to content

Lorraine Broderick as AMC head writer


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 722
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

^ The two already worked together on GL and it wasn't a successful collaboration. The show was better when she was around, but she left after about six months. She was around for Kriezman's early days, which helped cement him as GL's savior IIRC. BTW, on the subject of Black and Stern, I can't believe they got picked to work at ATWT. Their work on Eden and Falcon Crest was terrible (just assuming on Eden, but i'm sure I'm right) and so different from what ATWT is supposed to be about. I really wish I could see their ATWT because it sounds like such a bizarre pairing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I saw some of Eden. The show wasn't awful but it was just flat. The male flesh was probably the only real highlight, that and Diana Barton as a psycho. Oddly enough both Jeff Griggs and Jack Armstrong got acting work on soaps after that. (Jeff was pretty good though)

This is some of their ATWT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxSjkCv3FWE

http://www.youtube.com/user/patc2000#p/u/63/wa5dibiOhSo

That's fairly early in their run. The later stuff was often the real pits.

This leads to clips of the story where Casey was kidnapped and Tom and Margo thought the culprits were Nazi gunrunners.

http://www.youtube.com/user/TomarShipper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If it cemented him as GL's savior as you said, then it must have been successful in some manner. Do we know that her exit was due to acrimony between her and Kreizman? While her being there for a 6-month stint may be the case, I don't think just that necessarily speaks to the idea of him trying to get her canned here on AMC. Unless there's more to the story than that, I think that idea's jumping the gun.

No, it's not at all harsh for someone who would angle to get another person fired (that would be the "conniving" part) because he felt threatened by the reputation of a co-worker (that would be the "insecure" part)... which is what you described Kreizman would do. I wouldn't call that the behavior of a "confident" / "ethical" person.

You're not answering my question, though. What is it about Kreizman that would make him have it in for Broderick (or any other writer) like you described? I'm not defending him; I don't know much about him, other than his climb from an intern to head writer. I guess I'm just asking because, while I always hope for the best, I like to prepare for the worst!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

By successful I just meant that the time she was on the show it was better than when she left. That's when the stories began to take a ridiculous turn. It might not mean she's the reason they were successful or anything. But I do think if she only lasted for six months it has to be for a reason. Either Kriezman didn't see her as a fit or she didn't see herself as a fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No HW other than Bob Guza has any real, lasting power over story direction at ABC. The others take their freedom and brief intervals of self-determinism where they can find it, good or bad. Sometimes they're in sync with Frons. But Frons has the upper hand with almost all of them over the last several years.

I'm pretty sure Kreizman was hired because he is more of the new breed of malleable writer that Frons prefers; he's also younger, and represents something 'new' whereas Lorraine Broderick is the old guard and likely reeks to Frons of the middle-aged demographic. I never thought all that much of her, but she's still better than Kreizman and she has some talent. I don't, however, think that DK had anything to do with pushing Broderick out. Broderick allegedly did not want to stay long, and I don't think Frons would have let her. ABC was tripping all over itself to tell people again and again that she was not, repeat, not head writer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It hasn't been seriously tested but I think if you have the looks and charisma (which I think Griggs/Sinatra did -- he was very good in those Skinemax B-movies and in his brief DAYS run), you can make it past porn work. But then, he supposedly lost his job at DAYS because he was once in porn, so who knows. Last I heard about him was when he painted a picture of President Bush (W) and it was put in the White House. :lol:

The oddest part was that four years after he was fired from DAYS they brought him back in a cameo in a totally different role. I don't know if they felt sorry for him over having to fire him or what, but how random. Perhaps it depended on who his costars were in the '96 story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Did the DAYS people really know he didn't have a porn past? Seems weird to me. It's true it's happened before (Dennis Parker the porno disco star being in Edge of Night of course) and maybe it's easier for guys and they assume if they did gay porn the peopel who may be offended watching the soaps wouldn't even know about it? But still, I don't fullya gree with you--it's still a stigma no matter the talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The rumor was a co-star had him fired in his first DAYS role after they found out he did gay porn.

I don't disagree that it's a stigma, I'm just saying if they have the talent and the spark then I think eventually a porn actor can move on to something bigger. It hasn't really happened yet but I think it might someday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy