..but it also speaks VOLUMES about the level of corporate micromanagement this show is experiencing!

YEP!!! It is sad to say but I don't blame them for it. I hope when they said tone it down that means stop trying to act like you are blind because you suck at it LOL and it is very distracting!!!!!! I have to already try to ignore all his other fidgeting!!

Y&R should be treated like it's an actual company with some form of long term strategy, goal and vision and sadly to say I have no clue as to what it is. It is as if they are just trying to write to make it.

Edited January 9, 201015 yr by JimTolkien

Muhney just tweeted something very interesting about his blindness. I think it explains some of the writing, some of the performance...but it also speaks VOLUMES about the level of corporate micromanagement this show is experiencing!

I think it explains just how little input is being made by those who should be in charge of the show. This is something which SHOULD have been noticed long ago.

I thought Muhney's first months on the show were unbearable for many reasons, but one of the biggest was the endless squinting and bizarre facial expressions Muhney passed off as vision problems. He struggled to connect with co-stars and many of his scenes had an odd undercurrent, like Mr. Magoo was tormenting Ashley and seducing twinky lawyers.

Y&R should be treated like it's an actual company with some form of long term strategy, goal and vision and sadly to say I have no clue as to what it is. It is as if they are just trying to write to make it.

I wouldn't say "writing to make it." That implies effort.

He struggled to connect with co-stars and many of his scenes had an odd undercurrent, like Mr. Magoo was tormenting Ashley and seducing twinky lawyers.

I hate you, CARL!! Now, every time Muhney's onscreen, i'm going to have the voice of Jim Backus ringing in my head!

Edited January 9, 201015 yr by alphanguy74

I wouldn't say "writing to make it." That implies effort.

+1.

I hate you, CARL!! Now, every time Muhney's onscreen, i'm going to have the voice of Jim Backus ringing in my head!

I would think this might improve Adam's scenes.

Muhney just tweeted something very interesting about his blindness. I think it explains some of the writing, some of the performance...but it also speaks VOLUMES about the level of corporate micromanagement this show is experiencing!

LOL, that's pathetic.

No one believes in corporate micromanagement. People do, however, believe that Maria paid him to write that.

As if a network honcho watches this sh!t and had something to say about blindness...

Edited January 9, 201015 yr by Sylph

LOL, that's pathetic.

No one believes in corporate micromanagement. People do, however, believe that Maria paid him to write that.

As if a network honcho watches this sh!t and had something to say about blindness...

You might be surprised, Sylph. word on the street is that the network is glutted with alot of middle managment turds who are DESPERATELY trying to think up things to justify their paychecks in this bad economic climate.

I would think this might improve Adam's scenes.

Yes, and every time he does something stupid... it'll be, "Oh, Magoo.... you've done it again!"

I'm not sure if there's a lot of interference here or not. Y&R is full of stories which are exactly what Rauch and Sheffer and Hamner have foisted on audiences for decades. I would actually say compared to other soaps, I see the least corporate interference at Y&R. The only interference is in salary disputes, which meant they had to briefly sorta kinda tarnish their big hero Victor, for about five minutes.

I'm not sure if there's a lot of interference here or not. Y&R is full of stories which are exactly what Rauch and Sheffer and Hamner have foisted on audiences for decades. I would actually say compared to other soaps, I see the least corporate interference at Y&R. The only interference is in salary disputes, which meant they had to briefly sorta kinda tarnish their big hero Victor, for about five minutes.

Exactly.

Muhney said the note was from "the network". Not the producers. Not Sony. "The network".

They're giving notes on performance issues. That is just so different from the "my show" rhetoric MAB handed out. If the network is now empowered to make performance notes that the actors are compelled to respond to, it's fair to say that Bell/Sony are not quite as in control as they're claiming.

Tom Casiello also posted something about "notes"--oh yeah, he was citing a writer who was complaining about "know-nothings" giving notes--

Ed Bernero (Criminal Minds)

Television viewership has been declining for about 10 years. The internet has been blamed. Everything has been blamed. Except for what I think the problem is: that the networks own the shows, and they completely think that they make them. They don’t any longer let the people who make shows just make them. The networks have notes about everything. They are intimately involved in every aspect of the process. And I think it’s hurt the process.

...

Look, I make way more money than I ever thought I would make in my life, so I’m not complaining about the money part of it. But on a creative level – there’s a feeling like, writers over 50 can’t work in this town. But shouldn’t those people be giving you notes? Shouldn’t they form a panel of 55 year old writers who have spent their whole life writing and then go, look, we’ve read the script, and here’s our notes? They ‘re business school people who have never written anything, never directed anything.

There’s a famous note that was given to a friend of mine, and the note was, “It starts with this kind of nonspecific shot.” And the director said, what a minute, this is a very specific shot, what does unspecific even mean? Or we get notes, "Is there a better take?" Did you think we were holding the good takes? We get that so often, and I know that all producers, all show runners feel it, whether they will say it or not. You want to go – who are you?

and expressing a similar frustration.

Casiello specifically highlights this quote in his twitter:

tommiecas

"we’re going to take people who make these shows 4 a living & anyone who has never made anything can give a note" http://tinyurl.com/yewv48x

1:45 PM Jan 7th from web

Now, I know you'll all claim this is self-serving...and maybe it is. But the fact of the matter is that I think this kind of micromanagement makes it impossible for anyone to implement "my show, my vision"...whether they are an "auteur" or whether they are Maria Arena Bell.

We're in an era now, I sincerely believe this, where were cannot attribute these massive failures to the Guzas or the Arena Bells or whatever. They're (of course) a huge part of the story...but this micromanagement is killing everything DOWN TO performances and the nuances of how someone chooses to play blind. You can't have an artistic vision (even in a commercial product like a soap, which isn't really meant to be artistic) if you're constantly meddled with, IMO.

Maybe Barbara Bloom and Margot Wain are giving him notes. So what?! It was ridiculous of them to want to have this "blindness" story both ways to begin with. Writers can do amazing things with corporate interference. Several can be cited.

It still doesn't change that fact that Maria/Hogan/Scott, at the end of the day, set the tone and pace for this show. You mean to tell me that if (assuming there was as much corporate interference as you specuate)Bloom/Wain/Kent backed off and let them write the show that the show would be in any better shape than what it is now?

As CarlD2 pointed out, we are seeing many of Sheffer/Rauch/Hamner's same tired patterns on Y&R as they have exhibited in years past. And together(along with Maria) they are all killing this show.

And Hackiello is not relevant, he proves that everytime he opens his mouth. He should change that "former blog" to "Damn the Empire! Save the Man!" I wish people would stop bringing up this tired "Tom."

We're in an era now, I sincerely believe this, where were cannot attribute these massive failures to the Guzas or the Arena Bells or whatever. They're (of course) a huge part of the story...but this micromanagement is killing everything DOWN TO performances and the nuances of how someone chooses to play blind. You can't have an artistic vision (even in a commercial product like a soap, which isn't really meant to be artistic) if you're constantly meddled with, IMO.

I don't believe that micromanagement is anywhere near as much of a problem with some soaps as it is for others. GH has been repeating variations of the same stories for Guza's entire time as headwriter, starting back in 1996. Jason worship. Violence against women. A hostility towards the Quartermaines, and towards anything Luke and Laura had together. This has been with two different EPs and three different ABC Daytime Presidents.

Sheffer has written the exact same sicko stories at NBC and at CBS, on three different soaps. Hamner has written variations of the same poorly constructed, endless "mysteries" on PC and on Y&R. Rauch has had longstanding issues regarding minorities and women on his soaps. Am I supposed to believe that a wide variety of networks and executives have somehow managed to make them produce the same stories? That everywhere Sheffer goes, he hears people tell him that there needs to be more animal killing, more smarmy assholes passed off as leading men, men being raped for a laugh, more "if she says no she means yes, especially if you threaten her boyfriend" storylines? That Y&R, which had a long history of frontburner stories for black characters, suddenly decided to completely downplay them and give them offensive stories as soon as Rauch showed up?

If anything I think Y&R needs MORE interference. The show seems aimless and I can't put that on Sony or CBS. It's a basic failure of writing and producing which someone with a modicum of talent would know how to overcome. And if the network "killed" Michael Muhney's embarrassing attempts to play blind, which reinforced all of his acting flaws and disconnected him from co-stars, is that a bad thing?

"we’re going to take people who make these shows 4 a living & anyone who has never made anything can give a note"

I notice that he says they "make these shows for a living." That's true, but it also reinforces that they see this as a job, not as something which inspires them. That's another reason the show is so flat.

Edited January 9, 201015 yr by CarlD2

/\

+1

I don't believe that micromanagement is anywhere near as much of a problem with some soaps as it is for others. GH has been repeating variations of the same stories for Guza's entire time as headwriter, starting back in 1996. Jason worship. Violence against women. A hostility towards the Quartermaines, and towards anything Luke and Laura had together. This has been with two different EPs and three different ABC Daytime Presidents.

Sheffer has written the exact same sicko stories at NBC and at CBS, on three different soaps. Hamner has written variations of the same poorly constructed, endless "mysteries" on PC and on Y&R. Rauch has had longstanding issues regarding minorities and women on his soaps. Am I supposed to believe that a wide variety of networks and executives have somehow managed to make them produce the same stories? That everywhere Sheffer goes, he hears people tell him that there needs to be more animal killing, more smarmy assholes passed off as leading men, men being raped for a laugh, more "if she says no she means yes, especially if you threaten her boyfriend" storylines? That Y&R, which had a long history of frontburner stories for black characters, suddenly decided to completely downplay them and give them offensive stories as soon as Rauch showed up?

If anything I think Y&R needs MORE interference. The show seems aimless and I can't put that on Sony or CBS. It's a basic failure of writing and producing which someone with a modicum of talent would know how to overcome. And if the network "killed" Michael Muhney's embarrassing attempts to play blind, which reinforced all of his acting flaws and disconnected him from co-stars, is that a bad thing?

I notice that he says they "make these shows for a living." That's true, but it also reinforces that they see this as a job, not as something which inspires them. That's another reason the show is so flat.

Exactly.

Mark loves to pass the blame of this regime onto third parties, when many of the big problems with this writing regime have been unique to this writing regime. The same power structure has existed at CBS for years, and prior regimes were able to put on a much better and yes written show. No offense to Mark, but it seems he always looks for any excuse to excuse this regime and their faults.

Edited January 10, 201015 yr by Y&RWorldTurner