Jump to content

Douglas Marland 1986 NYT Article


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I wasn't disagreeing with you, Sylph. I remember Lemay saying those words, too. I just can't believe he looks at Marland as having a darker vision of humanity than he. Not when you look at the stories he crafted in the Seventies for all of Steve Frame's self-serving, avaricious siblings.

But he didn't write for only one show. He also wrote for THE DOCTORS, SEARCH FOR TOMORROW, and his own creation, FRIENDS AND LOVERS. And yes, although network/sponsor interference is partly to blame for his stints on these other shows turning out so badly, the truth is, Marland has a slight edge over his mentor, b/c his track record (THE DOCTORS, GH, GL, ATWT, even LOVING) is more impressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

;) It was a Snark podcast? You need to remind me.

What you say is true (regarding Steve Frame). That came from Harding's own upbringing and childhood. However, when you look at his biography and all he went through (didn't his mother go mad and kill herself?, poverty, escape from home, sibling issues, death of his first wife Dorothy...) you begin to realise that the man had to have a really bright outlook or else...

Yes, I know. :) But precisely because of interference I don't really look at them as his shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I've wondered about that too - not having ever watched either of their shows at the time, but savoring every detail I can find about them after the fact. FWIW, I think it may have been Lemay's very gracious way of saying that Marland featured a lot more melodrama and mayhem on his shows than Lemay preferred. Didn't Lemay say that he didn't even like to have trials on his shows? It seems like when Marland was head writer, everyone was always attending each other's murder trials, the way friends in real life go to movies together or meet for drinks. Everyone was polite and cheerful on the surface, but it was kind of like Murder She Wrote cheerful (a show I loved).

I couldn't see a wholesome, hunky love interest for a legacy ingenue turning out to be a stalker and a serial killer on a Lemay show. I think if Harding Lemay wrote the Doug Cummings story, Doug would have turned out to just be a self-serving narcissist with Frannie intermittently being turned on by his dark side and growing weary of his heartless business practices. Then when they finally broke up, he would have had a long monologue about how he'll do whatever it takes to make sure he never goes back to being poor and having to bus tables in a trashy piano bar while some b-list diva sings the same treacly Gershwin number for the ten zillionth time - cut to Kim, feeling suffocated by her staid marriage to Bob and flashing back to her heyday singing Someone to Watch Over Me in New Orleans (moments before her plane goes down and she dies). Which is still arguably much darker than the Marland version, but...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's cuz Agnes Nixon, sorry Saint Aggie, is beyond brilliant ;) In all honesty she has gotten some criticism--she never managed to pull Loving into clear focus even the periods (85-87, 1994--which I loved) when she was HW. She has gotten a LOT of flack in the soap press for never being very good with a murder mystery (even if some did bump the ratings, like Kingsley's murder--WHo Shot Will was McTavish of course and that was the first one they got really glowing reviews from--ironic), and many have hated her gothic stories which she seems to secretly love (ironic, Marland had the same prob with gothic stories)--I loved them though (well I haven't seen the famous Loving one with the villain who sells his soul to the devil LOL). But you guessed I would ;)

I think too, maybe sometimes she can be a bit too soft--she didn't liek telling storylines that weren't full of hope--ie she didn't want to do a gay storyline early on when the network told her she could but she'd have to have at least as strong a presence and argument on the show against gays--she said she just didn't want to give that prejudice ANY screentime (hence the very ligth Devon lesbian storyline). It took her a long time to work out how to do an AIDS storyline as she was worried about doing a story for a disease that was uncurable. Of course in an era where people find soaps too lacking in hope, this isn't seen as such a bad thing.

I love her work--to me it's what soap opera is. But I don't think she was brilliant the way Lemay was. She took the genre and elements of Philips and elevated them--she made, at her best, soap opera art but it was STILL soap opera, the pulp fiction of tv. Lemay arguably (at least his top 3 years) elevated it beyond soap opera, if that makes sense. So while I'm not exactly offering any harsh criticism, I know she had her failings (like Bell, and prob most major soap figures she also liked to recycle storylines).

In the 70s the traditional soap press and books didn't know what tomake of Nixon's shows--many books (like LaGuardia's several) go on about how jarring they found the humour and larger than life characters like Phoebe on her show, and seem to long for the P&G classic storytelling - I think there was some resentment too at how much insane press she suddenly got for her "relevent" shows.

But it's a style thing for me--I like and appreciate Bell but I can't love his work--I can love individual storylines or weeks of episodes and then the slowness, the over seriousness, etc, all starts to bore me. But I *get* why people LOVE his stuff.

Didn't someone JUST in the past week post a quote from Lemay where he said he thought Marland was very talented but said something about how he worked too much within his own rules, etc? It was kinda a backhanded complement I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The fact that his later soap attempts were failures at best (not that he ever had any time to really do much) and that he apparently approved of JFP's lame OLTL when he was consultant for it, shouldn't replace what he did so brilliantly. I have to say, my soap holy grail would be to see the entire Lovers and Friends (it's too bad that he seemed so worn out by then that he didn't fight for the show--from his interviews he seems to have lost all interest in it).

Not sure i'd place Marland above Bell and Nixon though (I would Lemay--at least for what he did, not in overall legacy of course). I do wish (repeats myself) that I could see more of his cable soap New Day in Eden or find out ANY real info on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah. That 1984 episode (and even the kidna lamepilot movie which has story by Nixon, scripted by Marland credit) actually feels to me like the mix worked--it feels both like 1970s AMC and Marland's ATWT (particularly the Wochek's or whomever--Marland's standard, in every thing he wroter, and some say something he got from Lemay's ATWT, poor but super close family clan). I wish more wouldleak online--I still think that 1984 episode under him on youtube is one of the best, "average" (ie no major story climax) 80s soap opera episodes I've seen.

So while I think his Loving seemed to work, I could see him leaving because, whether real orperceived, he was under Nixon's shadow.

He saw trials as a soap opera cliche to be avoided. Ironically when AW started to fall apart creatively (I guess right before the 90 min conversion) the soap press complained that it had endless court trials one after the other.

(I have half of the NYT 1980 piece on Marland at GL and the influence of Dallas and Knots on daytime typed out--I'll try to get the rest done).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Though Slesar flopped elsewhere--Somerset, OLTL... If you compared Slesar's 15 years at Edge to Agnes' first 15 at, well let's pick AMC obviously, and Bill's first 15 at Y&R and ONLY those eras, wouldhe still rank as high? Maybe actually

It'd be fun (though maybe pointless) to make a list of soap opera ranking/ratings for the writers. For instance, where would one put the Dobsons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agnes Nixon was to the 1800s serialized fiction of its day, Charles Dickens (campy caricature characters for humour, young if maybe bland lovers and heroines, social issues) and Lemay was Henry James. ;) (no clue where to slot Bell into my analogy :P ) Like Dickens, at her best her work just worked on such an emotional, magical level--but you also see the gears turning sometimes with the forced coincidences, cliches, shoe horning of, well done but still done, social issues, etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I would have loved to see a Marland and Gordon Russell collaboration. Like Marland, Russell died unexpectedly, but unlike Marland, he never seems to get the credit he deserves for his groundbreaking work at OLTL. Perhaps, he would have gotten more credit had he written for more soaps and created a soap, like Marland did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think if Gordon Russell doesn't get credit it is because that era of OLTL is not as known (aside from Judith Light's witness stand and the baby switch) and not referenced on today's OLTL. Today's OLTL basically seems to think the show started in 1987. Still, a lot of people seem to have fond memories of the Marco/Karen era. I still can't quite get over the audacity of having so much of your show become about the struggles of a prostitute and her pimp but it really paid off, and sadly, even at his worst, Marco didn't seem that much worse than the "heroes" of daytime today.

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.



  • Recent Posts

    • If the show was interested in tying in one of the three prime time specials in the 90s, the smarter choice probably would have been Night Sins from 1993. Night Sins was the ushering in of Titan Publishing, the first mentions of Kate Roberts coming in to run it, plus it had involved Jack retyping a manuscript he had found in the new house he and Jen moved into... which ended up being a thinly veiled story written by Kate about her dalliance with Bill Horton that produced Lucas. However, I doubt the writers were even thinking about the prime time episodes when deciding to name the manuscript One Stormy Night.  I also don't see Stephanie being the one that would be writing it.  The current actress playing Stephanie seems to play a more passive version of Stephanie vs the previous takes by Shayna and Shelley..imho. Javi is cute... much too good for Leo.  He can do so much better.
    • I might've gone after someone like Jed Allan, or even Donald May. Though they're very different.
    • Same.   Looking forward to seeing what I missed later.
    • Question for all: Who would have made a good Mike recast after Stewart departed?
    • I think they did. Again, it is not an either/or proposition for most of the audience so far. Most don't feel the need to stan one or reject the other.
    • KKL on Bold Live on May 1st. Details here  
    • I do wonder if the show realized that fans would take to Silk Press and Eva as much as we have?    To me, I think the core four was mostly used to get eyes on the show since all four were familiar performers in both daytime and primetime.   Of the four, I think Nicole is used most effectively where it doesn't look as though she's hogging airtime.  She works as a lead and as a talk to. Anita has been the most under utilized of the four, but I do have a feeling that might be changing once the Ted/Nicole/Eva/Silk Press Story goes back to support status. Of the four, I think Dani has been over-used.. but I do still see potential for the character.  I know some people think she's the modern day Erica Kane, but I don't see that.  Erica was a Have Not that became a Have while Dani is a Have by birth and has done nothing to have earned being a Have. Good cliffhanger.
    • LOL now this sells it for me!  I can't wait to watch later tonight!
    • I think this is a great observation.  I do wonder if some of that was down to how Nixon had started writing story and plot outlines.  By this point (maybe even by the mid 70s) many have discussed how she *didn't* write detailed story outlines anymore--the focus more was on a mood or theme and ABC simply allowed that because they trusted her at this stage (in her "memoir" I think even Megan McTavish talks about Nixon's writing in this way in the 90s and she basically seems to admit that it worked for Nixon.  But if Nixon wasn't in charge of the daily execution of these ideas...)
    • Ooooooo that was a soap reveal!!!   And we even got a brief Kat vs Eva fight.   OOoooo cliffhanger!!! Oh, yeah, I remember they had a cover story, but I find it interesting that it was just mentioned again today. I wonder could it be foreshadowing another twist coming up. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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