Article: Daytime's Two Biggest Psychos Return

[soapfan770]

[DRW50]

That's probably the best description of McTavish ever. The sad part is that I still have many good memories of her writing, including 2003/up to early 2005, because when she is good, she can be superb. But when she's bad, look out. I guess that type of up and down can be something which you would rather see than a lot of empty nothing, but she never, ever seemed to be able to have any type of consistency, unless you count consistent badness in her last few years at AMC.

As for Reilly -- do you think his DAYS in his second run was easy to understand? I think it was to a point, although Melaswen and all that always confused me when I would watch. I kept getting confused over who was really dead and who was faking their death and who was brought back from the dead and then it seemed like they would have, say, John think Marlena was dead, then they'd reunite, then wait, now he REALLY thinks she's dead, and at one time didn't she think he was dead? And Jack "died" like four times didn't he?

[Y&RWorldTurner]

And the funny thing is, I believe McTavish and Reilly shared the same agent...

[EricMontreal22]

It certainly did seem that Frons came in, thought "hrmm when did OLTL and AMC last do well in the ratings" saw it was under McTavish/Malone-Griffith and hire them. But as issaidabove, the shows weren't so micromanaged them (as well as tons of other elements).

I know many feel even McTavish's first AMC run wasn't true to the show, but to me it was better than "medium" AMC, it was often very very good. I admit, I hate how some of her non-fans hate to even give her credit for anything good in that time ("obviously Agnes was heavily involved--even though she spent all of 1994 headwriting Loving" tough I do give FMB a lot of credit). As Carl said, the woman DOES have talent, which makes her long runs of utter suckage all the more head scratching... And while I didn't much care for the work of Rayfield/Cascio (and I think now we can admititwas obvious Frons just saw them as an interim solution till he could hire McT or someone), I agree with the article that it did seem counterproductive to promote them to HW and then not give them much of a chance...

[marlenadlc]

Soap "critics" are free to say whatever they want about shows, and I, Marlena De Lacroix (Connie P.) have always fought for critical freedom. But calling two people (one who is dead) "psychos" is beyond scurrilous and perhaps slander. I knew both Reilly and McTavish personally, and they were not psychotic. I disagreed with a lot of their work, but I would NEVER link their work to their person this way. Pychosis is a disease! What an insult this headline is!

Who is Tom Smith and where does this article come from? I have been in this field (professionally) forever and I never heard of him.

Connie Passalacqua Hayman

[R Sinclair]

Oh, god! Did someone open a trap door?

It's not slander because he didn't say they are psychos. The complete thought: "Daytime's Two Biggest Psychos Return... is how some might tout the impending returns of Head Writers James E. Reilly and Megan McTavish to the shows that put them on the daytime map," is speculation on his part about what the others would think.

Take the high horse back to the stable.

[Mike_Cady fan]

Megan McT is psycho in the fact that she is oblivious to reality!!!!!!!!

[Khan]

Sure you have! It's Snark! From "Snark Weighs In"! Remember?

[R Sinclair]

I agree! And that's just my novice opinion.

[Cheap21]

Megan McTavish returning to AMC in 2003 was the best thing to happen to that soap in years

[marlenadlc]

Tom Smith was Snark? Well, he was always respestful to me and he was the only poster whose opinion I valued. But what you don't get is a person IS NOT his writing! Both Jim and Meagan were writing for the television market, not for themselves. Televsion is a business, it is all about making money for a network.

As the first to condemn Megan at Guiding Light and All My Children in print (look up by old columns) I know how awful she was and how she ruined my favorite soap ever, All My Children. And Jim did some unmentionable things on Passions towards the end.

But you know what? Both Megan and Jim was poor kids who became ENORMOUSLY wealthy writing their soaps! Check out Megan's huge home in an old Connecticut newspaper article on the net. And Jim, he's dead. And no will will ever stop insulting him. We all die someday, think of what people will say about you when you are not around to defend yourself.

And if anyone insulted me this way on the net, I'd sue. Or report them to their boss, if they were professionals.

[beebs]

To be fair, this article was from 2003, and I think there's been a sort of re-evaluation of Reilly's first run at Days. But his second run was unbelievably ridiculous. I think people aren't sure what to think of his writing. I know the man had a lot of talent, but some of his later work was just unfathomably offensive to the viewing audience. Becoming wealthy doesn't preclude you from writing from the heart, not the wallet.

[Adam]

In the short run I would agree with you, in the long run it was the worst thing to happen to AMC ever. The show never has recovered and never will.

[R Sinclair]

Ugh!

[bellcurve]

This is, probably, the biggest crock of bull I've heard.

Yes, people write for money, Marlena. Shakespeare did it too. And we still study Shakespeare and the themes that were present in his work and what it suggests about the era in which he lived, not to mention his personal life(Is He GAY?!!!?). It's highly unlikely McTavish and Reilly are going to be studied in schools around the globe, but everyone's writing suggests something. You being a proud, self-proclaimed college professor, you should know this.

I recall reading in an interview that Jim Reilly's Catholic views drove some of his work, an obvious example being Marlena being possessed by the devil. Of course he ripped it off from The Exorcist, but knowing Reilly was a devout Catholic, you can't help but wonder if that was part of why he wanted to explore this story, knowing it would connect with viewers and get a lot of buzz in the process. And in addition to knowing that, it makes perfect sense why Mimi tortured herself about her abortion, even referring to "killing her child," being made barren, etc. There's also the way he explored gay characters. With the exception of, maybe Simone, other gay characters on Passions have often been met with extreme ridicule("Two queens instead of two (prom) kings," as Taylor Anne Mountz' Kay uttered) while other gay characters had major gender issues(i.e. Charlie the Lesbian really being Alistair, Vincent the gay man really being a psychotic intersexed person). Knowing the Catholic church's stance on abortion, gay marriage, suicide, etc., can you really sit here and say that we can't judge Reilly for foisting these stories upon viewers because of his personal beliefs? Or was it all a coincidence, because he wrote for MONEY!?

Good for them! No one is jealous of either one of them; No one cares about how much money they made shoveling crap to the masses.

And I can't defend myself against everything everyone says about me anyway and I doubt McTavish and Reilly would care what anyone thought. They are(were) both incredibly egotistical, arrogant human beings. They may love the genre, but that doesn't, nor should it shield them from any sort of scrutiny.

For someone who claims to be a truthteller and so open to such deep, meaningful soap conversation, you are certainly very close-minded and limited in what you want people to say about those you clicked with in your journalistic heydey. I'm pretty sure if we were roasting Linda Gottlieb over hot coals, you'd be wigging yourself out, sharing stories about what an arrogant bitch you think she is.

I'm sorry if we've offended you or your friends, but this is a universal soap opera message board at the end of the day. No writer/actor/producer/fellow journalist should be treated with kid gloves because you, Marlena, like them.

I think you give yourself far too much stock.