I really don't remember anything much of Batten other than that horrendous accent and the controversy over the recast. I wasn't AR-T's biggest fan either, and I kind of understand that FMB didn't find Connor "warm". That was kind of the point----Connor wouldn't be warm, being raised by Edwina, living with this resentment that Lucinda had "stolen" the company from her father and caused his suicide (or early death, I'm fuzzy on deets). It was the fact that this IIC didn't get how Connor fit as a character in the fabric of Oakdale, and replaced her with a hammy, corn-pone actress that pissed me off. It's ridiculous to think that the entire direction of an established character could or should be changed on a whim, because IIC 'X' needs all women to be "warm" and motherly and that somehow that mean she also had to lose every functioning brain cell.

 

IMO ART Connor was vibrant, independent strong woman who came to Oakdale to get what was stolen from her by Lucinda. She did it marvelously completely making Lucinda looking like the biggest fool in Oakdale. As much as I loved what Connor did I felt bad for Lucinda. Thats more to do with the writing and the actors involved. After ART was replaced/Marland passed…..Connor became a weak, whining needy non business female pining for a man she really didn't need. She was fine on her own as a strong independent business woman.

IMO ART Connor was vibrant, independent strong woman who came to Oakdale to get what was stolen from her by Lucinda. She did it marvelously completely making Lucinda looking like the biggest fool in Oakdale. As much as I loved what Connor did I felt bad for Lucinda. Thats more to do with the writing and the actors involved. After ART was replaced/Marland passed…..Connor became a weak, whining needy non business female pining for a man she really didn't need. She was fine on her own as a strong independent business woman.

Connor's triangle with Cal and Mark did a lot of damage to the character. I liked Susan Batten as Luna on OLTL. Firing AR-T and recasting Connor with SB was so stupid. AR-T brought something special to the role. SB looked lost while making awkward faces. Plus her thick southern accent often came out.

IMO ART Connor was vibrant, independent strong woman who came to Oakdale to get what was stolen from her by Lucinda. She did it marvelously completely making Lucinda looking like the biggest fool in Oakdale. As much as I loved what Connor did I felt bad for Lucinda. Thats more to do with the writing and the actors involved. After ART was replaced/Marland passed…..Connor became a weak, whining needy non business female pining for a man she really didn't need. She was fine on her own as a strong independent business woman.

Connor's triangle with Cal and Mark did a lot of damage to the character.

I would have preferred her with Mark but she was already with Cal and they were a popular couple. I know why they would do a story with the three but Connor would have been better single and not attached to either Mark or Cal.  

I have been watching a group of episodes from the 1990s are realize that both Allison Janney (West Wing) and Kristin Johnson (Third Rock from the Sun) both had small roles on the show around '93-94.  So fun to see them in bit parts before they had bigger success.

I have been watching a group of episodes from the 1990s are realize that both Allison Janney (West Wing) and Kristin Johnson (Third Rock from the Sun) both had small roles on the show around '93-94.  So fun to see them in bit parts before they had bigger success.

Allison also had a fairly big recurring role on GL in 1994. It's where I first saw her. 

Today is May 1 - the birthday of Penny Hughes.    If her brother, Dr. Bob Hughes has not already sent her a bouquet of flowers, he will prior to midnight.    After the death of Chris Hughes, Bob continued the tradition of sending flowers to Penny on her birthday.

didn't remember either of those. I do remember Janney as one of Alex's maids on GL. One was Ginger, and I forget the other one's name. But they were funny as hell.

Today is also the day that the great Helen Wagner passed. Cannot believe it has been six years. Still too raw for me.

I'm not totally sure where to post this, but those early 1997 episodes on YouTube and the subsequent discussion about Felicia Minei Behr in this thread were what got me thinking about it. At the time, I was so intrigued by the new golden era that not only ATWT - but the P&G lineup as a whole - was supposedly ushering in that I saved this transcript of an interview that Michael Logan conducted with newly hired executive in charge of production, Mary Alice Dwyer-Dobbin, for TV Guide. (I think this was when the traditional media was even more baffled about how to deal with the internet than they are today, and a lot of the soap press was actually publishing longer, unedited transcripts of interviews online - for free - than would fit in the print publications that you actually had to buy.)

 

Of course, MADD's (and Behr's) fall from grace in the eyes of those of us who knew any of these people's names was already in process by the time this interview went live. The momentum of the stories hyped in this interview quickly petered out, the aforementioned Connor recast was in the works and, of course, within a few months GL's Michael Zaslow was fired and MADD used the phrase "wizened old man" in a quote in the press release. Despite the many mistakes she made - and as furious as that statement still makes me, even more so having lost a family member to ALS since then - as a soap fan, I can't help but wonder what might have been if MADD had been able to deliver one tenth of the things that this interview foretold for these shows. This was only just past the point in time when a new head writer and/or executive producer with a strong vision could turn a soap around. Those of us who were following these behind-the-scenes developments on the early internet hadn't yet been disappointed enough times to realize that had necessarily changed, and MADD had assembled a very interesting team...

 

In a remarkable renaissance -- oh, heck,
let's call it what it really is: a miracle --
former ABC big cheese Mary Alice
Dwyer-Dobbin (aka Mickey) has taken
command of the faltering Procter &
Gamble soaps and turned them into the
talk of the industry. As the World Turns is
skyrocketing in the ratings and once again
is a riveting, must-see show. Guiding
Light, which has been in a funk for eons,
also is showing great signs of improvement
(so much so that cancellation talk has
temporarily ebbed). And Another World, which recently hired the
revered, Emmy-winning scribe Michael Malone, seems destined for
the same re-energization. This MADD-woman rocks!

 

Well, whatever they're paying ya, it's not enough!

 

[She laughs uproariously.]

 

Seriously, congratulations, Mickey! You've got everybody so
excited.

Well, thank you -- but the work is only beginning.

 

I was recently having a discussion about the state of soaps with
a highly respected, well-credentialed daytime actress -- whom
you know, so she shall remain nameless -- and this actress said
something very interesting. She said most of the female
executives running daytime TV are afraid to be forceful
because their primary concern is being liked. I myself have
seen evidence of this. This actress feels that you, on the other
hand, move quickly and with great power because you don't
give a damn what people think.

 

Oh. [Long pause, then she laughs.] Well. [Another pause.] I
wouldn't say I don't give a damn what people think because I care
very much what they think. I care about people. Yes, I've moved fast.
That was my mandate. But I've tried not to move without sensitivity.
Look, it's not an easy job.

 

But your moves have been very bold, very sweeping in all
capacities -- new exec producers, new head writers, improved
production values, some very controversial cast changes.
You've even brought a new PR philosophy to P&G.

 

But [these things] haven't been without design and they haven't been
done without a great deal of thought -- even though it has been fast
thought. Nothing has been done precipitously. Nothing has been done
just for the sake of doing it. In fact, in some instances, I've moved
more slowly because I haven't had the right pieces in place to make
certain moves.

 

But you do not show fear. You are not a pantywaist.

 

No. I'm not afraid. Look, I know what I'm doing. I know what needs
to be done and I know how to help get it done. I've been doing this a
long time. I've been there, done that. I'm really out to save these three
shows and make them better. That's what I care about. And time is
of the essence with these shows, because each one is in a precarious
position. So, for the life of these shows, I could not be fainthearted.

 

What you say makes total sense -- so why, then, is there such
fear and/or reluctance to be forceful in this
decision-by-committee industry? With the audience eroding, we
do not have a luxury of time here. Reflect, if you will, on the
state of decision-making in daytime drama. What is the biggest
problem?

 

The biggest [picking the word carefully] challenge is this: As
lifestyles evolve, and target viewers have more and more demands on
their time, we have to provide daytime drama that makes the audience
want to give up some of the [diminishing] leisure time they have left.
We must give them enjoyment, fun, fantasy and relaxation with
characters that are engaging. The challenge is also to tell the kind of
stories the woman at home wants.

 

We frequently hear cable is chipping away at the audience. We
can all agree on the lifestyle thing -- our world and the
workplace have changed and we don't have the same volume of
women at home watching TV during the day that we used to,
yadda, yadda, yadda. But this cable excuse seems like a bunch
of b.s. Are there any statistics proving this is a real threat? I
don't know anybody who has given up a soap to watch The
Discovery Channel.

 

There is a statistic that shows daytime cable viewing is going up. More
and more women can find movies [there] -- whether on free cable or
pay cable. There's always a movie to turn to.

 

But is cable really the problem? If the soaps were holding the
viewers, they wouldn't be tempted to go somewhere else.

 

The programs aren't good enough to hold them. The viewers have
other choices and they make them -- for all sorts of reasons. They can
get an instant fix with a movie rather than devote five hours a week to
a soap. Or they can go do something else entirely. [The viewers]
learned during the O.J. trial that there were more things to life, you
know? They also learned what life and death stakes are really all
about -- O.J. was real. Look at the shows that are working -- Days
of Our Lives, The Young and the Restless, General Hospital --
where the stakes are all very high. The characters are all very
compelling. The stories are all well told.

 

Well, we're certainly seeing that same thing these days on As
the World Turns. We've seen a vast improvement in quality
and a big rise in the ratings -- and better still, you've done it
surprisingly quickly.

 

Knock on wood. [Laughs.] We're very gratified.

 

So how come every time a show is in trouble, network execs
start spouting that cop-out analogy about how soaps are like a
big luxury liner and you can't turn 'em around quickly? What's
the secret you're not sharing?

 

You know what the ATWT [turnaround] says to me? It says that this
show had a wonderfully loyal group of fans who had not given up
hope. They were still hanging in, hoping this show would once again
deliver the things they used to love. We were able to get on track real
fast and [take advantage of that]. Now we're going to struggle to stay
on track and get even better. You know, we're not there yet. We've
got two stories that are working right now, but we're not there. We
have a long way to go. I'm just very grateful that the fans checked us
out, liked what they saw and are sticking around.

 

The Lily/Diego wedding and the murder worked so well -- this
seems to me to be an example of being handed lemons and
making lemonade. Some pretty bad planning has resulted in a
very good story. We're seeing the same thing on All My
Children right now. They had Maria and Dimitri sleep
together, which made no sense whatsoever and royally pissed
off the fans, but it has now been turned into the best plot
they've had in a year -- and the only reason to watch the show.
Is this some new trend -- making crap work?

 

It doesn't always work that way. We lucked out. We saw a way to
clarify a character -- Diego -- who wasn't working and put him at the
center as the villain of the piece. I credit our writers for seeing the
opportunity for this umbrella story, which is one of the things Doug
Marland always did so effectively. He would get the entire cast of
characters involved in one story. We've got three writers at ATWT
who had the foresight and the vision to see how this could work again.
But it doesn't always work that way. So, yeah, we were lucky. And
this show has a different set of circumstances than Guiding Light or
Another World. Every show has to do different things to get its house
in order.

 

Does the Kim storyline have long-term ramifications or was
this a short, fast, punchy story arc to get the veterans back in
focus?

 

The effect of Kim's heart condition is meant to play out over time, sort
of as a midlife crisis. What do you do when you start to question your
entire life and how long it's going to last? It's meant to be a slower
story told over time. Is this leading to another big event? Not yet. But
stay tuned.

 

I ask because this seems an excellent example of a successful
fast fix. It brought back a group of beloved actors in a sudden,
very emotional crisis that caught our interest big time. Other
soaps -- most of which have similarly beloved people on the
back burner -- might learn from this.

 

We needed to get those older characters active with something that
could be played in their own arena. It's all a balancing act. Every story
doesn't have to be high, high drama. They do need to be operatic, but
some operatic melodies are gentler than others.

 

What about the Snyders? We want to see them all come back.
Is that realistic?

 

You're going to see some Snyders come back.

 

Are we going to see Lisa Brown return as Iva?

 

No.

 

No?

 

Lisa Brown is on another show!

 

Yeah, but they ain't doing anything with her! Besides, you're in
charge of that show, too. Move her!

 

But we have new writers starting on that other show. Let's see what
they want to do with their canvas.

 

Then what Snyders will we see?

 

Well, we're going to see a cousin of Holden's. Then we may see that
cousin's father and then we may see some others.

 

What about Julie Snyder? Are you familiar with that part?

 

No, who is she?

 

She was the town tart who married Caleb, another great Snyder
who was also written out a while back. We need all these
people back. The Snyders were Doug Marland's greatest
achievement on ATWT -- a wholesome, corn-fed family that
was ridiculously dysfunctional and the fodder for endless story.
It was really good stuff.

 

Well, we hope to continue in Doug's spirit.

 

What do you want to say about the switch in Connors?

 

I want to say that we're taking the character in a different direction.

 

Uh-huh -- but everybody says that, so be more specific.

 

Well... um... how? How do you want me to be more specific?

 

Well, what do you see in Susan Batten that you did not see in
Allyson Rice-Taylor? People use the old "we're taking the
character in a different direction" thing because it's the
politically correct thing to say to avoid hurting somebody's
feelings.

 

You're right.

 

But let's face it, the girl doesn't have her job anymore -- you
can't be much more hurt than that. Let's put it this way: What
surprised me about this decision was that you saw so much
value in the Mark-Connor relationship. I always thought
Allyson Rice-Taylor was pretty uninteresting and the other guy
can't act. So I find it really surprising that you've made this
bold move with two characters who could quite easily have been
written off and nobody would have noticed. Susan Batten is
obviously a unique, quirky, very good actress and that says you
want to accomplish something here.

 

The challenge on this show, Michael -- I'm going to be real honest
here -- is that we have only one effective young heroine, and that's
Lily. We have one big romance -- Lily and Holden. They have been
destined for each other for a long time. We had to do a little
housekeeping when we started refreshing the show, and that left us
with not many other people we could get involved in romance. We'd
been trying to figure out what to do with Connor and Mark and, quite
honestly, they're the only other couple where we have an opportunity
for romance. We needed to see a Connor who was more emotionally
involved. We tried to find it in the current actress and we couldn't. So
we saw an opportunity. We felt the character of Connor has a lot of
history on the show and Mark has some history and rather than
bringing in two new characters with no history, we thought that a
recast -- although we understand it is a risk -- would be the better
risk to take at this time.

 

There continues to be widespread
concern -- despite widespread denials
-- that NBC is determined to make
Another World a Days of Our Lives
clone. I don't want to believe it, but
when I see Vicky Wyndham getting pregnant at age 103, it's
hard not to.

 

First of all, Vicky Wyndham is not 103!

 

OK, so I exaggerate. But c'mon, this is silly, Mickey.

 

And you'll be happy to know that we just did focus groups across the
country...

 

[Groaning.] Puh-leeze don't start talking to me about focus
groups....

 

[Pressing on] ... and I can't tell you how many women like this story.
In fact, one woman yesterday in a focus group in Boise, ID, said,
"You know, I love this story because I'm 43 and I'm pregnant, and it's
wonderful to see something like this happening on my soap."

 

Well, what about the other Days-like things going on?

 

Like what?

 

Oh, gee, like how about the twin for Jake that they
conveniently brought in to pull that story off?

 

It wasn't a twin!

 

OK, then, a look-alike.

 

He had a mask on!

 

Well, whatever the hell it was, it was preposterous! Has this
ever happened in your life? Has someone in a latex mask ever
pretended to be you? I want more realism, not less.

 

Well, it hasn't happened to me, but I'm sure it has happened to
someone somewhere. Haven't you ever been to a costume party with
people who look like famous people and you say, "How did he get
here?"

 

No. But then, I never get invited to costume parties like
everybody on a soap does, either. OK, forget that. What about
the ghost of Ryan coming back? Vicky's trip to the afterlife?

 

That was gentle. It was not outrageous. Many shows have gone to the
afterlife. [Getting serious.] Let me answer your question: NBC fully
recognizes -- in conversations that I've had with them -- that AW is
not Days. Nor do they want it to be Days. But what we're doing [on
AW] is what I meant when I spoke [in part one] about raising the
stakes and making the storytelling more operatic. We are trying to up
the ante here. AW is far from being in place. It is far from being set on
its course. We all acknowledge that. They have been doing some
wonderful things but we still have a lot of work to do.

 

In my Q&A with Tom Eplin a few weeks back, he strongly
believed that AW can succeed as a hybrid -- part gutsy,
down-to-earth Bay City realism, part over-the-top Salem
outrageousness. Is it possible to have it all?

 

You tell me. Because the Ryan ghost story was an attempt to do that.
Did it work?

 

On one level, I would say yes, because it was fun and highly
romantic -- though don't get me started on the costume and set
design. On another level, I think it only served to point up that
the Bobby-Vicky thing is not as strong as the show would like
us to think it is. The purpose of Ryan's return, as I understood
it, was to free Vicky to get on with her love life. But by joining
them in the afterlife, you defeated that purpose. Now you can't
put Jensen Buchanan and Robert Kelker-Kelly together and
get some big supercouple thing happening because we've been
rereminded how great the Vicky-Ryan chemistry was. It's not
that Buchanan and RKK have no chemistry. But they ain't no
Luke and Laura or Bo and Hope or Roger and Holly waiting to
happen. It seems manufactured. It's exactly the same thing GH
is doing right now with Stephen Nichols and Mary Beth Evans.
There's no good reason to put them together. There are no
sparks. There's no nada.

 

OK, let me say this about AW: We've been struggling with the writing.
Some of this is not the fault of the [writing team's] intentions, it may be
the fault of the realization of the intentions. And that's why I say we
still have a lot of work to do on the show. Everybody has hits and
misses. Just because [every story] doesn't get an A-plus doesn't mean
we're doing the wrong thing here. We've been struggling with the
writing for a long time.

 

So what, in your mind, will Michael Malone bring to this mix?

 

Malone brings a wonderful sensitivity of characters and storytelling.
He knows how to tell a good story and how to write wonderful
characters and give them a fullness of life. That's what I'm looking
forward to seeing from Michael.

 

Why has Linda Dano appeared to have fallen out of favor?

 

I don't think she's fallen out of favor. It's a question of the bigger
picture, a question of trying to get all your ducks in a row and what
ducks you want in the row first.

 

What about Guiding Light? Rumors are flying on the Internet
that 10 to 15 people are being let go.

 

[Laughs hysterically.] You can write down that I laughed
hysterically. There is no intention to get rid of anybody at the moment.

 

On the surface, it seemed to me that taking Paul Rauch -- who
exercised some pretty severe misjudgment and shockingly bad
taste when he was the final exec producer on Santa Barbara --
and two head writers from The City -- who created a
storyline-free soap opera for ABC -- and putting them on the
very troubled GL was the equivalent of pounding the last nail in
the coffin.

 

Well, what do you think about what Paul has accomplished so far?

 

I think there is some excellent stuff happening again. But this
has much more to do with the playing out of the twins storyline
-- Ross's reaction, Abby's reaction -- and the reteaming of
Hutchison and Deas, Zimmer and Newman, Zaslow and
Garrett.

 

So he's moving in the right direction.

 

I see the show on the mend, but frankly, I credit great
chemistry among the stars mentioned and a great story which
was created by the McTavish regime more than I would credit
Rauch. Maybe I'm being unfair, but any one of us fans could --
and has -- said, "This Reva and Buzz crap isn't working -- put
Reva and Josh back together." It doesn't take a rocket
scientist. The same with Roger and Holly and Jenna and Buzz.
We can all do that.

 

Oh, yeah?

 

Yeah, look on the Internet. The fans have been screaming for
this stuff for months, years.

 

Well, why didn't it happen before?

 

Well, how the hell do I know? Because the inmates were
running the asylum, I guess.

 

I see. Well, let me just say this: First of all...

 

Let me clear this up: I have the utmost appreciation and
respect for what's going on at GL and I pray it will continue, but
as right as picking Felicia Behr for ATWT seemed to be, this
Rauch decision made me say, "What the hell is Mickey
thinking?"

 

Look, Paul is a superb producer. He really has wonderful taste. I
didn't watch Santa Barbara during its last few years, so I can't speak
to that. I just know that we are very blessed with a network that
knows what it wants us to accomplish. CBS sat down with us at the
outset and together we identified our goals and our strategies, both
short-term and long-term. The first thing P&G needed to do was
show the network there was still life in GL, so that we could get past
the sword that was hanging over our heads. Luckily, we have been
able to do that. We had some stories in place that we had to write
ourselves out of. And some of what we're telling right now is still a
part of those stories that started a while back. But I have the utmost
confidence in Paul as an executive producer. We here -- you tell me if
I'm wrong -- we here are thrilled with the improvement in the
production values on GL. We believe we have some good story in
place but we need more -- and we need it better, further, faster.
Barbara Esensten and Jim Brown both know GL. They started their
daytime careers on this show. They were responsible way back when
for writing the broad strokes of the Harley/Mallet love story, which
was so effective. They were scriptwriters at the time and did not
ultimately see that story through, but they know the show, they are
talented, and we are convinced that they can help us get back some of
our fallen-away viewers and attract new audience.

 

Cool. Now let's talk specifically about a couple of people. The
writing-out of Alexandra Spaulding has caused a furor.

 

Marj Dusay is a wonderful actress and wonderful in the part.
Unfortunately, the politically correct [statement] that there is no more
story is really the reason. We had so many Spauldings on the canvas
that we had to make a very difficult decision.

 

But this is so bizarre. Five years ago, no one would have ever
believed that Alexandra Spaulding -- who was the hub from
which every spoke in Springfield emanated -- would come to the
end of story. That's like saying Erica Kane or Victor Newman
or Luke Spencer has come to the end of story. It's... it's...
heresy. It's inconceivable. I mean, looking back we can see
how it happened because of the way the character gradually
became so watered down, so unimportant in the writing, but
still.

 

That's the problem. Over the last four or five years, the show evolved
in such a way that suddenly we did come to that point. I feel very
badly about that. I know what a beloved character Alexandra is and I
know what a fine actress Marj is, and I'm truly sorry. It's a tough
decision.

 

Well, I guess my question really is, of all the things that could
be fixed, the character of Alexandra -- because it has clearly
been so invaluable in the past -- would seem to be at the
absolute top of the list. As opposed to writing her out, why not
fix her?

 

Umm... there was nothing wrong with the character. It was the
position the character was in.

 

Is it true you have approached Beverlee McKinsey and offered
her back the part?

 

[Laughs.]

 

Did she take your call?

 

[Still laughing.] No, it's not true.

 

Really?

 

It's not true.

 

Hmmm... how do these rumors get started? Is Ron Raines
being fired?

 

No.

 

What about all this talk of a contract for Beth Ehlers?

 

No, no truth to that.

 

Jordan Clarke?

 

No truth to that.

 

So we won't see them back?

 

Never say never -- but not in contract roles at the moment.

 

How long is a moment?

 

[Growing impatient.] Who knows?

 

Well, like a couple of months at least?

 

I don't know! Look, we have two new head writers. Certainly they
know the Harley character. They feel they created the Harley
character. So who knows? The character of Billy is very popular and
when Jordan Clarke visited, the audience was thrilled to see him. He
caused a stir, but I don't see [a return] in the near future. He may
come back for periodic visits as story dictates.

 

OK, answer this -- because this has puzzled a lot of people --
why, with all the 60th anniversary hoo-hah and the big GL ball
and whatnot, did CBS and/or P&G choose not to use
flashbacks?

 

I think we felt like... it was not a conscious decision like, "We're not
doing flashbacks." It was a conscious decision to try to move the
show forward. It is 60 years old. We don't want to keep reminding
the audience of that.

 

[Laughing.] Yeah, that is kinda dangerous in this demo age, I
guess. So can we breathe a sigh of relief with CBS here? Is the
GL contract going to be renewed? And please don't tell me to
ask [CBS Daytime honcho] Lucy Johnson like you did the last
time I asked you this question!

 

[Laughing.] Go ask Lucy Johnson! They haven't opened negotiations
yet, but I know they're very happy with what's happening.

 

Mickey, you have a lot of people breathing a sigh of relief.
Everybody's always going to have a problem with something --
myself included -- be it writing, producing, acting, recasting,
whatever. But there are a lot of really excited fans. You've
showed us miracles can happen.

 

Well, thank you. I have this to say, though: What has been done so far
is the easy part. The hard part is just beginning. These shows don't
turn around overnight. Thank God we've been able to breathe a little
life into them with everyone's combined cooperation and creative
artistry. Bringing in new executive producers is never easy. Those
transitions always take time to settle into place. But we have had a
wonderful spirit of cooperation and energy from the writers, the
actors, the production crews.

 

Even [The Young and the Restless and The Bold and the
Beautiful creator] Bill Bell, who probably stands the most to
gain by one of the CBS/P&G shows going bye-bye, said to me
the other day that he was extremely thrilled to see what's
happening with ATWT. And he really, really meant it.

 

Don't forget Bill has a history with P&G, too. He was here once upon
a time when they started. We in the daytime drama industry are all in
this together.

 

Thanks for your time and candor and patience, Mickey. You're
the best!

Edited May 4, 20169 yr by DeliaIrisFan
Fixed line spacing issues after pasting from file nearly 20 years old

I only read half of the interview …didnt want to vomit reading the rest…..calling ART uninteresting and saying that Susan Batten was some great actress is absurd…what an idiot…any wonder the soaps practically vanished. I guess he was wrong about fans not caring about Connor disappearing or being recast….again what a moron Michael Logan is..

I only read half of the interview …didnt want to vomit reading the rest…..calling ART uninteresting and saying that Susan Batten was some great actress is absurd…what an idiot…any wonder the soaps practically vanished. I guess he was wrong about fans not caring about Connor disappearing or being recast….again what a moron Michael Logan is..

 

In hindsight, 1996 is often talked about as a markedly bad year for daytime, but it wasn't until 1997 when it (should have) become apparent that the solutions that had worked in the past were failing across the board to improve soaps that were struggling creatively. I remember at the time Logan and the handful of other serious soap commentators would run these messiah-narrative pieces about newly hired figureheads periodically, and then within weeks or months they would be harshly critiquing those same folks' work (often fairly). This MADD interview is actually not too far off from the (also very fascinating) interview that Logan ran with Jill Farren Phelps just a few years back, when she took over Y&R.

 

But, to my knowledge, nobody ever analyzed collectively/longitudinally how it could be that hiring new writers and/or producers failed repeatedly to fix the fundamental problems plaguing most/all of these shows over the long haul. In retrospect, the problems had to be higher up, and I don't know if the soap press had gotten to the bottom of it and called it out, some of these shows might have at least gone out with some dignity, instead of a race to the bottom.

 

Edited May 4, 20169 yr by DeliaIrisFan

After Marland passed …no one knew or had any clue what ATWT was all about. The remaining year and a half after his passing ATWT was still using Marland's outlines but the stories had no emotion or connection. The show became so stale. ATWT grew in the ratings in 97 because the awful story of Diego ended and Holden returned. After that FMB and Lorraine wrote one boring story after another. And if I remember correctly they made Kirk the killer of Diego?? Which I found absurd and just ridiculous. Behr and Lorraine tried with Andy and Denise but that story fell flat….and so did Kim's heart condition….I didn't care for that story either….and I believe they also had the whole Reid story with Julia which I thought was ok but I don't even recall how it ended…so I must have lost interest along the way. ATWT had literally lost its heart and soul without Marland in charge. 

 

And as for ART and Connor…you don't get rid of a character and actor who fans of the show have come to love and recast her with someone new who doesn't even have the mannerisms or looks or warmth of the previous actress. I still remember the day walking into my local store and picking up that SOW issue and reading ART had been fired. As a fan of ATWT and ART it totally ruined my day….Batten didn't last long though with the "Can Her" campaign.. soon she was gone. If FMB cared what the fans wanted she should have brought ART back in the role...

Edited May 4, 20169 yr by Soapsuds

I wasn't watching regularly between '93-'01.  Some years, I could only watch during the summer, others, I really only caught an episode here and there during the holidays, so a year like '94, which I'm trying to watch some episodes, is mostly unfamiliar to me.  

 

I have to say, though, '94 is pretty boring.  There are pockets of interest, here and there but so many poorly written storylines.  A real chore to watch.  It's painfully obvious to me when the drop-off in quality began. '93 was depressing but at least the storylines had more interest than some of the pointless drivel I'm enduring watching '94.  Nicolas Coster's horrible accent is grating, how did he get away with playing a Maltese?!

 

One positive:  Judy Reyes (Scrubs) appeared on an episode!

Edited May 4, 20169 yr by DramatistDreamer

Thank you for the transcript. I actually remember this interview - I remember being annoyed because she had no idea who Julie was, as I loved Julie. Julie wasn't a major character, but she had been a part of stories up to fall 1995, so the complete lack of awareness of who she was baffled me. And then I realized why they'd allowed writing that had Holden just casually dump Aaron off on Caleb and Julie, when Julie was...not a good mother, and had never had any strong interest in being Aaron's mother. 

 

I guess at least they brought her back briefly later that year, which no future producers ever bothered to do. 

 

Those repeated jabs at Victoria Wyndham help explain why she absolutely tore into him in an interview later that year - one of my favorite soap interviews of all time.