Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members

True, but Goutman was present during both writers' terms, and JP's tenure still featured more screen-time for the vets than Sheffer's did. Helen Wagner once approached Sheffer personally and requested more appearances on the show. In an interview later, he said that although Wagner was the matriarch, he was going to continue writing the series as he saw fit. This suggested to me that HS had at least a certain degree of control over the stories he told and the actors he showcased. And clearly, Sheffer had his favorites. I believe he (or someone at P&G) had an issue against Eileen Fulton, who was basically marginalized to the status of an under-fiver during Sheffer's tenure. 

Penny was such a pivotal, beloved heroine with a staunch fanbase. I knew from the moment Phoebe Dorin appeared that the audience would close ranks and protest. Viewers never accepted another Mary Ryan on Ryan's Hope after Kate Mulgrew left. Even though the first recast, Mary Carney, was good, TPTB gave up on her almost immediately, but then the second recast, Kathleen Tolan, was HORRENDOUS. Replacing Tolan with the better-but-still-tepid Nicolette Goulet failed too. And don't even get me started on the misfires surrounding the "new" Alice Frames on AW. Yikes. Some actors truly cannot be replaced, and most of us know by instinct who they are.

Yes, that was an opening to keep Paul Stewart's legacy and place in the show's history alive. Sadly, Stewart Cushing disappeared from Oakdale like many other members of the Lowell/Stewart family, never to be seen again. That TPTB never mined that clan for new characters to introduce in later years indicated to me the lack of knowledge or interest producers and writers had in ATWT's history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2970

  • DramatistDreamer

    1958

  • Soapsuds

    1716

  • P.J.

    823

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I think P&G were active in getting rid of or diminishing vet performers.

This goes back to the 70's when Teri Keane and later Mandel Kramer were dropped from EON.

Then there were the firings at GL when Doug Marland was told to stop writing for Barbara, Adam and Steve.

Beverly Penberthy dropped from AW, Billi Lou Watt at SFT and so on.

If anything I think Goutman might have fought to have the vets kept on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It is from this past weekend's Hollywood Show in Burbank. A meet and greet fan event. Most of the cast of Dallas was there having a reunion besides the meet and greet. ATWT stars were there too! Plus other actors from various shows.

I posted the Dallas pics on the Dallas thread.

I love me some Julianne Moore!  

Edited by Soapsuds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I like Sheffer, but he had many flaws. I did not know that Helen Wagner asked him for more appearances and he ignored her. That was a trash move for him to cast her aside. He didn't handle the likes of Kim, Bob, Nancy, and Lisa real well. Honestly, he suffered with the Hughes for the most part. Carly was my favorite, but he overdosed her at times. 

RE: Paul--When they did a RETCON on Emily's embryo story with Larry, which was gross by the way, they should've cast the younger that played Emily's son as one of Annie & Jeff's quads or a son of Stewart. Again, the history is there. I don't know why any writer wouldn't use it. I feel like it kills them to read up on the show's history, which for me has been fun. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I will grudgingly admit that a writer should have the power to write a show as he sees fit, but only to a point. When you take over a long-running series, you simply cannot cut off its roots and drastically alter its tone and style without severely damaging the program.  If you assumed the reigns of, say, DALLAS, no one in power would allow you to ignore and marginalize the Ewing family. TPTB of the original Star Trek would not permit you to kill off Spock and write out Kirk and Bones. If you accept the job of writing a beloved franchise, its your obligation to keep essential components of it intact.

What i find most offensive about the Sheffer/Wagner interaction is not just that he turned down her request, but that he spoke openly about it in the press. How humiliating for Wagner, a beloved original cast member and lynchpin of the program, to have her participation be undervalued so publicly. Sheffer should have been gracious enough to keep such a private conversation private.

Agnes Nixon, Pat Falken Smith, Claire Labine, Douglas Marland, and a few other writers were rightfully applauded for studying the history of each soap they took over from other writers, and using the past effectively. I don't think a lot of scribes even bother. Pamela Long at TGL sure didn't know the history. Unless I am misremembering, I believe Ellen Dolan once said that Hogan Sheffer did not know that John Dixon was Margo's father. 

When fans of the soaps know more about them than the people writing and producing them, you know there's a problem.

Edited by vetsoapfan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's interesting to read people's issues with how the shows "vets" were used during the last 10 years of the show. Having originally watched just those years, I considered Bob, Kim, and Lucinda a huge part of the show when I watched. Bob and Kim's marriage were the stability of the show. Lucinda had tons of storylines with both Lily and Rose as well as Worldwide and her cancer. Oh, and her boyfriend who was actually into Luke.

Lisa as well. Sure she had no romantic storyline but she was around a lot. Nancy was in her 80s in the last decade. There were times (even in the Sheffer era) where all the actress could do was sit in a chair. That's rather limiting to her storyline options. 

I think people also have to consider that, during those years, other "vets" were Lily, Holden, Ben, Jack and Carly who certainly got a lot of screen time.

We also got to see grown up versions of core families.

Hughes: Adam, Christopher, Casey

Munson/Ryan: Paul, Jennifer

Montgomery/Walsh: Bryant, Lucy

I don't know where this idea that the vets weren't used enough comes from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's the problem. I never understood how a writer could take the position and not learn the history. Or at least ask someone about the history. Yes, Sheffer got the show out of slump, but as we both agree, he handled many of the vets poorly. It hurts my heart to hear that Helen Wagner had to plead with him to give her more airtime and he dismissed her. That does not sit well with me. I wondering if other writers tried to challenge him or just opted not to, to stay employed. And that is embarrassing that Hogan didn't know Margo was John's daughter. That probably makes sense as to why he wrote Larry Bryggman off the show, which was a criminal act in itself. 

I  do think that Hogan was trying to keep up with GH (I know he was obsessed with GH), which was he successful at, but it alienated so many loyal, long-term fans in the process. 

I beg to differ. 

Bob and Kim were reduced to talk-to characters. They were only really brought out the mothballs for holiday episodes or when Christopher was in peril. And Christopher did not really stay a mainstay; he was cast aside once his arcs with Abigail and Allison ended. Chris should've been the lead of the show from that time to the end. Not Craig. Not Jack. Not Holden. 

Lisa was a surrogate to Bonnie at times and would get in the mix of Barbara's antics, but she barely did anything too. 

Yes, he did do right by Lucinda as he kept her busy, but that was at the extension of her being a foil to Craig or tagging along behind Lily/Rose. 

All the vets on this show were still viable characters that should've been deeply involved in story.

Any WOAK story, Kim should've been involved. 

Any hospital story, Bob should've been involved.

Lisa should've been heavily involved in the BRO stories with Carly and Babs. 

The last huge vets story I remember is the Rick Dekker story (the original one), but that was more about Allison than anyone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Very true.  Time and again the writers (and casting department) dropped the ball with Chris.  He should have become the "new" Tom; the lead male character of the show.  It would have been a natural progression; he was connected/related to almost every character on the show.  But somehow he was always portrayed as a disappointing, second-rate son.  So much wasted potential.

 

 

 

Edited by MarlandFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do think that at the end when Daniel Cosgrove (my least favorite rendition) occupied the role they were finally starting to put in the role of lead, but I also think that was partly because he was latched to Katie--a pairing I loathed. I just had a hard time with Chris ever wanting to be with Katie after she accused him of stalking her during the Endicott arc. I don't even really remember her being remorseful and giving him a proper apology. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I feel that Christopher came down to bland casting. I can think of 4 Chris variations that were just "bland likable white man." Some would argue it was the writing. Some would argue it was the acting. I'm for the latter. Just in terms of actors, they never had a Chris who could be the lead of the show in the way that Jon Hensley and Michael Park could.

I remember Kim always being active at WOAK. She was a "grandmother character" at this point and, by definition, those characters are always going to be characters that are "talk to" characters. I remember Kim being involved with Katie and Brad and having her heart attack at WOAK in the last few years. She was involved with Luke and Maddie. She and Bob were the "happily married couple." As a writer, I can tell you, there is no story there. The story becomes about them relating to their children. It's a natural progression of any story that goes on for 40 or 50 years. 

I remember Lisa as being involved in the Barbara/Carly storylines. Fashions still existed as a store on the "street set" we were given towards the end. (Not one of my favorites but when the budget is cut, you've got to create some generic set where people can meet.) She had been married 8 times (as she just said to Issac on the March '00 episode I watched a few days ago.) Her romantic storylines were over. As mentioned, she was attached to Bonnie for one thing. Now I'll be the first to admit that in the final four or so years of the show, she disappeared, absolutely. But that old gal had some story left in her in the early aughts - again...in relation to other characters.

Now that I've reached the aughts in my watch, as I've said before I will be interested to see how I feel about watching them having now seen the 80s and 90s.

And having now watched what's available of the late 70s and then 80s, and read the synopsis of the series since its beginning, it cracks me up when people think the quadruplets should've been brought back. Maybe it's a shame that the Stewart family got boiled down to Emily, Susan (another long term vet who was used a lot in the aughts) and Allison but hey, at least they were still there as opposed to the Lowells. 

Why does no one ever complain about the Lowell's grandchildren not popping up? 

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Sheffer's idea of soap was just too cynical and dark to fit veteran characters. I still remember great choices like having Jessica and Margo, longtime close friends, fight over a man - this not long after Jessica had been raped. 

I will credit Goutman with not dumping vets for quick cash. That's better than many managed.

If we get into the realm of spent characters, a character like Lily felt more spent to me in ATWT's last decade than Bob or Kim, but then I wasn't writing the show...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I appreciate conversations like this, in which posters can hold different beliefs about issues without becoming enraged and flinging ad hominem insults around. We've all seen what social media can be like, LOL.

I respectfully disagree  about the use of the vets in the 2000s.

Back in the day, while Sheffer was writing the show,  another message board would post daily cast appearances, and there were times when Lisa went weeks without being seen.

Around the same time, Sheffer was asked in an interview why we barely saw Kim, whom viewers missed and clamored to see more often. He gave a reassuring reply that, soon, "We are going to be seeing a lot of Kim." But...we didn't.

One thing that grated on my nerves the most is having to endure Helen Wagner's rare cameos on the show being used to prop up Katie. 

Please register in order to view this content

 Chris Goutman referred to her as "America's Princess," but I could not stand her.

I would NEVER refer to folks like Jack and Carly as "vets." I regarded them, like Katie, as over-exposed interlopers.

The problem about the new generation of certain families was that so many of the actors were poorly cast and/or did not stick around for long. It was difficult to care about them one way or the other. IMHO, the absolute WORST was Roger Howarth, such a mistake in the role of Paul.

I do believe the "vet situation" improved under Jean Passanante, as much as I cringe at having to applaud her for anything, LOL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 member




  • Recent Posts

    • Sorry, just one more post on the Thorntons. How did Ruth and Edna feel about each other prior to Tad dating Dotty?
    • I can't remember exactly but I think it may be 1995 as Jake was trying to hide from a loan shark.
    • I also wonder if it was considered controversial at the time to show a morally corrupt doctor?(another character troupe for Agnes Nixon, the upstanding male citizen who is hiding secrets back at home) Up until the early 1970s, prime-time would very rarely tell stories about the private lives of doctors, because advertisers tended to shy away from such content. @robbwolff -- so is this wrong that Ruth dated David before marrying Joe?  Dr. David Thornton is a fictional character from the ABC daytime soap opera All My Children, portrayed by Paul Gleason from 1976 to 1978.  He was introduced as a respected physician in Pine Valley, presenting himself as a widower to his colleagues at the hospital. This facade, however, concealed a darker truth: his wife, Edna Thornton, was alive, and he was leading a double life. David’s character is defined by manipulation and secrecy, as he maintained a carefully curated public image while engaging in deceitful and criminal behavior in his personal life. His relationships were marked by control and betrayal, particularly in his marriage to Edna and his romantic entanglements with other women. David’s charm and professional status allowed him to navigate Pine Valley’s social circles, but his actions revealed a calculating and ruthless nature. Career David was a doctor at Pine Valley Hospital, where he was well-regarded by his peers for his medical expertise. His professional life provided him with a veneer of respectability, which he exploited to mask his personal misdeeds. However, his career was not a central focus of his storyline; instead, it served as a backdrop to his personal schemes. His position at the hospital gave him access to resources, such as the drug digitalis, which he later used in his attempt to murder his wife. David’s professional life unraveled as his criminal actions came to light, tarnishing his reputation in the medical community. Personal Relationships and Family David’s family and romantic relationships were fraught with tension and deception, shaping much of his narrative arc: Edna Thornton (Wife): David was married to Edna Thornton, with whom he had a daughter, Dottie. To his colleagues, he claimed Edna was deceased, allowing him to pursue other relationships without suspicion. In reality, David was plotting to kill Edna, motivated by his desire to be free of her and possibly to gain financial or personal freedom. He began poisoning her with digitalis, a heart medication, which caused her to experience heart pains. Edna was unaware of David’s true intentions until after his death, when the truth about his poisoning scheme was revealed. Dottie Thornton (Daughter): David and Edna’s daughter, Dottie Thornton, was a significant character in All My Children. Portrayed by Dawn Marie Boyle (1977–1980) and later Tasia Valenza (1982–1986), Dottie was raised primarily by Edna. David’s neglectful and manipulative behavior extended to his daughter, as he showed little genuine care for her well-being. Dottie’s life was impacted by her father’s actions, particularly after his death, when Edna became a wealthy widow. Dottie later married Thaddeus “Tad” Martin in 1985, though their marriage ended in divorce in 1986, and she suffered the loss of an unborn child with Tad. Ruth Parker (Fiancée, 1976): David was engaged to Ruth Parker in 1976, furthering his pattern of deceit since he was still married to Edna. His engagement to Ruth, who was also involved with Jeff Martin, highlighted David’s willingness to manipulate romantic partners for his own gain. The engagement did not lead to marriage, as David’s true intentions and double life began to surface. Christina “Chris” Karras (Lover, 1978): In 1978, David began a romantic relationship with Dr. Christina “Chris” Karras, a fellow physician. This affair added another layer of complexity to his web of lies, as Chris was unaware of his marriage to Edna and his poisoning scheme. After David’s death, Chris was initially accused of his murder due to their relationship and her access to medical resources. However, Jeff Martin’s investigation cleared her name by proving David’s death was caused by his own actions. Parents: David’s parents are unnamed in the source material, and both are noted as deceased. No further details are provided about their influence on his life or their role in his backstory. Death David Thornton’s death in 1978 was a dramatic and fitting conclusion to his villainous arc, brought about by his own treachery. Intent on killing Edna to escape their marriage, David had been secretly administering digitalis to her, causing her heart issues. In a twist of fate, their daughter, Dottie, innocently switched Edna’s drink with David’s during one of his poisoning attempts. Unaware that the drink was laced with a lethal dose of digitalis, David consumed it and suffered a fatal heart attack. His death was initially investigated as a possible murder, with Chris Karras as the prime suspect due to her relationship with David and her medical knowledge. However, Dr. Jeff Martin conducted a toxicology screen on David’s body, which revealed that the digitalis poisoning was the cause of both Edna’s heart pains and David’s death. This evidence exonerated Chris and exposed David’s plan to kill his wife, cementing his legacy as a tragic and self-destructive figure. Impact and Legacy David Thornton’s storyline, though relatively short-lived (1976–1978), was impactful due to its intensity and the ripple effects on other characters. His death left Edna a wealthy widow, altering her and Dottie’s circumstances and setting the stage for further drama, including Edna’s manipulation by conman Ray Gardner. David’s actions also strained relationships among other Pine Valley residents, particularly through his engagement to Ruth Parker and affair with Chris Karras, which intersected with Jeff Martin’s storyline. His character exemplified the classic soap opera archetype of a charming yet duplicitous villain whose downfall is precipitated by his own hubris. Additional Notes Portrayal: Paul Gleason’s performance as David Thornton brought a compelling intensity to the role, making the character memorable despite his brief tenure. Gleason’s ability to portray both charm and menace suited David’s dual nature as a respected doctor and a scheming husband. Storyline Context: David’s arc occurred during the early years of All My Children, a period when the show focused on intricate personal dramas and moral dilemmas. His poisoning plot and double life were emblematic of the show’s penchant for high-stakes interpersonal conflict. Lack of Additional Family Details: Beyond Edna and Dottie, no other family members (such as siblings or extended relatives) are mentioned in the source material, limiting the scope of his familial connections. Conclusion Dr. David Thornton was a multifaceted antagonist in All My Children, whose life was marked by professional success, personal deception, and a fatal miscalculation. As a doctor, he wielded authority and respect, but his secret plan to murder his wife, Edna, revealed a cold and calculating core. His relationships with Edna, Dottie, Ruth Parker, and Chris Karras were defined by manipulation, and his death by accidental self-poisoning was a poetic end to his schemes. David’s legacy in Pine Valley lived on through Edna’s newfound wealth and Dottie’s subsequent storylines, making him a pivotal figure in the show’s early narrative. His story remains a classic example of soap opera drama, blending betrayal, tragedy, and retribution.
    • The only blonde I see is one of the actual women staring at first & then screaming & running later.  DAYS: Vivian's manservant Ivan is in a long curly red wig. 

      Please register in order to view this content

      Y&R: long straight black wig is the actor Peter Barton whose character name I am blanking on.   
    • I very much liked office Cleary and the actress who portrayed her (as you say, Mary Peterson).  A shame her turn didn't evolve into a contract role.   BTW, does anyone know the timeframe/years that Betty Rae served as casting director?  If i understand correctly, she not only led the effort for contract roles, but also for shorter 13- and 26-week roles.  IMO, GL had LOTS of very well-casted, limited roles, too. I'm surprised the actors throughout the soap industry, and especially P&G actors, have not assembled a book or something similar, praising Rae.  Each actor could write a few paragraphs or a page of text describing his or her experience.
    • No. Ruth had an extramarital affair with David while married to Joe.
    • I'm not sure I agree with Bernstein's children on that. Bernstein's life and activism here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Bernstein#Social_activism_and_humanitarian_efforts
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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