Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • 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 they definatley would have had to recast Davidson, and should have done it earlier. She reminds me a lot of Rachel Minor (Michelle Bauer) She was beloved, especially since the audience went through a major characters death with the actress playing the character. But she like Davidson, was not going to be cut out for a "romantic" lead. By the same token, the kids on GL at the time that everyone on boards said they loved needed to be recast, the kid who played Bil Lewis and the Ben kid actor (who, grew up in midwest Springfield but had that terrible New York accent...)

I have a feeling the Davidson/Rekell romance was made up for their boring and non-existent storyline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I just wonder if Betsy ever needed to be a romantic heroine. I guess the show did need Meg Ryan's appeal, so a recast worked in the long run, but I really prefer Lindsey Frost, was more thoughtful, wasn't a romantic heroine at all, and reminded me more of Davidson. But I guess most fans preferred Ryan types.

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Of course Betsy needed to be a romantic lead, she's a legacy child with a troubled, tangled childhood RIPE with issues. And I don't think you could have recast Davidson earlier, since a major part of the '70's dealt with her paternity secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

For me a character can be a strong lead without having as much focus on their love life. I think it just makes you less of a character. Dee was the younger lead heroine on ATWT in the early 80s, but they never defined her beyond her love life, and the character paid the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But soap operas are about relationships. I don't think Annie or Dee was any more or less focused on their romances than say Kim or Barbara were. We just see Kim and Barbara in a more rounded way because they grew and evolved over time whereas Annie and Dee (in the scheme of things) were short term characters.

I think the writers tried to make Annie and Dee ATWT's version of Y&R's Laurie and Leslie Brooks---and it failed miserably, imo.

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   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I’ve reached the summer of 1998.  Until now, my impression has been that the show has steadily improved since the great quality dip of 1994, reaching as high as 8/10 in 1997. Sure, I could complain about a few things in 1997 (Claudia got wasted after her initial storyline; Thorne’s feelings for Taylor were a bit too sudden; the storyline where Sheila lived with James and Maggie while pregnant got rather boring; Mike periodically revisiting Sheila despite being on the run from authorities), but overall it was a very strong year.  I liked the Thorne/Taylor/Ridge triangle, the mystery plot about who shot Grant, the sham wedding to trap Sheila, Stephanie/Eric/Lauren, and Clarke manipulating his way back to working at Forrester. I even liked the Greenland storyline with Eric/Lauren/Rush, although I had expected to hate it. Maybe 1996 tops 1997 in raw soapy excitement (especially as Sheila got a chance to interact with a larger canvas of characters), but some problems with overall storyline cohesion puts it somewhat below 1997 for me. Unfortunately, 1998 has turned out to be a bit of a speedbump, perhaps on par with 1995 levels of quality: - Maggie’s character really got trashed after James left her to be with Sheila, and the early 1998 storylines where she imprisoned Sheila in the house from Psycho, or installed those wires and mikes and such in her house to make her think she’s going crazy, were total GARBAGE. So much so that the latter storyline (and Maggie with it) pretty much disappeared into a limbo.  - I have mixed feelings about the twins plotline with Lauren. No way did Rush survive being shot with a crossbow through the chest, and the romance between Lauren and Rush’s good twin brother Johnny was rather dry to me. I did however enjoy the camp aspect of Rush taking his brother’s place to be with Lauren, and Eric rescuing her. But it doesn’t appear like Bell cared too much about the Johnny/Lauren romance beyond the twin storyline gimmick, and it too disappeared in an unsatisfactory manner (come on, why not hire Johnny’s actor for just 5 more episodes for an arc where he realizes Lauren is not over Eric, or JUST SOMETHING?) - Clarke wormed his way back to FC in late 1997, which had exciting storytelling potential, but then he disappeared almost entirely. Sad to see my favorite character wasted in this manner. Does he get anything interesting to do between now and the Morgan saga of 2000-2001? - The Thomas saga was entertaining in 1997, but it got stretched out too much, and made some of early 1998 tiresome, with Ridge having to decide YET AGAIN which woman he wants to be with. On the plus side, I like the plotline of Thorne being neighbors with Macy and Grant, and we’ve finally been introduced to the SORASed Rick/Amber/CJ crowd. The Stephanie/James/Sheila triangle is also starting, and it makes me excited (I remember seeing some if it in my childhood). I know Sheila, Grant, and James are all leaving soon, which I honestly kind of dread - between them and Clarke’s near-absence, it feels like herd is going to get culled too much in the near future. But I know there’s the familiar 1999-2002 to look forward to.
    • LOL - this is a perfect description, and that's what I loved about it! May be a bit campy, but it immediately caught my attention in a good way.  I'm not familiar with the Fishing Trip storyline, I'll have to look that up. I've noticed that about Josh, which has made him less attractive to me overall. He just yells a lot when he's not happy. Wow, Reva was married to HB!  LOL - "Always... eventually, and again"
    • I love your ideas. I would love to see Jack grown up this confused unhinged individual. He should hold a grudge against both Brooke and Taylor.   
    • @chrisml

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Lois's return has been a bust. So disappointing that the writers have never written for her. As with Tracy, the pool of GH vets is so thin, there's no one to pair her with. Doubtful they would go to the trouble of properly recasting a legacy character and then sticking  him with Lois; they're obviously not that invested. If she wants to be on this show, it'll be as a noisy grandma who stays in the background. 
    • I love me some Anita and TT. They need to give her a good storyline and I know that it's coming. 
    • @Franko Thanks for tagging me. A few days ago I was talking in another thread about the rise of "snarky" critics for TV shows in the '90s online recaps, but this is just more along the lines of a mauling. There's also the unspoken reality that films like Steel Magnolias were seen as movies for women, so therefore they sucked. Pauline Kael also had her share of blunt, at times incredibly nasty remarks, but the vitriol is often balanced by her love for film. I'm not seeing that here.  With that said, the comment about Field's work becoming unbearable describes how I felt when I tried to sit through her and Maura Tierney on ER. 
    • I skipped most of Daniel too. I think it's awful he has kids with Nicole, Csrky5 and Chloe and Brady, Bo and Philip do not. 
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • A great day. Feeling happy and accomplished.

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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