Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Now I love me some enemy to lover tropes, however I never saw a romantic spark or chemistry with these two characters. Some characters never need to hook up but if kept Lucinda free of Dixon, I would have taken it (yes, I have very unpopular opinions on certain things).

I do love the idea of Lisa online dating.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2972

  • DramatistDreamer

    1958

  • Soapsuds

    1716

  • P.J.

    823

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

To be fair, Marland began to let that diminish during his time..which is when I stopped watching as often, and moved on to GL, which,  while not as prominent as with the Hughes, were recentering the Bauers with Ed and Mo as the center of town and the house "Everyone comes to when they want to celebrate or when something bad happens, people just start coming here," as Michele said once. As soon as that ended my viewing became sporadic there to.  I don't know why soaps can't figure out that the fantasy of the core HOME and family that is open to everyone is one viewers have no matter what their age.

 

Agreed...Lisa was always best when clucking around young people, especially the bad girls and boys of town that she would take under her wing. The interesting thing about her that was often ignored is that under that whole "romantic fool" thing she had, it really wasn't the men but about belonging and having a family. Lisa was the prime example of a character creating a choosen family, which she did her whole time on the show, becoming a Hughes even when the [!@#$%^&*] hit the fan..and she  didn't need big storylines during the last two decades..she just needed a bunch of characters that she adopted around her that would come to her for her screwy advice and support. Bob and Kim you would go to for advice on an "honest" relationship, Lisa you would go to for advice on how to hide a body. So many easy ways to involve the vets without them being on everyday or having front burner stories. And yes, I hated that she ended up alone, not even going to her grandkids going away or around dour Tom and Margo (though I agree, I wouldnt want to be around them either.)

Edited by Mitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In one word: Advertisers. 

In my reading about television in the early years, I have come to see that the advertisers rules these shows, including content. No matter how powerful you think the HW is, the advertisers had more power. Procter and Gamble, from the very beginning of these shows' runs, P&G had the ultimate power. As frustrated as Irna Phillips was, she realized this. She couldn't even get them to stop playing organ cues when the Guiding Light went to television, even though she hated it because she knew it would become a trope. P&G obviously wanted a change in tone, perhaps what they viewed a cooler, slicker tone, which also happened to coincided with "efficiencies" in the budget. And P&G, whose main goal was always to sell products, was notorious for making these types of "efficiencies". It's like, even if it's not broke, they're still going to try to "fix it". And they kept "fixing it" until cancellation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So tragic what they did to her character.   She should have been the focal point of the show to the end.  AMC was usually associated with Susan Lucci and Erica is a similar prototype of Lisa. Who was the character most associated with ATWT in the end?   Probably Carly who was okay but not part of the show’s legacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do not have any personal knowledge of the internal dynamics at ATWT but worth pointing out that it can be both be true that an EP fought to keep some of the veterans on the show while not giving them front-burner storylines.
His argument could have been that keeping them around helps the tapistry of the show and avoids a PR disaster while not thinking they are interesting or young or whatever enough to be carrying storylines anymore, which in turn might have been offensive to said actors who were kept as potted plants.
The alternative could very well have been for them to have been written out altogether which would have saved money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Goutman was a very divisive figure, there is no room for debate about that. It's no secret that he had conflict with a few veteran actors. Long-time actors Martha Byrne and Scott Bryce had very negative experiences with him. Both Byrne and Bryce have spoken about their experiences on the show when he was EP. Byrne was a bit more circumspect, not wanting to divulge too many specific details, Bryce was more blunt. From my understanding, having listened to their actual words, they were marginalized, as was Fulton. Fulton also spoke of how hurtful her treatment was. As EP, the head of what goes on, day to day in production, if he wasn't at the root of this, honestly, I don't know who would be.

I also know of his reputation along other spheres, that are not ATWT-related. It's not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Byrne's problem was just at the very end and the contract negotiations ..Bryce was a more layered actor who was used to Marland's work and by the time he got there the network and MADD were all about...cartoon BAD and no depth. I think Byrne got along with him quite well until that time.

I think Goutman did work to keep the vets there..he just didn't know how to use them well. Kim and Bob and Lucinda were used quite well, and to tell you the truth, I would not have given them major story either...but I would not have cut off their family tree like they did, so I would have given their kids the most story and I would have them interact as support with their own robust lives.  I think Fulton, sad to say, would not have been happy unless she was LISA...the STAR of ATWT..she was the prototype of Zimmer, bitching if she had a day off back in her hey day. Again, I would have Lisa be a go to for the troubled grey characters of Oakdale, where she would energetically butt into their lives.  Again, I think Goutman saw them as adding color and texture to the show, but didn't know how to incorporate them as such.  I take a look at Rauch, who actually fought to keep MG, JVD and LK on contract (as soon as he left most were bumped to recurring) but really didn't give them good story when they were there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

and then there’s the barbara bloom factor, who arrived at cbs daytime in 2003 and escalated the ‘abcification’ that madd had begun. i’ve heard from a couple of insiders her arrival coincided with goutman’s decline. and, not for nothing, it’s worth noting that both scott and martha were replaced my abc daytime actors.

as for eileen, i agree. she always saw herself as the ‘world turn’s star, even after her star had faded. her marriages all ended in divorce, she had no children. it seems as though her life is made up of ‘world turns and her cabaret act, along with her dogs, which is kind of sad.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That is sort what I am getting at.

I understand we have an emotional connection to these actors in a way we do not with producers so it is easy to automatically want to side with the former but we have to allow for the possibility all these stories of "being mistreated" and "hurt feelings" at least partially come from a place of long-time veterans Norma Desmond-ing themselves into being more difficult than we imagine.
And in truth even with the most veteran-worshipping producer, it is hard to have those characters be as front-and-center as they once were.
It is not that they can't write stories for the older generation - they can and they should have done it way more rather than treat them as background props. BUT they are now competing for airtime with two or three generations of characters and they are not the stars anymore. It is the natural flow of things. And if they cling to their former glory, we know how some older people can become ornery and some of the tension might also come from that.

I know not what kind of person Goutman is but I do know it often feels too easy to lay everything we disagree with on a show at the feet of the producer - it is their job to take the incoming and I am sure they are well compensated for it - and caricaturing them as unfeeling money-obsessed dont-care-about-the-show without ever allowing for all the factors an EP has to juggle. 

An example is LB. Sure, there is evidence she was treated unkindly (not inviting her back for the finale is high-level BS) BUT I'd argue there is evidence some of her requests might have been unreasonable. At the point of her failed contract renewal, the show was struggling and I can't imagine they were doing well financially (it didn't look it on-screen). One can easily imagine her sticking to her guns for what money she wanted and a torn producer deciding that the extra cuts they would have to make to continue being able to afford her weren't worth it. Not because they didn't want to keep her: but because what she demanded forced their hand to decide whether they wanted a specific actress so bad that they should get rid of two or three sets or two or three other supporting characters. It is a tough call but not necessarily an evil one.

Same with an actor complaining about story. When SB told them he hated they were writing Craig as a cartoon, he was right. But do we want actors' opinions to dictate stories? For every time we agree, how many times has an actor come to producers with a stupid idea? I hear the idea that actors know their characters the best and yet they are actors, not writers and they don't always see the big picture. I can see a writer hearing an actor bitch and moan and go "Thanks for your input but no thanks" without being a monster. There is a pretty fair point to make that ignoring actors is the healthiest way for writers to handle that. 

Again: I am speaking more generally than Goutman whose reputation I believe. When there is smoke from enough actors there is fire. But I tend not to read everything that was done in those last twenty years with the same What Monsters reaction as other fans.
Long list of mistakes and things I would have done differently. But I allow for the fact I do not know everything and a lot of things were done probably had a rationale that wasn't just "Let me screw over this miserable show". People can screw up while trying to do the right thing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It was more than just money for Martha. It started out as contract negotiations but spiraled and disintegrated. She alluded to a type of psychological warfare that was being practiced, she said it was very damaging and hurtful. Hurtful was also the word that Eileen used to describe the way she was treated. Yes, actors can be sensitive, but from working with them, that's why they are effective at what they do. Their feelings are close enough to the surface that they can be easily accessed. Anyone working with actors ought to know this, or their in the wrong profession 

Bryce has worked with a number of professional s and personalities in his numerous film and television work, he likely has far more professional experience than Goutman has. Years ago, in an interview, Bryce basically talked about how unprofessional Goutman and co. were. I believe him.

I have a connection to the very same department in which Goutman work(ed) on and off in academia and he's not so stellar there either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh, I definitely got the sense that she was personally revolted by what happened, the visceral nature of it leaped off the page when I read it and when I listened to her podcast interview ,(with a different soap blog), I got that exact same sense of revulsion. She didn't want to go into much detail and I respect her desire not to revisit that particular time in much detail. I also got the sense that it was somewhat traumatic and she wanted to push past it. 

Another aspect that comes to mind about that particular sequence of years and events is that, when a soap opera is on its "last legs" as ATWT obviously was at that time, TPTB usually put the production in the hands of less than fully capable people.

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.




  • Recent Posts

    • Okay, I continue to maintain that what is so good about this particular reveal followed by umbrella storyline is that you can see & understand many different points of view where there is not one bad guy or one 100% right person.  About your stated opinion, that Lois & Gloria did the right thing, you know that this was technically an illegal adoption? For it to have been legal the father, if known, would have to have been informed & have signed off on terminating his own paternal rights. And, of course, it is clear how many people they lied to.  Personally I feel like Lois is going to take the biggest "public" blame with Lulu a close second in the blame category. I am looking forward to a tongue lashing I hope Brook Lynn gives to Gloria. I continue to be more than annoyed with Dante. First his attitude toward Gio with regards to Rocco & a drinking game & its results. Second his attitude toward Lulu. Meanwhile enjoying the show every day!
    • Lois and Gloria did the right thing I feel knowing it was Camila that raised Gio has BL feeling some jealousy No one is saying that Camila was a bad mother to Gio I believe it will be Gio saying that Camila was great to him, thanking Lois and Gloria to get BL to see truth
    • Its realistic for Dani and  true of how the character thinks and operates. We've known her long enough to by that this would be consistent with her past characterizatioin
    • Random takes: - What was even the point of that jeweler guy? Also—Dani was borderline harassing him. - I know I’m probably in the minority here, but I want Jacob and Kat to happen. I need something messy to completely dismantle the Duprees—and Katomas just isn’t cutting it.  - I officially can’t stand Jacob and his wife. Same goes for Anita and Vernon. - Hayley’s corset was just as ugly as it looked uncomfortable. - I genuinely don’t remember when or how Derek and Ashley reconciled—and I’m someone who didn’t even mind their storyline! LMAO. - Tuesday’s episode was a mess. - Dani finding out about Hayley’s pregnancy and immediately thinking, “She’s faking it”—huh?! What writer thought that was a realistic reaction? I get denial, but that leap was absurd. I agree the ‘Leslie Victorious’ moment was way OTT. But hey, at least I wasn’t yawning. The following episode, where she handed over her daughter’s last few belongings was much better. - I can’t with the constant back-and-forth between Orphey Gene’s and the Country Club. I forgot this was such a soap trope, but even back in my loyal viewer days (late ‘90s, early 2000s), it wasn’t this bad. While GH has a ton of beautiful sets, we’re stuck with the same three—and half of them are ugly. Also: it’s been way too long since we had a party, gala, or any kind of event. I know the Richardsons’ anniversary gala (back in late April) has had a big ripple effect, but I was kinda getting used to those large-scale episodes. Fingers crossed they don’t go with Guza.  
    • The horrific comments execs and writers make when they justify rape storylines or keeping rapists as love interests is just so icky. I remember Ron Carlivati's comments about the reraping of Marty storyline on OLTL. Made my skin crawl.  No matter what you think of her, Susan Lucci could have demanded front burner storylines but she never did. She was happy to be part of an ensemble. I never got that vibe from Zimmer.  For me, Reva was just not a character I cared that much about after a certain point no matter how talented Zimmer is/was. I think Zimmer had a keener eye for what made a good storyline, but she was less willing to take a backseat if it meant someone else got to shine. I'm trying to recall if she ever mentions Michelle Forbes in her book--one of the few times the viewers did not care about Reva in a storyline. My sense is if she did, it was probably some backhanded remark about how she had to show Forbes the ropes.    
    • GH was good? I havent watched since Joss went away to do her traininig and Lulu had just called Brooklyn out for having Dante's baby and not telling him
    • BTG: A-  DAYS: B+  Eastenders: C
    • There was a rumor that Jean will die and that’s probably why she’s back then
    • There has been some confusion about Michael & facial burns. Please see this post: https://bsky.app/profile/shallotpeel.bsky.social/post/3lqkrryu54226 I've chosen to put this here instead of the Classic Thread because it is now with the appearance of recast Michael that this has come up. Different places online, including at least one podcast, remarks have been made about how remarkable it is that he is without facial scarring. Other fans say it was clear from the first that he did not have facial burns. What is included in this post is 2 screengrabs where you can see his face at the hospital & a very quick edit of that day in the hospital. 
    • Put me in the LOVE KMH camp. As a poster alluded to above, her detractors seem to come from people who first experienced the 80s Emily actress. And that's often the case with soaps, myself included. I enjoy the original actor so much that I just never take to the recast. However, KMH played Emily far longer than the original - for almost 20 years - and when she had great material, she was great. I get the sense she didn't like playing the whiny oh-woe-is-me Emily which was all the material she got from about 1996 until she took over the Intruder in late '99/early '00 and got to play a stronger kiss-ass woman who didn't care what anyone thought of her. (Some would call that a bitch but, if a man was in that role, he'd just be called a smart and savvy businessman.) Her relationship with Hal was great. The transformation was done realistically and I thoroughly enjoyed those years the best out of all. Once the writers decided to break up those two, they went back to writing Emily half the time as whiny and pathetic. I preferred when the writers made her stronger.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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