9 hours ago, DRW50 said:

She starts to adopt her own style around early-mid 1985.

Thanks. She looked much better when she wasn't being made over to be a Meg clone.

14 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 Prinz was on the show before Din Hastings' arrival, no? It felt wrong not to have Penny Hughes, one have of daytime drama's first big romantic couple not make an appearance to mark the serial's ending.

Yes. Prinz was in the original cast in 1956. Hastings joined in 1960 when Bob was SORASed. There were MANY things that felt wrong about the show towards the end. Forgetting important characters was just one of those things. I mean, I can sort of get that if you have a tight budget you can't bring back a lot of actors. But were Donald and Penny even MENTIONED when their mother died? The only reason Frannie was mentioned toward the end is because Julianne Moore was making an appearance. If she wasn't coming in, they would have kept pretending like she never existed. As I said before, I remember the Frannie/Sabrina Haiti reference so well because I was shocked they even mentioned them after so long. Looking back, I do believe the mention was to sort of remind the audience who they were before Julianne Moore's appearance. ATWT towards the end became this bizarre world of unrecognizable newbies and people who had no connection to their own past. 

14 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

Betsy was sort of seeing Rod in a quasi-platonic way when Steve finally served her with divorce papers sometime in autumn 87, probably close to the time his dream house in Ruxton Hills went up in flames.

 

It seems like Marland really hated the character of Steve. He broke up his marriage, framed him for murder, burned down his dream house and sentenced him to 25 years in a Greek prison. 

Edited October 7, 20214 yr by Bill Bauer

4 minutes ago, Bill Bauer said:

It seems like Marland really hated the character of Steve. He broke up his marriage, framed him for murder, burned down his dream house and sentenced him to 25 years in a Greek prison. 

Yes, I would say so. 😳

11 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

86 was a hot summer, for sure, for many characters.

 

I think 1986 was the best year for the show. There was absolutely nothing that was fast-forward material. Followed closely by 1987. That's a limited opinion since I didn't first-hand witness every year and only know the synopses of every year. 

13 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

I'm confused about what happened to Whit McColl's house. I thought that went to Brian when Whit died. Perhaps Lisa was still living there but by 86, it looked like she was living in a different place, one that didn't resemble Whit's house. With so many missing episodes, recollection of events become disjointed and muddled.

Lisa lived in the mansion until she bought "Caroline's" and turned it into the Mona Lisa. So she moved into Doug Cummings (what an odd last name Marland..kind of like "Rod" for a rapist) old place above...(kind of weird Lisa moving into a murderers pad but I guess better then living in the place where Ole' Whit got konked on his toupe...) No mention of what happened to the mansion after that but it was a really ugly set.

Marland commented that when he joined the show it was the "Steve and Betsy" show and he wanted to turn it into an ensemble. You knew the writing was on the wall for Steve when he had another one of his hissy fits at Bob and Kim and...Nancy and Chris were in the room! See YA Stevie!

 

57 minutes ago, Bill Bauer said:

It seems like Marland really hated the character of Steve. He broke up his marriage, framed him for murder, burned down his dream house and sentenced him to 25 years in a Greek prison. 

I actually think that the opposite is true, if a writer "hated" a character then they would just have them disappear. 

Creating a drug storyline for Steve was in keeping with the hot-headed nature of character, as well as popular story for time.  And, the actor got to play scenes with the types of exaggerated emotions that are useful for one's resume reel when auditioning for other soaps.  So, if there is no future for a character, or an actor, in the writer's plans, then it seems like a win/win situation. 

Things may not be as personal as they seem in entertainment, and if soaps kept every flawed romantic hero, then there would be no opportunity for growth and new stories.  I know that I would take hunky-early-Holden, over nose-flaring played-out-Steve everyday of the week.  I am of the belief that each new writer should get the time and space to experiment, rather than be beholden to their predecessor who were dismissed for lack of popularity among the fanbase.

Edited October 6, 20214 yr by j swift

3 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

We may be in the minority on this board for liking the pairing of Casey and Lyla. Many don't seem to like Lyla much (or perhaps Sward's portrayal of the character).

I think Lyla made a great background character. To Marland's credit he did keep her on even though some of it was a bit forced (Lyla opens her house to borders...what is she, Bea Reardon...Lyla has a hot nightclub music career..a middle aged nurse in central Illinois???) I thought it was nice that she got a guy who truly loved her but I didn't  think they were on fire or anything.

I think the Dobson's screwed Lyla up...she came on as this tough ex-hootch with a past and then she was recast (due to Hastings not liking the first actress) and she was both softer and younger. I see clips of Sward back then and wow, she is a cute sexy thing but no fire, and they broke her off from Bob too soon...( Marland would have reconnected them after Dee's trial just for the impact of the reveal of Margo having an affair with Bob's stepdaughter's husband...and Lyla knew about it...I don't even remember a reveal coming out, the show was so disconnected with their families at that time..) and the Montgomery family was kind of on its own.  I did like Lyla being super protected Mommy of Craig and calling Betsy on her behavior!

I've never heard that Casey and Lyla weren't popular - I was under the impression they were held in esteem. Fair enough though.

1 hour ago, Bill Bauer said:

Yes. Prinz was in the original cast in 1956. Hastings joined in 1960 when Bob was SORASed. There were MANY things that felt wrong about the show towards the end. Forgetting important characters was just one of those things. I mean, I can sort of get that if you have a tight budget you can't bring back a lot of actors. But were Donald and Penny even MENTIONED when their mother died? The only reason Frannie was mentioned toward the end is because Julianne Moore was making an appearance. If she wasn't coming in, they would have kept pretending like she never existed. As I said before, I remember the Frannie/Sabrina Haiti reference so well because I was shocked they even mentioned them after so long. Looking back, I do believe the mention was to sort of remind the audience who they were before Julianne Moore's appearance. ATWT towards the end became this bizarre world of unrecognizable newbies and people who had no connection to their past. 

It seems like Marland really hated the character of Steve. He broke up his marriage, framed him for murder, burned down his dream house and sentenced him to 25 years in a Greek prison. 

Frannie hadn't gotten a mention at all in the last decade until the last few months of the show's run (ironically, I had stopped watching by that time). They wanted to put a feather in their caps by bringing in a star, even as a veritable daypart. Tight budgets are one thing, but they didn't even ask Prinz, did they? The last actor who played Donald, hadn't he died the previous year? That would've been excusable but it's inexcusable not to have at least asked Prinz to make an appearance sometime in the final year, not when you brought back Ben Harris and Mike Kasanoff, oh hell no!!

I agree with @j swift, indifference is the worst thing a writer and a show can do to a character/actor. What the show did to longtime veterans toward the end of the series' run was far more egregious.

Personally, in Steve's case, I don't think it was personal for the actor or the character. Actors want to leave for greener pastures and they have every right to do so. The show has to try to finesse an exit that is dynamic for viewers and imo, the best, most interesting way to create such a dynamic is to draw on a character trait or flaw that is ingrained in the character's DNA and create events that unfold from that. Steve always had a murky past and he was always portrayed as an outsider with securities, even in the best of times, so why not use that to usher the character off the campus, and leave things settled but somewhat unsettling, which gives an opening for the possibility of bringing the character back in the future (even years down the line) to deal with "unfinished business" left behind in Oakdale? Had Marland lived to celebrate a decade of consistently being at the helm of the writing, it is most likely Steve would have made his way back eventually, for one reason or another. Runyeon has said in interviews that it was his choice to leave and we can only guess at his motivations? Was it displeasure at no longer being regarded as the super-couple with the most storyline and media attention? Was he disenchanted with the show after losing Meg Ryan as his onscreen partner? We all can only guess. No one is an open book as to their true feelings. Steve and Betsy's wedding probably garnered the highest ratings of any ATWT episode in history and Marland was unlikely to dismiss that fact, even though, of course, it makes sense that he wanted as much of an ensemble show as he could muster, which is why I believe he left the door open for the character by sending him to Greece for several months before beginning to sever the ties between Steve and Betsy. Even then, there is room to exonerate Steve, or overturn his conviction years down the line and bring him back briefly for Dani's sake (a sure shot better than that disgusting story they had her in with Craig, which I still refuse to lay eyes on-for fear I would want to pluck them out of my head). At the end of it's run, the show chose to try to tie up every loose end in a near little bow, which ensured that no other network would ever pick up the series. Why bother when there's no story left to tell?

One aspect I applaud All My Children for when they ended their run: they didn't tie up everything in a tidy bow-- they left room for some loose ends and uncertainty when they ended their run on ABC on a virtual cliffhanger, which I realize many fans hated, but in all likelihood, it is reason why producers keep wanting to do reboots and retelling of AMC, unlike ATWT.

10 minutes ago, Vee said:

I've never heard that Casey and Lyla weren't popular - I was under the impression they were held in esteem. Fair enough though.

Among the viewers of the show, in real time, they were hella popular and it was a stroke of genius, since P&G and the show's other sponsors were likely trying to appeal the most to women in Anne Sward's age group. I was talking about members of this message board.

4 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 @j swift, One aspect I applaud All My Children for when they ended their run: they didn't tie up everything in a tidy bow-- they left room for some loose ends and uncertainty when they ended their run on ABC on a virtual cliffhanger, which I realize many fans hated, but in all likelihood, it is reason why producers keep wanting to do reboots and retelling of AMC, unlike ATWT.

AMC had a lot of guts to do it that way - and in a lot less time to put together a finale than ATWT.

10 minutes ago, amybrickwallace said:

AMC had a lot of guts to do it that way - and in a lot less time to put together a finale than ATWT.

Fans of that show were rootin tootin mad but as a writer, I understood it and thought it was clever (albeit messy in the execution) because it generated intrigue and lots of conversation, whereas ATWT was unquestionably final and mournful. Agnes Nixon and everyone connected to writing and producing the soap through its finale on network television likely planted several seeds for the show's revival. ATWT should have at least sprinkled some seeds of a possible renewal, but they didn't.

1 minute ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Fans of that show were rootin tootin mad but as a writer, I understood it and thought it was clever (albeit messy in the execution) because it generated intrigue and lots of conversation, whereas ATWT was unquestionably final and mournful. 

Even AW's finale, uneven as it was (the gorilla!), wasn't altogether sad. A series finale shouldn't have to be sad. Yes, it's sad because it's the finale, but the content shouldn't be sad.

35 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Among the viewers of the show, in real time, they were hella popular and it was a stroke of genius, since P&G and the show's other sponsors were likely trying to appeal the most to women in Anne Sward's age group. I was talking about members of this message board.

Oh, them.

5 minutes ago, amybrickwallace said:

Even AW's finale, uneven as it was (the gorilla!), wasn't altogether sad. A series finale shouldn't have to be sad. Yes, it's sad because it's the finale, but the content shouldn't be sad.

I think the ATWT finale was the nadir of soap finales, with OLTL's (many flaws and all) being the apex. You can't close a door completely on those kind of continuing worlds that audiences have lived with for decades; I find it borderline unethical. There has to be a sense that world goes on. Even GL, which was a mess, did that.

4 minutes ago, Vee said:

I think the ATWT finale was the nadir of soap finales, with OLTL's (many flaws and all) being the apex. You can't close a door completely on those kind of continuing worlds that audiences have lived with for decades; I find it borderline unethical. There has to be a sense that world goes on. Even GL, which was a mess, did that.

Well said.

1 hour ago, amybrickwallace said:

Even AW's finale, uneven as it was (the gorilla!), wasn't altogether sad. A series finale shouldn't have to be sad. Yes, it's sad because it's the finale, but the content shouldn't be sad.

ATWT didn't get a happy ending. That's why I love telenovelas. They have a beginning, a middle and an ending. The ending(the last episode) ends in a happy note unless the soap is so popular that the last episode is left with a cliffhanger because they'll be a second part a year later.

Goutman was suppose to give us a happy ending yet all we got from him was s h I t !