Jump to content

GH: Classic Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Even if it wasn't kind, it was true.  As a viewer, I was satisfied with GH as it was right before Gloria Monty's return, and though Ms. Monty did help to save the show from cancellation in the late 70s, her return as EP of GH in the 90s was pretty bad.  The ratings slid quite badly under her watch, and deservedly so.  Rumor had it at the time that she fired Finola Hughes and that was the last straw for ABC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Both Tristan and Finola were fed up with Monty and burned out.  They were originally going to work it out to keep her she was planning to leave but had second thoughts.  Then she booked a prime time show on ABC.  Monty told her it was her last day while she was filming and didn’t have her finish out the end of her contract on air because she was mad at her.  They eventually made up.

 

Edited because I had some stuff wrong lol.

Edited by titan1978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yea, I'm a huge Gloria Monty fan but I was no fan of her second stint.  She lost the midas touch.  However, it's amazing how long ABC will keep  EPs that are much worse than her.  I'd take GM's 2nd stint in a heartbeat over what we've had in the last two decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not so sure that GM lost her midas touch, that is her marketing instincts.  What she did lose was the recognition that it's good story that is of prime importance on a soap..  Besides her sister, I think she brought on a HW named John Whelpley, a writer that I had never heard of before then and haven't heard anything about since.  GM's second stint probably saw the greatest number of changes in the writer's room in a year on GH since 1977.  Some names I remember seeing passing through on the writing staff during GM's second run were Arthur Bernard Lewis, Linda Grover,  and Anne Howard Bailey, in addition to John Whelpley, who I had mentioned earlier.

Edited by victorlord75
Clarification
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Part of why they acted so quickly was the vocalized frustration of the actors.  In under a year the show lost Robert, Anna, Felicia, and Frisco.  The Quartermain family wasn’t being featured, and she rushed her new vision onscreen.  By the end of that year things were looking up though.  She had repaired some of her own damages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In her defense, Monty did swift changes in 1977/1978 that worked wonders.. but I think the difference between the start of her first stint vs her second stint was that she kept some of the stronger actors/characters/stories.. and added to the stories.

 

For example, the Jeff/Monica/Heather/Lesley/Rick situation that started with the Pollocks was maintained.. as well as the start of the Diana/Heather connection... plus Laura was kept on as well.. while the new characters added were added to ongoing plots.  

 

When Monty came back in 1991... she quickly put Robert/Anna back together with little to no build up (I think the actress playing Robert's main squeeze had quit just before Monty came back)... killed off a core character with loads of potential (Dawn).. and added a family (Eckerts) with loads of airtime then quickly wrote most of them out.. with none of the characters connected to GH.  Plus, drove Robert/Anna off the show.

 

The difference was that when she came on the first time.. the show was in dire straits.. and in early 1991.. the show wasn't strong, but nowhere near the condition it was before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love Monty but I also really enjoyed a lot of what happened under Hardy and Kenney.  And they were not as demanding as she was, so the cast also had reasons to not enjoy her worst traits.

 

When she took daytime by storm before, she had strong writers for the first few years or her tenure with Marland and Falken-Smith.  That was not the case during her return.

 

I still think some of her choices were right, just not the way she implemented them.  But I would not trade those Riche years.  When Labine got there, the show moved me in a way that it had never before.  It was sophisticated for the 1990’s like Monty had modernized it in the late 70’s.  Monty would not have told a story like BJ’s heart, and never would have told the story of Stone and Robin.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yea, I'm a huge Monty ran but I loved the Riche years.  I loved how Wendy truly respected GH's past but made the show her own.  Unfortunately, succeeding EPs didn't follow her same path.  The disrespect of GH's past is it's greatest flaw 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
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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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