Jump to content

GH: Classic Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Going back to substances and '80s GH, I still need to read Ann Marcus' Whistling Girl, but I remember the TV Guide blurb for it saying that she talked about an actress who was on the show in 1988 (and still on in 1999) departing to go to rehab. The most likely (but still alleged) candidate would be Kristina, who was off from September '88 through January '89.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I was thinking about this clip the other day and it made me wonder if Monica was telling the truth?

(a) I don't think Rick was enough of a cad to tell Monica how Leslie was in bed, (b) Leslie had a more varied sexual past, so she may have actually been more skilled, and (c) Monica knew exactly how to get Leslie's proverbial goat by making her feel old and dull.

Also, Monica was not exactly a good judge of passion considering she booted cutie-pie for Jeff for a dullard like Rick.

Please register in order to view this content

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah Rick, and who is going to cook that candle lit dinner after you've both worked full shifts at the hospital? 

No wonder Monica found her way back to the Q mansion, Rick would have had her cooking and caring for every stray kid in Port Charles.  She was probably thinking, "thank goodness I didn't have to listen to Blackie's drums or Mike's constant whining" 

She really dodged both a metaphoric and literal bullet with that relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Just for fun, from a psychodynamic point of view, I would say that Monica's abandonment as a child caused her to avoid intimacy by only seeking unavailable men. 

She wanted Rick during her marriages to both Jeff and Alan because he was unattainable, and because she didn't need to fully commit to her marriage if she wanted someone else.  Thus, she avoids re-experiencing the abandonment of her youth by never getting over involved with her spouse.  

I'm certain Gail Baldwin would agree with my analysis.

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

@Vee I suspect a lot of the Nik/Emily stuff was to give TC a viable love interest.  If you think about TC's initial run he spent a lot of time in unpopular pairings (Sarah, KATHERINE-for so long) or aborted ones (Nik/Robin).   Gia was clearly not working out so that wasn't an option and there was enough of a tease of Nik/Emily during AT's run that it could work (although AT and TC kissing was disgusting).  Zander was expendable to the show, so we wound up with the "fairytale" that was Nik/Emily.

2003 was a mess.  It started with the Sam and Brenda are the same story and just weaved into the overall canvas.  I think casting issues were a big issue and Guza and co had no idea where to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Nikolas/Emily was always a grand plan starting when they got Tyler back. I don't think Gia was ever a consideration from then on. They'd been teasing Nik and Em since the late '90s, and Guza rarely lets a good chemistry test go (he continued teasing Nik and Robin almost until the 2010s). I understood doing it. A long-running, well-written triangle with the three of them, or a quad with the right Gia, including Stefan as the scheming patriarch, would've been dynamite. That's not what they wrote for any of it.

Frons' micromanaging at ABCD was at its height in 2003, when he was fully ascendant. That was also the Year of Courtney. It felt like five years tbh. I think the stories going so extreme as well as into overdrive pacing-wise was in part Pratt, who also unleashed Guza's worst instincts. The writing also was often weak and ADD in many stories, and not as razor-sharp as what they were known for on the daily dialogue. Once Pratt was gone the show righted itself in a few ways, but Guza remained ugly in many others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, I assume Emily/Nik was always the plan to help get TC back.  He was still a pretty hot commodity in the soap world at the time.  With AT not coming back, it really opened the door to find an Emily that sparked with TC and CB, but we got blandly gorgeous NL instead lol.  It is something the show could have played for years.  With Lucky, Liz, Zander as spoilers.  Like you said that group was already incestuous.  

Gosh, I forgot 2003 was the year of Courtney/Journey/Fab 4 as well.  That group went through so much story so quickly.  When you have your perceived male lead shoot his pregnant wife in the head while giving birth, you know you have problems.   I am not overblowing the importance of Brenda I don't think, but I think that whole group suffered from the loss of VM and the future plans completely being blown.  Instead of re-directing the whole story, Guza/Pratt used bits and pieces of ideas they were planning and it fell very flat.

I just think bad casting decisions were worse than even story telling.  JY as Lucky, NL as Emily, AP as Gia, Summer, Lydia, Sarah recast, and so on...

TBH, I think Guza and co were so busy trying to figure out the Fab 4 crap and taking Frons direction the B stories just fell apart as well.   I still think Guza is a good writer.  He just needs someone to reel him in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When he was good he was brilliant. But he could also be very, very lazy and misogynistic. I just can't cosign Guza writing GH again after the rest of the 2000s unless he had a lot of oversight or a significant co-HW - a woman. I'd sooner see Karen Harris and MVJ back. Most of 2003-2005 were total dreck, and the years after that weren't exactly genius. GH ultimately became a dark nihilistic void I largely ignored under his stewardship, even when they still had some very good daily writing staff in those years.

I don't know what stories they re-appropriated from Brenda for the Fab 4, so that makes me curious. Sam you can point to later on, but they didn't really move her towards Sonny til the very end of '03.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It pushed everything back for them if that makes sense.  It followed Sam's storyline with the Sonny affair/baby/Jason, but the show wouldn't have needed all that time to set it up with Brenda and it would have been better lol.  I know Guza wasn't keen on Journey and I think Brazen was the get out of jail free card on that one with Frons.  Instead it ended up in marriage and I don't think that was ever where Guza wanted to go.  As far as Sonny/Carly, I have no idea where Guza saw that and have never heard anything.  Probably better than what we got because there was always a viable pairing with Brenda if Carson broke up, which was never an option with Sam.  I think I always heard Guza preferred Brenda/Jax to Brenda/Sonny because he basically created them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't think the pivot to Sonny and Jason was planned for Sam initially. I don't think the show had a plan. They were told to hire her, they were given the thing with Jax and told to go. It didn't pan out because it was forced and rushed, and Maurice wanted a shot at the hot new girl to compete with Ted King and Tamara so then that went down. Then they kludged in the old Jason/Brenda stuff, because there was no getting rid of Kelly Monaco under Frons and it enabled Guza to finally toss Courtney into the reject pile.

I think Guza was devoted to S&C under both Sarah and Tamara. He 'made' both of them stars, really; Tamara had gained audience goodwill under the JFP/McTavish struggle and Maurice had taken up for her, but it was the writing of the Guza team that cemented her when he returned. But when Tamara wouldn't play ball later both the actors and the writing turned on her. Whether or not Guza was into Jax and Brenda after the '90s, he sure didn't show it onscreen. Jax was almost a C-level player in the 2000s he clearly had zero respect for. I can't see him having gone back to that then.

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.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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