Members alexisfan07 Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 You liked David during Pratt's era? Him forcing Amanda into sex in the backseat of a car was a new low for the character Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I thought the first few months of AMC under Pratt were better than I expected. There was some great humour early on (I remember one episode that nearly all took place in the Chandler house and had some great comic timing), he used Opal a lot (though her seeing blood etc started to get a bit much), initially the show was more balanced... Of course part of that was the show was SO badly balanced under B/E before--and was really slow and dull, so he didn't have far to go to improve those aspects). And yes he made Annie finally interesting and essentially created the Annie most fans love. But really he was just such a wrong fit for the show--and the fact he seemed to write it as if it were the daytime version of Melrose Place (down to the pacing missing out all the points between a and c) just proved that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted September 2, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 he basically said he wanted it to be Melrose Place and that Annie was the Kimberly Shaw of the show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 LOL did he? I really wouldn't be surprised. Didn't he get his start on Santa Barbara? While that was always a more outrageous show than AMC, if he had gone back to that model with the campy caricatured older characters, etc, it at least would have been a slightly better fit. Don't get me wrong, I loved Melrose at its prime, but it's not what I want for a daytime soap--particularly AMC. (I guess it could have been worse, and he could have modeled it after his Models Inc ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JaneAusten Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I think people like Guza and Pratt were hired to give the soaps more of a "primetime" feel to them. Some of what Pratt did at GH and AMC I thought worked like the big events which were successful for the most part but things that PT does that didn't work, killing off popular characters, the fact that the events were not setup to drive followup story and plots points were just dropped, turning women into the types of women you watched on Melrose place or 90210 with little motivation and lack of complexity. Heck even the men were written that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted September 2, 2011 Author Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 I wish I could find the interview, but yep he sure did. I'm just shocked he didn't have Annie blow up Pine Valley ad an ode to Kimberly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted September 2, 2011 Members Share Posted September 2, 2011 Pretty much exactly right, I think. He was good at some of the big moments (even if increasingly they became WTF moments--like Zack taking Josh's heart--no matter what you thought of Josh and the unabortion mess). You could get away with that with Melrose--that's the kind of plot focused, fast moving campy soap it was... Did Guza have a background in primetime too? I admit the only place I really knew his work was the year he co wrote Loving withMillee Taggert which at the time anyway, I thought was pretty good. But I know it doesn't sound indicative of his work at GH either... Oh if they had only given him another month or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I hope Taylor left the john at some point. Don't get me wrong: on many levels, Pratt and McTavish were equally destructive with this show. Pratt never had me looking back fondly at McTavish and saying, "How could I have been so wrong about her!". Still, even when McTavish was still around, you felt a glimmer of hope, no matter how faint, that the ship would right itself again with a little time and (of course) a different and better HW. Pratt, to put it frankly, robbed us of that hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 McTavish did have moments (and I don't just mean her first peirod with Behr as producer) where the show felt like Pine Valley. It never really did under Pratt. It could be argued that part of that was because of McTavish's destruction (her last year, especially half year, was so dismal that even by her standards it felt like she had completely given up and wasn't even writing...), except that Pratt really didn't seem to play off ANY past eras except in truly superficial fashion (I've grown to really love Jamie Luner, and kinda accept her as Liza especially since Marcy would never come back, but that's a classic example of Pratt hearing that there used to be a character called Liza and then just throwing someone on the show and calling them that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 Even I said that was stupid -- "in this very thread!" But, seriously. I liked how he wrote David as a whole, despite the flaws in story/character. Similar to how I like this board as a whole, despite some of the... well, never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I will agree that Pratt did some good stuff for David. Remember, when VI won his Emmy, he made sure to thank Pratt, who apparently called him up and said (something along the lines of) "Come back to AMC so I can help you get an Emmy." Speaking of which, VI needs an Emmy for this year too. As much as this Project Orpheus nonsense bothers me, he's been selling it harder than Opal sold Jenny at Foxy's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alexisfan07 Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 http://www.tvline.com/2011/09/all-my-childrens-susan-lucci-slams-abc-exec/ Damn, Lucci ain't mincing words. LMAO at "fatal combination of ignorance and arrogance." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 This was bound to happen. Susan Lucci has done more for ABC than the other way around. Once she no longer felt an obligation to be discreet for their sake, she was going to be honest with her feelings. By the way, just so everyone in TV land is clear, Susan Lucci will not be joining the cast of "Desperate Housewives." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DeeeDee Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 Kim Zimmer would be proud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted September 3, 2011 Members Share Posted September 3, 2011 I love how people in the comment section are all "Soaps are dead/terrible anyway, so why blame someone for it?" Yes, because soaps just got to this point all by themselves, naturally, and there was absolutely no way at all that they could have been modernized and successful. Get the [!@#$%^&*] out of here unless you know what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.