Members Cheap21 Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 So, let me get this straight. Being featured in one slide of a NYT slide show (with an oh-so clever quip about toilet paper) is supposed to... what? Prove to the naysayers that we have the modern day Norman Lear deigning to write for our little crappy soap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members VirginiaHamilton Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 The NY Times profile renders the haters irrelevant, thus Ron should rest assure that they don't speak for the rest of us who recognize GH as an improvement under his (and Frank's) creative vision. Should he decide to engage with them from this point, whatever aggravation (as justified as it is) will be on him for his refusal to let the praise from both critics and viewers speak for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 All it proves to me is that Frankie V. is giving head to someone at the NYT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Really? You needed to put that image out there? Really?!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members VirginiaHamilton Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 I can't imagine that his head game is fantastic enough to land a feature above the dozens of other executive producers/main writers in the industry - unless there's something that you're not sharing here...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Technically, he didn't have to out-blow all the other people in the industry just the ones in New York so that narrows the field considerably but, still, I'm sure the field is very competitive. Apparently Frank is at least as good as Seth McFarlane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 This Johnny/Connie stuff is a Tess/Ford redux Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cyberologist Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 "Lapse of judgment" and noone knew what Sam had done, she skated, then writing began to kiss her ass (as its still doing) to whitewash her..Guza threw Sam under for St. JaSus it had nothing to do with Elizabeth w/Jason because Guza certainly wouldn't write him take a hit under his watch. How many characters have been 'demonized' because of Jason Morgan? AJ, Robin, Tony, I can go on and on....hell an entire family was minimized to accommodate Jason. Elizabeth was raked over the coals re: her affair w/Jason and humiliated in writing (for years & still counting) repeatedly re: the Nik and Lucky fiasco..while Boo took a one time hit six years ago GMAfriggin'B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cyberologist Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Ron Carlivati is featured pictured with some GH writers in NYT 9/30 "Inspiration' section quoting something re: GH I don't have it now but I can type it here tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 PLUS ONE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 What exactly is this profile saying that renders "haters" irrelevant? Is it favorably critiquing Carlivati's material? Or is it just profiling a writer without critiquing his work? If it's the latter, then this statement is garbage because a profile doesn't indicate approval from anyone in the media. At best, it indicates the media's interest in the writer of the oldest of the remaining four soaps. But cute try, though. So, according to this incredibly warped logic, Ron should only listen to the critics and viewers that praise him. Got it. Failure, here we come...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 I'm so sorry, marceline. Forgive me. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Well, I'm not writing GH, so clearly, I've nothing to share, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 I agree. Especially during the Guza era of "Carly and all the whores of Port Charles are superior" during the mid to late 00's. Elizabeth was evil because she went around pretending to be a saint. Carly, Sam and Maxie may be immoral skanks that use their vaginas before using their brains, but at least they own up to it. Somehow, we were supposed to think Elizabeth being ashamed of her skanky actions was a bad thing, and Carly and the Whorettes being proud of their skanky behavior was a good thing. I never understood that thinking. What woman would want to "own up" to being a deceitful skank? I understand the characters and their insecurities allowing them to "hate" Elizabeth because the people in their world viewed Liz as a saint but, in their minds, she's doing exactly the same thing as they are. I just didn't understand the narrative of the show trying to get the audience to accept/believe that as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.