Members glatwt Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 linda gottlieb? the woman behind OLTL in the early 90's! does anyone think that if she would have stayed in daytime under the pressure she did, would have given JFP a running for the strongest female EP of her time?? something tells me she would have stayed with OLTL if it wasn't for network interference?? this woman knew how to run daytime in a different way (think gloria monty early GH)! if she left OLTL to produce another show for example, would she be in the running for the strongest female?? remember in the early 90's during her time, all the soaps under gottlieb, phelps, riche and behr were the golden standard of daytime!! i wonder if gottlieb didnt give up so soon and ran head to head with phelps??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 It's possible. LG strikes me as very cool, confident, and collected whereas JFP seems rather neurotic and maybe even a little insecure. I really liked LG's casting, social consciousness (which went at least as far back as her work in after school specials), and her stylishness. Would love to see what she would do with something like Hollywood Heights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members glatwt Posted October 5, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 thankyou SFK, i just think she gave up too soon!!! if phelps got shuffled around, i often wonder what she could have done with GL, AW. ATWT, GH, AMC or even DAYS if given the chance?? i def put my bets on her over phelps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CSF Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 Linda obviously left because she was sick of the network interference. I think she did what she wanted to do and when it was getting to be a pain she left. She could mark off the accomplishment. Had ABC not been so annoying she probably would have stayed at OLTL for 6 year instead of 4. I always had a sense that if things worked out, I could have seen her being tapped by PGP for Guiding Light instead of stupid Michael Laibson and then Paul Rauch. She could have turned Springfield back into the sophisticated community Doug Marland made it into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 5, 2012 Members Share Posted October 5, 2012 LG at GUIDING LIGHT? *shudder* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CSF Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Because, unlike many ONE LIFE TO LIVE viewers, I didn't believe LG was the Second Coming. Yes, she improved the production values, as far as music, lighting, set and costume design go. However, she, in tandem with Michael Malone, appeared to pay lip service to the idea of honoring the show's roots and traditions. To me, LG and MM had made OLTL (and especially long-time veteran characters, such as Asa, Clint, Dorian and Viki) unrecognizable to the point where I felt like what they were producing and writing every day was a brand-new soap opera which just happened to call itself ONE LIFE TO LIVE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 That's an interesting perspective Khan because beyond childhood flashes of my mother's OLTL viewing, I really didn't come to know these characters until I knew OLTL for myself, which was '93 when LG was at the helm. I liked what I saw, but who knows, maybe I would have felt differently had I a longer history with these characters. Wow, this is a bit of a revelation for me when I think about the newer, younger fans who rave about the soaps in their current state while I eye roll myself a migraine. It's all perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CSF Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 To an extent maybe but I enjoyed her OLTL and I felt like Paul Rauch's OLTL was more damaging to the fabric of the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 And to an extent, I would agree. Especially as the '80's wore on, the stories became more bizarre, and Rauch's excesses as a showrunner became more, well, excessive. Yet, I could take an episode from 1989, let's say, put it next to an episode from 1982, and feel as if I am watching the same show, despite the differences in casts, writers and production regimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 The thing with Gottlieb was that she did not respect the soap genre, and openly admitted so. She wanted to reinvent the wheel, and I don't think she was entirely successful. I'm all for innovation and change, but you can't force them, which is what I felt Gottlieb and Malone did a lot of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Was it that she didn't respect the soap genre or that she saw that there was room for innovation, change? I don't think what she accomplished was radically un-soapy, really. I know she had the idea for the short arcs and all, and maybe this has to do with her after school special and film background, but it was like she was more comfortable with stories that had a more immediate beginning, middle, and end (which might make her great for the novella format). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 I believe Linda Gottlieb saw there was room for innovation, but I also believe she had to learn the hard way that when it comes to soaps, you can't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Elements such as long (or longer) form storytelling are too intrinsic to soaps' DNA to be tampered with; and for an audience that craves comfort and familiarity, the minute you change how these stories are essentially told, or alter in any way the process by which newer characters are introduced and then woven into the canvas with the ones they "know and love," you do so at your own peril. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 I do think Gottlieb cared, instead of just making her vanity project, like MAB did. She brought back a certain sense of community and heart. Once GL lost so much of its core identity, by the mid-90s it being gone for good, I wouldn't have minded her joining. The only real hesitation I would have is that she created Todd, one of the biggest canvas-destroying soap opera characters ever. In the long term she also did a big number on Viki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khan Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Actually, I tend to blame those errors more on Michael Malone. He fell in love with Todd, and expected the rest of the known, free world to. And Viki? Well, I think he took one look at her assumed status as Llanview's rich, white patriarch and assumed that was all there was to know. But the truth is, Viki wasn't quite so high-and-mighty even when she wasn't under Niki's influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.