Jump to content

GH:: Tony Geary Interview


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Geary's bitchy and he wants his way. That's all I got out of it. I do envy his Amsterdam lifestyle.

I can't say I fault his dislike of constantly having to rely on Luke and Laura.

I think he was soured mostly due to the constant returns and reunions, IMO, but I'm just speculating. It was getting tiresome. Every anniversary, Laura would return, we'd get L/L AGAIN (worse each time) and then we'd be back to Luke doing awful things, and then disappearing.

It's ALL just OLD at this point.

He's entitled to his opinion. I admit I wasn't fond of the 'domestication' but there was no need to trash and ruin things over the years. But a lot of that was Guza, too.

I think he has this view of how things should be and he needs to just show up, do your work, collect your check and go about your way. I've never seen an actor SO worried for nearly all of the wrong reasons about their character. He's a little out of touch but Luke's been dead to me for a long time, so ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

TG is a drama queen more times than not, but it does not invalidate his feelings on LnL, which has nothing to do with his feelings on GV. LL was 30 years ago and it was great for GH, and forgive the man if he would like to leave that behind him. As an actor, why would he want to be stuck in the same place? The fans need to move on.

I think its hilarious now how many who were LnL fans just Monday now want Stephan back for Laura? Twitter had me cracking up, but the upside is now we will have less people whining about LnL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If they want Stefan/Laura back they enjoyed 1999 and 2000 far more than I did. Stefan/Laura made me want to take a nap.

His feelings about Luke and Laura and Luke in general trickle down to the characters and actors who play his family. I think his behavior is unprofessional. I don't give a fig about Luke and Laura, and I don't see the point of reuniting them, but I'm sorry that his diva attitude helped lead to situations like GV being run off the show and that greasy-haired drip Nathan Parsons being given a handout for several years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh and Tony may have written the return storyline, but Guza's team used the Labine idea of a bone marrow transplant to bring back the Cassadines. That was one direction they were exploring for Luke and Laura's return.

Also, in that great We Love Soaps interview, Claire knew full well what Tony thought of her work on his character. He also was a champion of the other stories during that run, just not his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I found Tony's attitude re: Ethan and Nathan Parsons vs. Lucky to be unseemly, and I was not a big Greg Vaughan fan. He seemed so utterly enamored of him onscreen too that it was frankly a little creepy. You can't retrofit a "new Lucky" out of thin air, and Ethan was always so obnoxious.

Oddly enough I actually had a past history with Nathan Parsons - believe it or not, he had been a child voice actor on a dubbed version of a Japanese animated series I watched back in college, where they'd used actual kids to voice child characters for once, and he played a little French boy exploring the world, accent and all. My ridiculous memory made a note of the name in the credits, but years later I had no idea it was the same person on my screen on GH. Sure enough, it turned out it was. I think Parsons is talented, but I felt working with Geary so much made him as lazy and smug onscreen as Luke. Especially when Ethan would speechify about Laura, a woman he'd never met.

I think Khan hit the nail on the head. I respect a lot of Tony's concerns and legitimate criticisms, I always have, but I also think at least 50% of the stuff he says is horseshit. All that latter-day crap about Luke only seeing Bobbie as a whore, or regularly cheating on Laura, or whatever - come on. He keeps talking about "preserving Marland and Monty's vision," but the fact is Doug Marland was gone before Luke really became the Luke the world loved, the Luke that both Tony Geary and Gloria Monty continued to carefully mold and have very vested interests in. Luke came from the gutter and redeemed himself, not just in the eyes of Laura but in the eyes of the audience; he became a better man. Geary and Monty presided over that metamorphosis, however idealized it was. It was not a mirage, and it was not something neither of them were privvy to. It happened, and for its time it was done quite well. Luke was in love with life, in love with Laura, in love with being in love and having a family and being the better man, however volatile and fiery and dangerous he remained.

I think Tony Geary has somehow convinced himself that a very small sliver of time is the only Luke that matters at core - like, the campus disco period, pre-Left-Handed Boy - but that's the Luke that pre-dates so much of what came after, including his and Monty and the rest of those teams' hard work that made him a star. And yes, whether he likes it or not, that vibrant, passionate, joyful and volatile Luke also had valid representation in the Labine years, though sure, probably not enough.

I think you can do a honest reunion of Luke and Laura, that deals with the stuff TG claims to want to deal with. But I also think Luke has to fight for her. I think he has to fight for his own soul. I think he has to stop drinking, and admit what he did to Jake. And I'd personally start with something with the touchstone for an era TG claims to hate - I'd have Luke, having hit rock-bottom, work to rebuild the Ward house, where he and Laura and Lucky and baby Lulu lived. That life was part of the Luke that Geary denies, but it's also the Luke Luke denies. He was happy there. He just doesn't admit it. If he admits it, I think it would be a huge change for the character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • It's been pretty well-known since that that BBG was offered a similar deal as Ken Howard (ie 4-6 episodes) and she told them to fudge off. With Jane Wyman, I don't doubt they were willing not to hold her to her contract, but in those early episodes where she appears, she's written sitting down or in a bed for a reason. Her health genuinely seemed in decline.
    • Agree, but I am talking more about the initial casting. Melissa might have only lasted a season if Ana Alicia hadn't impressed.
    • I'm not that impressed with the costuming, still very hit and miss,not much improvement and some of the outfits for Nikki in particular have been awful. Maybe Mariah's secret is she encountered Ian and killed him? That might work except for the fact that her mother has done the same thing.
    • Ana Alicia was far more dynamic and charismatic than McGeehan or Vernon though. Some of it due to the writing of course, but not all of it.
    • It actually felt like TM-G was a bit softer in her scenes with nu-Ted that kind of matched his meeker energy as Ted on Friday. I was very curious how she’d play off him and now I have my answer.
    • My thoughts exactly! Fantastic find @DRW50!  
    • That was interesting; thanks. Courtney looks tired and/or bored AF, LOL!
    • 5-12   Lord have mercy.   I'm not sure how I feel about it. Perhaps what I said last week or the week before last. If the highlight of a soap is what people are wearing and not the writing, that's not a good thing. And that was how I was feeling watching this. There was not anyone that I was interested in seeing in the episode outside of Daniel and Sally tbh. Because Daniel continues to be the only thing that humanizes Phyllis for me.    I could care less for the Billy/Sally scenes where he's woe is me. I could care less about Kyle/Claire since the writers took all the drama right out of the pairing. Humanized or not, I could care less for Giggly Heffa.    I barely care for Teriah. But for me, it's nice to see something going on with them. Though it seems so horribly contrived.    I liked the costume designer appears to be trying to find individual styles for some of the characters. For me, Tessa's with the boots stood out given her indie musician history. It seems like Claire's style is coming into its own with block colors. I like Kyle's wardrobe is loosening up somewhat. I even loved the striped dress that Phyllis had on.    But again...where is the writing?
    • It was reported that Jane Wyman absence in the final season was due to health (it's documented that Jane was diabetic) but I believe her episodes being cut was a budget mode move. Similar move Dallas pulled in 1990, it was reported that Barbara Bel Geddes retired due to health (it's documented that Barbara had a heart condition) but I say salary dump. Jane Wyman only acted once after Falcon Crest, a 1993 episode of Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman, but she lived another 14 years after that. Barbara Bel Geddes did not act again after her last episode of Dallas in 1990 but she lived another 15 years after that. The trifecta of suck at Lorimar was Les Moonves, Leonard Katzman, and Michael Filerman. It was a pattern across all three CBS primetime soaps in the off the rails plus budget mode era to salary dump the long-time female cast members and bring on sweet young things hired on the cheap. 
    • To be fair, more than half of them are dead now. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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