Jump to content

Y&R: Michael Muhney Interview


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

No matter what you think of Muhney, giving any credit or praise to Chris Engen seems unjustified and ridiculous.

Chris Engen said and did all the wrong things, and came across as anti-gay and homophobic. When it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't know much about It other than he took umbrage to the Adam SL with Rafe...I gave him the benefit if the doubt in thinking he felt that story with Adam using Rafe was an insult to the gay community. Not that this couldn't happen but when you only have one gay character and this is what you do....just no. And there has been no mention of Adam being gay or bisexual afterwards. I mean really, what kind of crap was that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We'll never know for sure what CE or MM for that matter are like BTS. At least CE didn't come off as self-righteous in interviews as MM. Plus CE was very easy on the eyes, a decent actor and I cared for his Adam. I'd welcome him back in a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Maybe the fact that the man has absolutely no clue what constitutes actual drama. Sorry but the aspect of redemption is real. Perhaps he's never read any of the classics of Greek drama? I would suggest that he start by looking up the definition of catharsis and its relationship to redemption in Greek drama.

Or even Shakespeare, maybe (hello, does Hamlet ring any bells?).

He tries to sound like an astute, intelligent student of drama and the sum total of all its aspects. To me, he just comes off sounding like an a*s*s*. Plain and simple.

As a writer, I would never work with an actor like MM. I find him insulting to the writers in general (granted these are not at the top of the echelon but they are still his writers, he did not write his own scripts no matter what he says)

He is beyond self important and disingenuous. What's worse, is he has no idea the drivel that emerges from that enormous pie hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Chris Engen doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. He NEVER made a statement saying that he felt Adam was using Rafe in that s/l.

The only thing that came out was that Engen was against playing gay, and he never defended himself against charges of intolerance or homophobia.

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

    • “I’m not a lifelong soap fan, but I sure am now,” Wolf tells PEOPLE about creating the documentary Soaps, which includes deep dives into the biggest and most successful soap operas in the industry, with a strong focus on The Bold and the Beautiful. “It reflects, in a broader way, the cultural significance of soap operas and the incredible task involved in bringing these stories to the screen every day.”
    • I have this for the 4th act on 11/9/88, which per my files, is the first time John and Stefano are in a scene together: Limo (Roman, Diana, Stefano, Milo) Then their second time together is 11/17/88 in the second-to-last act: ON LOCATION: Beach & Cliff (Diana, Roman, Stefano) I'd have to check the 2016 logs, so I don't know who shares scenes as easily in this year, but these are the last 4 episodes that John and Stefano were both in together: 1/8/16, 1/11/16, 3/1/16, 3/2/16.
    • I'm going to respond to you about this show. I've been accused of hating on it for some reason or another. But as a 53-year-old black man I do not hate this show at all. It heavily represents people like me, but I want it to be treated well and not just pushed with half-assedness, which is what I feel has happened on several occasions so far. Bad editing, bad cliffhangers, or no cliffhangers at all, disappearing characters with dropped storylines, etc. I can understand shows no longer wanting certain characters or  storylines, but why the "Judy Winslow" effect? I'm really finding it weird that Jacob doesn't mention his father or his detective partner. Jacob was smack dab in the middle of them both.
    • I love many things about BTG very much. For me, it's greatest strength is how the family relationships are so beautifully written. The deep love between family members while acknowledging each other's flaws--it's SO GOOD.  The best of the best is the two sister relationships: loving but very different sisters Dani and Nicole and adversarial sisters Kat and Eva. These two relationships can anchor the show for many years to come, in my opinion. (The one caveat is that the young and very talented Colby and Ambyr may want to leave the show sooner rather than later, but that's to be expected). My biggest problem with this show is this: Where are the romantic love stories? Where are the star-crossed lovers? Almost every character on this show is married, or in a committed relationship, or just fooling around. Right now the only potential for this are in the Ashley/Andre/Derek and Kat/Tomas/Eva situations. Like a lot of people, I feel the sooner they ditch Ashley and Derek, the better. I hate picking on actors, but the characters are so blah and bland it's like they're a parody of soap characters. I like Andre, and there's some indication they might have him become more serious about Dani, but I don't see that becoming a big love story. I could be wrong. Kat and Eva fighting over a man would be amazing. Over Tomas? No.  I've noticed on social media some people are starting to ship Kat and Jacob. I think that shows how much viewers long for a messy love story. There is much I enjoy about BTG and I have no intention of bailing on it. But over all my many years of watching soap operas, the thing that always got me the most excited about them was the question: "When are those two finally going to get together?"
    • FROM THE VAULT: WEEKLY DAYTIME NIELSEN RATINGS: WEEKS OF 11/26/73-11/30/73 & 12/3/73-12/7/73:

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Please register in order to view this content

        Some initial thoughts.   1) a Who's who back in the day with an assortment of well known performers. 2) Surprised Debra Messing would agree to play a conservative character 3) Not surprised a network didn't pick this up because showing a conservative that is human/likable is a no no in Hollywood LOL
    • Yes from when they went on Let’s Make a Deal too. Pam stole Forrester designs for Jackie M. Of course a month later we saw Nick, Lesley, Owen, and Bridget all exit in the same episode.
    • Great pairing that seemed to come out of the blue! Around that time, it felt like Sheffer/Goutman didn’t really know what to do with Emily or Hal. And KM and BH had surprisingly great chemistry. It was good for Emily especially because she was coming off those unsympathetic years with the Tom affair and then running the Intruder and essentially just being a busybody.
    • I think the issue with Lulu is less the character (which was the issue in the Julie Berman days under Guza II) and more the lack of nuance. The current GH team rarely writes nuance for any character or at least can't sustain it for long, or they reserve it for a favored few. I also think the rooting interest at GH BTS often remains on preferred characters or actors - BLQ/Setton - vs. Laura's kids. So it's easy to make Lulu the heavy if you think Brook Lynn and Chase are the money on this show. I don't, but I think FV does. And that's not to say I think Amanda Setton is bad in the role, or that I would get rid of BLQ. I don't trend towards either (though I do think that if Setton's personal beliefs keep getting in the way of material I would reluctantly recast). I think Brook Lynn is essential to use as a lead presently. But I don't think it needs to be the black and white dichotomy of suffering young matriarch BLQ and aggressor Lulu. While it's good that unlike in the Guza years they can recognize that Lulu can be obnoxious and rash, can be her own worst enemy and that that is part of the character, it can be toned down or given more layers than it has of late. There's nothing wrong there the writing can't fix.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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