Jump to content

Backstage Mysteries: Forever Unsolved


Recommended Posts

  • Members

My husband and I had no problems with the gorilla at all. It was a nod to the past and to an era of AW we both loved. I imagine Carolyn was a nod to Carolyn Culliton, though your reference to Hinsey made me laugh. There was also a nod in the final episodes to Samuel Ratcliffe, an AW writer who died in the 90s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

OK, I can see if there was a history there. I only got to watch AW's final two years and change on NBC - starting at the beginning of 1997 with the death of Gabe. I also remember when Lisa Peluso was introduced as Lila (I always remember the way she said "Shaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaane", LOL). Still, what may have seemed like a good idea on paper just didn't seem to have a great execution. Maybe I felt that way because it was obviously a guy in costume...if a trained gorilla had been on instead it may have come across as more authentic. I do recall Felicia saying she was going to call Sam Ratcliffe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sam Ratcliffe on SFT was not played by Rod Arrants. He had bushy hair, but it was most definitely not the same actor. Liza only thought it was Rusty for a second until Sam turned around and she saw his face. Unfortunately, the actor didn't make the final credit crawl, since it was only for the main cast that week.

Larkin is there too, along with Nelson Aspen and Adam Storke, in the airport crowds. And John Pankow (MAD ABOUT YOU) was the priest who married Hogan and Patti.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I gotta join the conversation here about Lisa in the last ten years of ATWT. It got to the point where I'm pretty sure Nancy was getting more screen time than Lisa. Which isn't a bad thing, per se, but COME ON! Say what you will about EF's flutteriness, but we all know our beloved EH was ticky as hell. They both had their quirks that made their characters who they were, and we accepted that.

The last time they had any investment in Lisa had to have been when they randomly had her running a teen music club ("Crash") that looked like a freaking general store. I loved having her mix it up with the younger characters, but for a character with such a storied history, it just seemed hollow and dull. They could have done a LOT more with her.

I feel they did a lot of right by Susan/MM. They sorta reset the Stewarts as an important part of the show even without bringing on more people to round the family out (the injustice of them never having brought on one of those damn quads!!), and Susan had a good bit to do. Sometimes it was a lot of hand-wringing at Emily and Alison, but they had her play an appropriate mother role.

Bob and Kim, it can't even be debated, were shown tons of love towards the end. Lucinda was still a heavy hitter but in terribly boring business storylines that should have ceased to exist in the 90s. They kept her busy, though.

ATWT had so many tools at its disposal towards the end. Even if the end was inevitable, they could have gone out in a much more grander fashion, but we all know what it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Another mystery, which NONE of us will ever solve, LOL, is why the soaps keep hiring the same tired writers over and over again. Daytime TV has become a recycle-the-hack ghetto.

Back in the day, weak writers would move from one soap to another, but it was rare for a writer who had failed miserably at one soap to be rehired, to destroy that exact same show again. Margaret DePriest, for example, went from show to show, and she was never very good, but she was slightly better suited at certain soaps than she was at others. The same with Robert Cenedella. Ann Marcus was terrible at DAYS, in my opinion, but quite well suited for MARY HARTMAN 2, and her work at SEARCH FOR TOMORROW made the ratings soar. So I can sort of see why various writers would have the chance to take over DIFFERENT shows, even if they had previously failed at other ones. But with Dena Higley, and so many other writers, they have nothing but failure wherever they go, and to hire them again AT THE SAME SHOW, where they had already proven to be ill-suited and incompetent...that's just suicidal.

Why don't TBTB accept the obvious, admit that certain writers should never work on a daytime soap ever again, and then a give a chance to different writers who are new to the genre, but who have had success at character-driven storytelling elsewhere? It worked, to varying degrees of success, with Harding Lemay, Michael Malone (during his first stint at OLTL), Hogan Sheffer (during his first year at ATWT), etc.

I would rather see a brand-new name in the credits, and give that newbie scribe a chance to show what he can do, than cringe in abject horror as the names Dena Higley, Charles Pratt, Thom Racina, Jean Passanante, etc., spring onto my TV screen yet again.

The fans know that rehiring the same hacks is destroying daytime. Why can't TPTB figure this out?

This is the soaps' biggest unsolved mystery...ever!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The Case of the Revolving Door of Hack Writers is no mystery to me. Daytime recycled itself right out of attracting new talent. While they're in the business of boomeranging the same hacks from show to show, the talented writer out of the Iowa Writers Workshop is going to stay far away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What I'd like to know is when it became the norm for daytime to be written and produced by people who (to me) clearly hate soaps, see soaps as a bad joke, are desperate for primetime, or all of the above.

Goutman, Sheffer, JFP, Pratt, MAB, Carlivati, Guza, on and on.

No wonder the genre is in its death throes when so many of the people who have been involved in it in the last few decades treat it with such open contempt.

One of the reasons I never bash Tomlin, McTavish, etc. as much as some do is because I at least never felt like they hated soaps.

Look at people like The Dobsons, who essentially said they got into it because of Bridget's parents, more than any great love, - they made some mistakes, but overall I felt like they tried to understand and respect the conventions of the genre, even as they spoofed them or worked to expand them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it is because it takes a certain unique set of skills to churn out the amount of story that is needed to write daytime. And since they dismantled soap writing programs, it's easier to hire a tired old hack who understands how the business works, than it is to train someone else to do it. Isn't Hogan Sheffer the last person from outside of the soap world, to get a shot at writing? Or maybe it's Ron Carlivati. And since everyone demands instant results, a writer doesn't have time for own the job training. They have to hit the ground running.

I have two soap mysteries.

1) Why will a soap create a new character, instead of using a character from the soap's past with a lot of untapped potential? For instance, on Days of our Lives. Why create the Hillbilly trio and Serena, when they could have easily been characters connected to the show's past. I think it has been disproven that soap writers make extra money for creating new characters. So what is the incentive?

2) What did Matt Ashford do to Ken Corday?

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

    • https://www.instagram.com/p/DJxpFaAp_UY/ Roman vs. Stefano, Cliff top, Beach Below This is one of the most important scenes on DAYS in the 80s. After this nothing was ever the same. DAYS 11-23-84   @JAS0N47Closing Credits roll & it's complete silence. Isn't that unusual?
    • Mack was the show's moral compass and his groundedness complimented Karen's hysteria perfectly. Also, Kevin Dobson was the best looking male cast member with a huge fan base. He was never going to be killed off...
    • As others (I think) have said, Long just didn't get Nola and Quint. I guess it would've been hard to write them into adventure type stories with two kids, but they just fell off the map after AJ's birth. (or even the wedding/honeymoon) Long would've had to rewrite something, because Alex forced the Chamberlains out of Spaulding in the fall of '84. Not that she couldn't have just ignored it and written Quint and Henry being involved at the firm. I swear there was some plot point she just literally ignored that surprised me, but as I'm floating around between years, I can't recall what it was. lol Has anyone found the first day of the Kyle/Lewis dinner party up in English? After he took over Lewis Oil, Kyle arranged a dinner party. All hell breaks loose--Mindy admits to shooting Kyle, Vanessa remembers Reva's accident, and Billy and Reva get into a screaming match and she tells HB that Billy blackmailed her out of her Lewis shares. The last three minutes (or so) of the episode are up, where Kyle tells the assembled that HB's his father. And the next episode picks up with Sally entering the fray. Y'all know I'm dying to hear Billy and Reva go at it. As dicey as '85 is, I love it anytime when Billy isn't Reva's bitch.  
    • The original premise of "Santa Barbara" was that a Lockridge (Warren) killed a Capwell (Channing), who loved an Andrade (Santana), while a Perkins (Joe) went to jail for the crime. I think once the show started to pull away the threads by eliminating Joe and naming a new killer a lot of the show's original potential was lost. I contend, like others, that the fault lied in the uninspiring casting, which leads me to wonder if that's why the show became so keen on casting soap veterans for nearly every pivotal role.  The failure of the Perkins family was definitely a casting issue followed by a lack of interest in committing to the original onscreen characterization. I was fascinated watching the early episodes and realizing that the Perkins had been financially wiped out by the trial, which was an underlying current towards John's animosity towards his son. Then, the additional complication of Marissa's nearly incestual affection for Joe that led to her cutting off John sexually was a wild moment to witness, but not as strong as it could have been with a stronger actor in the role of John Perkins. Melissa Brennan wasn't the right choice for the aspiring young vixen that Jade was intended to be. Brennan may have breathed life into Laken, but I'm not sure how Julia Ronnie would have done in the role of Jade.  Despite the recorded history, Christina Robertson and Sarah Gallagher weren't sisters; they were aunt and niece.  I don't think it would have hurt to make Marissa and Augusta sisters, but I think it would have made the Joe / Augusta seduction impossible unless you truly mimick "Rituals" and make Joe Sarah's stepson. I think a childhood friendship between the two women would have worked. It would have also given Augusta someone to confide in about the situation involving Peter Flint and herself as Marissa would have been aware of Peter from her work at the pre school. As childhood friends that were estranged by class differences, I think a relationship between Augusta and Joe (and later Augusta and a sexually frustrated John) would have had multiple layers to play out giving a deeper impact on Augusta's involvement in both of the men in Marissa's life. And because I have thought about this all too much, I would have Augusta and Marissa square off again when Jade, after marrying Ted while pregnant, learned that the little Capwell heir was in fact an imprisoned Warren's son only for Augusta to ultimately keep mum because with Ted married to Jade he wasn't free to pursue Laken.  I imagine the Andrades would have slowly been withdrawn from the Capwell inner circle as the truth about Santana, Channing, Jr., and the baby came to light for everyone. In what I seen in the 1980s, Rosa confronts C.C. once about the baby and then seems to move on. Early in the run, the actor playing Reuben claims he and Bridget Dobson had a falling out and implied that she was racist which led to the character fading into the woodwork.  I know I am like maybe one of two people who liked the 1990s run of the Dobsons, but I loved the set up for Santana / C.C. with the Andrades having owned the land that Oasis sat on years earlier posing Santana to come into money while also potentially landing a position where she could raise Gina's son with C.C. if C.C. and Santana could have secured custody of the child. With Eden gone, I would have gone back to Santana and Cruz, but if not, I think Brick should have returned to be Santana's conscience and potential love interest.     
    • Well, I'm not going to shoot you, so no worries there. If it's subpar i hate hearing that. It was an old DVD not even mine a former partner. I thought why not make use of it. Serves me right for thinking. But to be clear, white label, www.radiomemory.com 
    • Just compared the open on Friday's episode with the first week episodes. I think the difference is that the bass line is much more apparent -- stronger and harder.
    • Phew, that was close to disaster!

      Please register in order to view this content

      I suspect we would have had a few withdrawals next year if Israel had won. I don't think many people would relish going to Jerusalem as things stand now. Not to mention it would have been a prime target for terrorist attacks.   
    • And they've given us plenty. Sets, outdoor scenes, music licensing, etc. And that was the point of me using DAYS... so. It's obvious the casino set is not intended for long-term use, hence why it's likely it wasn't as evolved as the other community sets, etc.
    • Enjoy Errol!  Your guy! Teehee @Errol  

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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