Jump to content

Stars you're surprised have lasted so long on daytime


Recommended Posts

echoing everyone about Rikaart and Goddard....we got rid of one, but the other managed to worm his way back....yes it's recurring but still...

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jason Thompson and  whoever is playing Adam now on Y&R only he hasn't been around long enough to fit the category.  He killed the show for me.  I don't know why people mention Jordi - he's not a bad actor and certainly good to look at.  You could go down 1/3 of the Y&R cast and name people.  Don Diamont on B&B...it's a good thing he's good to look at.  Horrible actor.  Bryton is about as interesting as a dishtowel. This is going to be blasphemy but Eric Braeden (the "OK" guy, "OK"?  I love you Nikkkehhhhh....need to protect my familehhhh, OK?  OK?)  God awful.  For years ended every line in "OK?"   Honestly Peter Bergman isn't very good either.  There's a reason people stay acting on soaps - they can't get work elsewhere. 

Edited by Fevuh
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fevuh said:

 I don't know why people mention Jordi - he's not a bad actor and certainly good to look at. 

 

Honestly Peter Bergman isn't very good either.  There's a reason people stay acting on soaps - they can't get work elsewhere. 

 

+1 on Jordi

Please register in order to view this content
 

 

Well, with so many of those you mentioned, it's not a bad gig for someone who wants to work steady. 6 figure salary, only work a few days a week, and no more overtime (not in this era of daytime!)... Sign me up! I can see why people stay. I'm sure people like Sharon Case, Josh Morrow, etc. planned/hoped earlier in their careers to jump to primetime/film after their first contract ran out, but here we are 25 years later, money's still good by comparison to other work. Why not ride it out?  Who'd o' thunk Laura Wright jumping ship from GL to GH would guarantee her 11+ more years of work (and still going) than GL

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Gray Bunny said:

Who'd o' thunk Laura Wright jumping ship from GL to GH would guarantee her 11+ more years of work (and still going) than GL

Especially as the third Carly!  And nothing about her portrayal has ever had the grit of SB or the romantic chemistry with Sonny or Jason of TB.


She is at least a capable soap actress.  People like Amanda Heinle have been playing their roles so long it’s kind of shocking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, titan1978 said:

She is at least a capable soap actress. 

 

Definitely. I've always liked her, and she's another who's made a lifelong career of steady, dependable soap work (Loving/GL/GH

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AbcNbc247 said:

Maurice Bernard and Roger Howarth own this thread

I never got the appeal with Mo.

 

Howarth played a villian and after that producers and writers thought he was actually good and kept hiring him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

Howarth played a villian and after that producers and writers thought he was actually good and kept hiring him. 

But that's the point, he's not good lol. He has that one style that makes every character he's played pretty much the same one. I see no difference between Todd Manning, his Paul Ryan and his Franco.

 

I used to think Mo was good, but these last few years it's been like watching a dying man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AbcNbc247 said:

But that's the point, he's not good lol. He has that one style that makes every character he's played pretty much the same one. I see no difference between Todd Manning, his Paul Ryan and his Franco.

 

 

Thats why I used the word...thought......lol

 

He was awful as Paul.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking more characters who have lasted so long on their respective shows. I should've entitled this "Characters you're surprised have lasted so long on daytime". Maurice Benard hasn't bothered to hone his craft in a good 15 years BUT Sonny is an undeniably popular character.

 

I'm thinking of characters who were never very popular but somehow lasted through years and different regimes just sort of...existing. You know those people who are very "Why are you here again? What purpose do you serve?". Franco's a good one! If he hadn't been played by James Franco that one time he would have been a long forgotten villain but no here we are stuck with him when Roger Howarth's portrayal has never taken off and most of the audience either hates him or tolerates him to vary degrees.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Darn said:

I was thinking more characters who have lasted so long on their respective shows. I should've entitled this "Characters you're surprised have lasted so long on daytime".

 

Michael Baldwin is a character that I'm surprised is still around on the GC canvas. He was brought out as a predator, stalking and peeping on the town heroine. When he got sent to prison, it was obvious he was meant to stay and not return to GC. I know what the official story is (or at least what everyone claims is the official story) of how Michael Baldwin returned, having been redeemed but that one has always been something of a headscratcher to me. I guess I usually find it a bit puzzling when villains stick around.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DramatistDreamer said:

 

Michael Baldwin is a character that I'm surprised is still around on the GC canvas. He was brought out as a predator, stalking and peeping on the town heroine. When he got sent to prison, it was obvious he was meant to stay and not return to GC. I know what the official story is (or at least what everyone claims is the official story) of how Michael Baldwin returned, having been redeemed but that one has always been something of a headscratcher to me. I guess I usually find it a bit puzzling when villains stick around.

 

And became friends with the woman he attacked!

 

Michael at the very least didn't get the entire show handed to him on a silver platter like Todd Manning...let me not get STARTED.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Darn said:

 

And became friends with the woman he attacked!

 

Michael at the very least didn't get the entire show handed to him on a silver platter like Todd Manning...let me not get STARTED.

 

FWIW, Y&R, from my earliest memories, didn't seem to be the type of show that obsessively focused on one character until around the mid '00s. Now if we want to discuss whether they focused almost exclusively on one family or group of characters, that would be a different topic for discussion.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Tell a friend

    Love Soap Opera Network Community? Tell a friend!
  • Posts

    • I agree with y'all, and I guess that's why I'm easier on soaps and other shows if they don't necessarily get it right. I'm not easy on them enough to still watch or support something I don't like, but I do think that "trying" is worth something. After being excited for a short while, I ended up absolutely HATING Luke/Noah on ATWT and thought they were embarrassing. But other gay men, especially the older ones who'd been watching the show for years and years, loved them. So while they just made me roll my eyes, I understood that they meant more to others. Still wanted that relationship blown to smithereens for something more fun, but y'know. GLEE. I hated it. But what it did for many gay youth can't be denied. I know that someone will reply that there were other majorly problematic things with the show, but my point is that it served tons of gay kids who otherwise would not have gotten that confidence boost or feeling of community.
    • Entering April and...   ...GOOOD this show reeks of propping. I cannot with the loops the writers are writing in to keep Peter around, Why is Dr. O who has went toe to toe in hand combat with Anna...IN A MASK TO BOOT or Carly who has pulled every trick in the book or even Maxie who has fake a pregancy and used to be the crafty schemer herself so scared of this nothing burger of weaksauce son of a GH villain I like? Uh...NO!!!   Yeah, that scene of Cameron picking on Jake was a bad one. WL has done better. That said, I do like there is family conflict in Liz's family. Those boys have gotten along for too long.   So is the next event we are building up to is the opening of Curtis's club? There is enough story building going on at least to have things happen.   I am just sadden that a month ago, there was momentum going on and climaxes and it fell flat in two weeks.     
    • I am shocked at you.  LVP is cohosting that new dog show with Rebel Wilson, has VPD still in the works, and at least has one more project in the works I believe if memory serves. And VPR is still in the air...especially now that Kandi is about to start filming that OLG spinoff show. It's why I had to post that tweet. No matter how things go, LVP STAYS hustling. Kyle could NEVER.    And Andy Cokehead's ratings are not much better at times so Twitter can stay pressed. Please register in order to view this content 
    • I suppose the premise of “LGBTQ” as this hodgepodge community is what I’m questioning. That one letter of the acronym is interchangeable with the other. I understand it from a political coalition standpoint—strength in numbers—and there’s certainly been overlap in term of cultural spaces, but for the most part, the only thing these letters have in common is that they transgress commonly accepted ideas of gender roles and identities. EDIT: I know they aren’t discrete, mutually exclusive groups. Trans people can be gay, lesbian, bi, etc. as well.   But in general I agree. Soaps are broadcast TV vehicles and have to be as broadly appealing and narratively nimble as possible. It’s why streaming services (or smaller cable networks) that can nurture niche-oriented content are so groundbreaking. A gay-male soap on Netflix or Hulu wouldn’t have to cater to a mass audience and could take more risks.
    • Well on the other hand, if the logic is the community is very broad and diverse so you can't represent it in its diversity, the notion that all that is needed is that there would be *some* representation takes precedence hence the logic here. We also have, frustrated as we may be, to understand the tough spot they are in. If they have budget for thirty contract players and the number of pairings LGBTQ character can have is necessarily limited, LGBT character have a lower return-on-investment in terms of story for a producer. So expecting every strand of LGBT being represented is setting the bar unrealistically high.
  • Recent Status Updates

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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