Jump to content

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, titan1978 said:

Laura tweeting compliments and sending positive posts towards and about Wes do not strike me as diva-like or unprofessional.  The pet aspect has more to do with the story isn’t working, hasn’t been working, and just like Michael Easton and Roger, the show should have moved on or cut their losses ages ago.  I don’t think Laura has anything to do with him still having a job, just the hiring part.

 

Yeah I don't want to come off sounding as a blind defender but from the corners of GH Twitter I follow (NLG, MW, WdV) it does seem LW is making a point of being very supportive of all the entire cast and complimenting even people she doesn't work with much/sleep with 
We don't know how WR got the role: maybe she recommended him but ultimately I doubt she has the kind of pull to get him hired purely based on that connection.
And she has been in the industry long enough to know better than to threaten anything if he got fired. She is the fourth Carly and is on her fourth soap. She seems smart enough to know that actors who walk out the show because they are pissed their current bf/gf was fired often end up regretting. She has the role forever if she wants it; I doubt she'd threaten to walk. So that's not much pressure on them to keep WR alone. 
Whatever reason they are keeping him longer is that he has support in upstairs offices, for reasons that may or may not be understandable, but I wouldn't put that down on LWs feet.
 

 

3 minutes ago, AbcNbc247 said:

I've been hoping that the rumors are true, but with Frank's obsession with his pets, I don't know what to believe. Seriously, when it comes to pet actors, he puts Jill Farren Phelps to shame lol

I think the reason this feels particularly egregious is because those "pets" feel very similar. Easton is boring and Howarth's character is heinous so the specifics are different but they have the same profile.
JFP had pets all over the place: young, old, men, women, rookies, soap vets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 384
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Oh she get tangential credit for him being hired, I believe he was there picking her up and started talking to Frank.  I think that is why they call him parking lot Pete.

 

And Laura Wright is a professional.  No question in my mind she does her job (and pretty well, though I don’t enjoy Carly she has always acted the hell out of her) and isn’t a backstage problem.  She always comes across to me as a no bullshit, hard worker that respects the genre and manages the constraints of the current production model.

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

Oh she get tangential credit for him being hired, I believe he was there picking her up and started talking to Frank.  I think that is why they call him parking lot Pete.

 

And Laura Wright is a professional.  No question in my mind she does her job (and pretty well, though I don’t enjoy Carly she has always acted the hell out of her) and isn’t a backstage problem.  She always comes across to me as a no bullshit, hard worker that respects the genre and manages the constraints of the current production model.

 

I'm sure he got some preferential treatment, but FV is the reason Peter is on the show and was frontburner for years on end. But this nonsense about how Ramsey or Wright or whoever schemed against Tristan Rogers or hacked him or what not is ludicrous. Wes Ramsey shouldn't be on GH, but these people aren't out here playing like dumb kids on Twitter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It still boggles my mind that for a show that has been yearning for a male vibe for so many years (remember that opening where only the guys where in the final cast "photo"?) the male cast is 80% awful for various reasons.

Edited by FrenchBug82
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FrenchBug82 said:

It still boggles my mind that for a show that has been yearning for a male vibe for so many years (remember that opening where only the guys where in the final cast "photo"?) the male cast is 80% awful for various reasons.

Controversial opinion, but I actually think that GH's male cast isn't that terrible. All the "pets" that have been mentioned (Michael Easton, Roger Howarth, and even Wes Ramsey) are talented actors stuck playing poorly-defined characters in idiotic storylines that too often still fall into the Guza-era trap of assuming that morose and growly = deep. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, prefab1 said:

Controversial opinion, but I actually think that GH's male cast isn't that terrible. All the "pets" that have been mentioned (Michael Easton, Roger Howarth, and even Wes Ramsey) are talented actors stuck playing poorly-defined characters in idiotic storylines that too often still fall into the Guza-era trap of assuming that morose and growly = deep. 

That's why I said for various reasons.
I agree for instance that Howarth's problem is not that he can't act - he has proven in the past he can.

But whether it is bad characters, bad human beings or bad actors, we end up with most of the male cast I really don't enjoy on my screen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howarth needs someone that he can play off of.  I love Becky.  But she works best as Liz in grounded, human emotion based storylines.  And he has nothing to bounce off of there like Todd did with Blair and Tea, which is where he did his best work in relationship/romance stories.

 

Which does not dismiss that he is playing a terrible character.  When he was Todd on GH, there was a place for him.  Moving the Sun to PC, his relationship with Carly.  There were natural places to go with that character.  Franco has been forced from day one.  And Michael Easton has played three different main characters in less than a decade.  Where would the show be if they had tried to find actual new actors and characters and moved on from what hasn’t worked?  Just because Frank likes them and they are not divas on set does not mean they are right for the show.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, titan1978 said:

To me there is a huge difference in how LW acts compared to Kelly Monaco.  Who clearly onscreen and vocally off screen wanted her partner to stay on the show and in her storyline.

 

Laura tweeting compliments and sending positive posts towards and about Wes do not strike me as diva-like or unprofessional.  The pet aspect has more to do with the story isn’t working, hasn’t been working, and just like Michael Easton and Roger, the show should have moved on or cut their losses ages ago.  I don’t think Laura has anything to do with him still having a job, just the hiring part.

 

It completely boggles when folks say with such confidence that LW keeps that talking tree employed when viewers are stuck with Howarth and Easton, who has played about 5 different characters.  Wes is still there because viewers don't approve.  This makes Frank dig his heels in even deeper.  Frank will turn an entire canvas on its ear before he admits defeat.  He recast Nina because he created the character not because there was a need.  

 

And now LW is being criticized for supporting her partner?  That's insane!  I'm super happy she decided to stay out of the Nazi mess and doesn't jump online to defend Wes.  Just being supportive is all she can do and she's wrong for that?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Give me Gregory Harrison, Kim Delaney and Michael Easton scenes together any day of the week over dull Michael/Chase/Willow/Sasha. It's a reason why they're called the mayo quad online. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Forever8 said:

Give me Gregory Harrison, Kim Delaney and Michael Easton scenes together any day of the week over dull Michael/Chase/Willow/Sasha. It's a reason why they're called the mayo quad online. 

 

I must have been doing a long, slow blink during the Chase/Willow scenes with the sugary background music. You're right, I take that back. I was at least awake during the Finn's Family scenes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Forever8 said:

Give me Gregory Harrison, Kim Delaney and Michael Easton scenes together any day of the week over dull Michael/Chase/Willow/Sasha. It's a reason why they're called the mayo quad online. 

 

That's truly picking the lesser of two evils.  Both stories are awful, but Michael/Chase/Willow/Sasha are the least charismatic quad ever.  Just pair Michael/Chase already.  I used to think Chad Duell was such an amazing find and great as younger Michael, but that boy has anti-chemistry with every girl he has ever been paired with except 40 year old Abby.  And Willow is such a boring character.  She's so bland in every single way.

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

 

That's truly picking the lesser of two evils.  Both stories are awful, but Michael/Chase/Willow/Sasha are the least charismatic quad ever.  Just pair Michael/Chase already.  I used to think Chad Duell was such an amazing find and great as younger Michael, but that boy has anti-chemistry with every girl he has ever been paired with except 40 year old Abby.  And Willow is such a boring character.  She's so bland in every single way.

I know it didn't happen but I wish one of those girls was at least Serena or Christina Baldwin. At least two legacy characters would be involved. Hopefully, Serena or Christina would've been written enough charismatic and energetic for me to stay awake when Michael comes on my screen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Forever8 said:

I know it didn't happen but I wish one of those girls was at least Serena or Christina Baldwin. At least two legacy characters would be involved. Hopefully, Serena or Christina would've been written enough charismatic and energetic for me to stay awake when Michael comes on my screen. 

I would say technically Michael is a legacy character and he's still dull as dirt, but SM as Sasha maybe could do something more.  I find her more appealing than Willow.  I think she would have made an okay Christina Baldwin, but they would have to give her some sort of nickname with 2 Christina/Kristina's on the canvas lol.  The problem is the quad is made up of 4 generally good, boring characters.  At least make one of the girls a villian or a least a vixen-y bad girl.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, carolineg said:

I would say technically Michael is a legacy character and he's still dull as dirt, but SM as Sasha maybe could do something more.  I find her more appealing than Willow.  I think she would have made an okay Christina Baldwin, but they would have to give her some sort of nickname with 2 Christina/Kristina's on the canvas lol.  The problem is the quad is made up of 4 generally good, boring characters.  At least make one of the girls a villian or a least a vixen-y bad girl.  

 

I was talking about Michael and either Serena or Christina being the two legacy children in the quad. 

 

But the rest I agree with! All of them being relatively good is the problem. Sasha being on crack could've had potential but she was overacting and the story quickly became a mess. 

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.

  • Community Activity

    1. 11,700

      As The World Turns Discussion Thread

    2. 7,369

      What Are You Listening To?

    3. 37,313

      The Politics Thread

    4. 11,700

      As The World Turns Discussion Thread

    5. 137

      The Talk: Discussion Thread

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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