4 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

Soaps, a medium that has gifted us with performances by the likes of Beverlee McKinsey, Susan Flannery, Maureen Garrett, Charita Bauer, Judith Light, Jane Elliot, Frances Reid, Judith Light, Kate Mulgrew, etc, have long proven that stellar performers are celebrated within the genre.

Not everyone is happy to settle for the work of Ronn Moss and his ilk. There are those of us who clamor to see superb thespian work on display, and we have been fortunate in that regard on many daytime dramas over the decades.

Long live the Meryl Streeps of daytime! I'll take Beverlee McKinsey, Susan Flannery and actresses of their caliber over Brenda Dickson (God love her) or Charity Rahmer any day.😁

⬆️💯THIS, all of this! And, for a little bit of Monday morning fun, especially for those of us who were fans of Scott Holroyd, here is a picture of him & me, where we both look like we are deer caught in headlights, but really we were having a good time at Blondie's in Manhattan at a soap/fan event! 

 

15 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

I do hope Mulcahey will introduce new characters carefully and judiciously (or even better yet, reintroduce beloved, legacy characters from the past). God knows, I'd loathe seeing a Buzz Cooper 2.0 coming aboard and eating the show. Some folks may have loved Justin Deas' loud-mouthed and belligerent hamminess in the role, but many did not. UGH.

I think it's all going to depend, again, on how much control Disney-ABC is allowing Mulcahey to have or how much interference they'll continue to have over the writing regime (as exampled from past regimes).

1 minute ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

⬆️💯THIS, all of this! And, for a little bit of Monday morning fun, especially for those of us who were fans of Scott Holroyd, here is a picture of him & me, where we both look like we are deer caught in headlights, but really we were having a good time at Blondie's in Manhattan at a soap/fan event! 

 

I do think that natural, layered and complex performances are just not everyone's cup of tea. There are those who would dismiss To Kill a Mockingbird in favor of Howard the Duck, or The Grapes of Wrath in favor of Chainsaw Cannibal Hookers.

Differences are the spice of life.

23 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

I do hope Mulcahey will introduce new characters carefully and judiciously (or even better yet, reintroduce beloved, legacy characters from the past). God knows, I'd loathe seeing a Buzz Cooper 2.0 coming aboard and eating the show. Some folks may have loved Justin Deas' loud-mouthed and belligerent hamminess in the role, but many did not. UGH.

Now, people do have the right to champion hammy theatrics if it's their preference, and yes, Howarth's nostril flaring was appealing to both of his fans (LOL! I jest, I jest! Sort of. 🫢). I know people who reveled in glee watching Divine with doggy doo in Pink Flamingos (seriously; they were wildly entertained at the outrageousness and wanted to see more pushing of the envelope like it.) I would counter that such material can be sought out in John Waters-type films. Soaps, a medium that has gifted us with performances by the likes of Beverlee McKinsey, Susan Flannery, Maureen Garrett, Charita Bauer, Judith Light, Jane Elliot, Frances Reid, Judith Light, Kate Mulgrew, etc, have long proven that stellar performers are celebrated within the genre.

Not everyone is happy to settle for the work of Ronn Moss and his ilk. There are those of us who clamor to see superb thespian work on display, and we have been fortunate in that regard on many daytime dramas over the decades.

Long live the Meryl Streeps of daytime! I'll take Beverlee McKinsey, Susan Flannery and actresses of their caliber over Brenda Dickson (God love her) or Charity Rahmer any day.😁

No one is “settling” for Ronn Moss and his “ilk”. We embrace him.

These kinds of performances belong on daytime so don’t tell us to watch John Waters movies instead. You can always record and fast forward through what you don’t like. 

Twenty years later, people still hate on Charity Rahmer but she was still a much better Belle than Martha Dumptruck.

3 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

I do think that natural, layered and complex performances are just not everyone's cup of tea. There are those who would dismiss To Kill a Mockingbird in favor of Howard the Duck, or The Grapes of Wrath in favor of Chainsaw Cannibal Hookers.

Differences are the spice of life.

The condescension and moral superiority is unnecessary and in fact is downright rude. 

Edited February 12, 20241 yr by Lye-C

9 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

I do think that natural, layered and complex performances are just not everyone's cup of tea. There are those who would dismiss To Kill a Mockingbird in favor of Howard the Duck, or The Grapes of Wrath in favor of Chainsaw Cannibal Hookers.

Differences are the spice of life.

Viva la difference! 

I always say that there is a reason that Baskin & Robbins has 32 flavors of ice cream! 

But, both the movie & the book of TKAM happen to be my favorites!

26 minutes ago, Lye-C said:

No one is “settling” for Ronn Moss and his “ilk”. We embrace him.

The consensus of many internet posters over the last 25+ years belies this claim, although you do have every right to speak for yourself.

26 minutes ago, Lye-C said:

These kinds of performances belong on daytime

Well, they have certainly been on display on daytime TV at various times through soap opera history, but whether or not they "belong" there or are embraced by everyone can be widely debated.

26 minutes ago, Lye-C said:

so don’t tell us to watch John Waters movies instead.

A calm reading of what I actually wrote confirms that I said people CAN seek out John Waters' films if they enjoy his style and content. There was no demand that they must do so.

26 minutes ago, Lye-C said:

You can always record and fast forward through what you don’t like. 

A huge portion of the audience has just abandoned soaps altogether, alas. 

 

Edited February 12, 20241 yr by vetsoapfan

Let's just hope that the new headwriters introduce intriguing new and returning characters whom the audiences grows to care about, played by actors who are worth our attention. Everyone will win! Soaps need all the audience pleasing they can get these days.

Edited February 12, 20241 yr by vetsoapfan

23 minutes ago, Lye-C said:

25 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

I do think that natural, layered and complex performances are just not everyone's cup of tea. There are those who would dismiss To Kill a Mockingbird in favor of Howard the Duck, or The Grapes of Wrath in favor of Chainsaw Cannibal Hookers.

Differences are the spice of life.

The condescension and moral superiority is unnecessary and in fact is downright rude. 

18 minutes ago, Donna L. Bridges said:

Viva la difference! 

I always say that there is a reason that Baskin & Robbins has 32 flavors of ice cream! 

But, both the movie & the book of TKAM happen to be my favorites!

Mine too. I love TKAM, but one of my best and longest-known friends friends cannot sit through quiet, character-driven dramas. He finds them painfully tedious, but he literally immerses himself into the other side of the coin, with films like Beneath the Valley of the Ultra Vixens; Faster Pussycat, Kill! Kill!; Plan 9 From Outer Space, and the like (all titles I only know because of him).

It's like some viewers loved Claire Labine's lovely, emotional tales on General Hospital, while other fans much preferred the science-fiction sagas which dominated the 1980s.

My friend and I always banter back and forth about we like and dislike, and often end up sampling each other's recommended titles. 

We understand that expressing even wide differences of opinion is not akin to acts of war, LOL.

(That being said, I personally hope Patrick Mulcahey's version of GH is closer to Claire Labine's than Thom Racina's.)

Were we not wildly afield as is here is where I would say someone online needs to pick Thom Racina's brain about his stormy OLTL 2.0 tenure which he has been kind but very circumspect about, and which near the end revealed the underpinnings of a classic Racina-style mystery/conspiracy arc with Corbin Bleu, Ron Raines' eleventh-hour character, Barbara Garrick's Allison Perkins, etc. But I digress even more, so that is a discussion for the OLTL thread or somewhere else.

7 minutes ago, Vee said:

Were we not wildly afield as is here is where I would say someone online needs to pick Thom Racina's brain about his stormy OLTL 2.0 tenure which he has been kind but very circumspect about, and which near the end revealed the underpinnings of a classic Racina-style mystery/conspiracy arc with Corbin Bleu, Ron Raines' eleventh-hour character, Barbara Garrick's Allison Perkins, etc. But I digress even more, so that is a discussion for the OLTL thread or somewhere else.

I would be interested in picking Racina's brain about his involvement with the sci-fi stuff on GH, and if he ever regretted it, if he was satisfied with how it turned out, what he thought about the audience's reception of it, etc..

Edited February 12, 20241 yr by vetsoapfan

35 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

Let's just hope that the new headwriters introduce intriguing new and returning characters whom the audiences grows to care about, played by actors who are worth our attention. Everyone will win! Soaps need all the audience pleasing they can get these days.

That's another problem: no matter what an executive producer and / or head writer will do, no one will ever be genuinely 100% happy with what they watch. You can't please all. 🤷🏻‍♂️ You can only hope to please most or a vast majority.

5 minutes ago, Vee said:

Were we not wildly afield as is here is where I would say someone online needs to pick Thom Racina's brain about his stormy OLTL 2.0 tenure which he has been kind but very circumspect about, and which near the end revealed the underpinnings of a classic Racina-style mystery/conspiracy arc with Corbin Bleu, Ron Raines' eleventh-hour character, Barbara Garrick's Allison Perkins, etc. But I digress even more, so that is a discussion for the OLTL thread or somewhere else.

I feel like a lot of 2.0 was eleventh-hour characters for the sake of casting former east coast talents.

2 minutes ago, Liberty City said:

That's another problem: no matter what an executive producer and / or head writer will do, no one will ever be genuinely 100% happy with what they watch. You can't please all. 🤷🏻‍♂️ You can only hope to please most or a vast majority.

Right. The reactions to any form of entertainment are always mixed and contrary; 100% consensus is non existent, and we have to accept that as a given. That's why I am always baffled when people take different opinions as an inflammatory act of war. I don't want or expect everyone to agree with me all the time about everything. How boring that would be. JMHO.

2 minutes ago, Liberty City said:

I feel like a lot of 2.0 was eleventh-hour characters for the sake of casting former east coast talents.

ITA.

9 minutes ago, Liberty City said:

I feel like a lot of 2.0 was eleventh-hour characters for the sake of casting former east coast talents.

They were definitely throwing random things at the wall at that show at times, but I don't think that's really what happened there. The show just got canned quickly due to BTS mismanagement right as the storyline's contours were finally revealing itself; I suspect Corbin Bleu's character being a mole for Raines and the conspiracy was there from the beginning, as Jeffrey King was Racina's idea. Raines (who was never very good at much but playing a mustache-twirling baddie anyway, so it was a decent enough role for him) simply came in at the wrong moment right as the money ran out. Just as the simmering umbrella plot came into focus the show was over.

Edited February 12, 20241 yr by Vee

5 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

Right. The reactions to any form of entertainment are always mixed and contrary; 100% consensus is non existent, and we have to accept that as a given. That's why I am always baffled when people take different opinions as an inflammatory act of war. I don't want or expect everyone to agree with me all the time about everything. How boring that would be. JMHO.

From my experience across multiple platforms, in today's world of social media, it is especially heightened where people cannot separate ART from ARTIST, etc. People want their version of things to be the only one and it's also why when there are those that fan says should be writing these soaps, and I completely disagree, because [so many] cannot see things without their rose-coloured, one-way pointed view of things.

5 minutes ago, vetsoapfan said:

ITA.

I mean: Ron Raines, Marnie Schulenberg & Paolo Seganti were all hired within the same point of time, and it just felt like "YOU GET A JOB! AND YOU GET A JOB!" and did not feel necessary to the canvas.

5 minutes ago, Vee said:

They were definitely throwing random things at the wall at that show at times, but I don't think that's really what happened there. The show just got canned quickly due to BTS mismanagement right as the storyline's contours were finally revealing itself; I suspect Corbin Bleu's character being a mole for Raines and the conspiracy was there from the beginning, as Jeffrey King was Racina's idea. Raines (who was never very good at much but playing a mustache-twirling baddie anyway, so it was a decent enough role for him) simply came in at the wrong moment right as the money ran out. Just as the simmering umbrella plot came into focus the show was over.

Well, the hiring of the Guiding Light and World Turns actors could also be from the hiring of Marin Gazzaniga? Don't know. Just hoping, in terms of General Hospital, we get some sense of Mulcahey infused into new characters and possibly mis-lead characters introduced during the past few regimes.