GH: Character Recast

[Liberty City]

Yup. All Kin Shriner said was this: ❝ I don’t see Scotty ever going back to Liesl, because that case is closed. ❞ That is the direct quote, and people are acting like it's the end of the world. Damn. Otherwise, I've not heard anything speak negatively about Shriner. And without substantial evidence, it's one person's delusions vs. factual statements others have made, and yet people continue to want to believe delusions.

[Contessa Donatella]

Okay. I quit. You win. I did not expect this out of @Liberty City & I am now offended. No, I am not deluded, have never had a delusion, but I am tired of people taking cheap potshots at me, so from now on, here on SON in the GH topics I will no longer post "heard from the studio" content. Have a party! 

https://soaphub.com/general-hospital/news-gh/timing-writers-switch-perfect-jason-morgan-return/

 

[slick jones]

It's obvious TPTB have zero use for Kathleen Gati's Obrecht. They've barely used her in months. Instead we get Cyrus running around quoting scriptures and Sad Sack Finn's predominately off screen storyline. That amounted to the waste of three days in court, among other unnecessary scenes.  No one got to know Dennis Muldoon, and most people couldn't have cared less. The days following Bobbie's passing with Easton off- screen were a nice treat.

Tying Scott to Lucy (again) after the last few months pouting over Lesl just keeps his ties to the canvas stronger. Beimg the longest running character (created in 1965), I would want to continue using him whenever possible.

 

Anyway, getting back to the thread's actual point, I would have expected a more ASJ appearing actor. Harrington is a capable actor. (I didn't realize how many things I have seen him in until I started researching him for Soap Hoppers). As long as this story is short term, I'm just settling for what we got.  He's no Jagger, though, and the way the character is being written, the shorter term the better.

 

[dragonflies]

"but heard from the studio" honestly means nothing Donna unless you have actual RECEIPTS to back up what's being said.

[Contessa Donatella]

1. People get to decide what to believe. 

2. What I had, over & over & over, was being right on things that I said. What better RECEIPTS could there possibly be? You tell me. I know I cannot possibly imagine better. 

[Liberty City]

Please register in order to view this content

[Contessa Donatella]

Hey, you! If you don't already know this, I will tell you. Saying someone is delusional is serious name-calling. You should probably watch what you say. You're revealing more about yourself than about me. 

Now, how about we not do this?! Back to Port Charles? 

[slick jones]

Please register in order to view this content

[Khan]

Spending your quiet nights alone with a (former) SOD editor does not make one an expert on all things soap opera.  And that's all I'm going to say.

[Liberty City]

It was brought to my attention you seem to think I called you delusional, which in fact, I did not, so you don't need to "tell" me anything as if you're my parent. I know what I said, and stating someone has delusions is not calling them delusional and / or saying they are delusional. If that's how you take it, then that is a you problem, not a me problem.

I also want it known (just as an FYI): the reason I don't respond to you Donna is because I have you on my ignore list. So, it would save time to cease responding to me. And if you are that bothered my things I've said, then I suggest you place me on your ignore list, because I'm not losing sleep over this. You have revealed a lot about yourself, and while I should take the high road on this, I'm going to let it sit for a moment to provide some much-needed clarity. You [seem to] get offended quite easily it seems and It's very clear a lot of members on here have the same opinions of you and, it has shown, especially in the past several days. Perhaps it may be best to take a break from the board, look in the mirror and reflect on things, or whatever it is you would need to do. And I genuinely mean that in the most sincerest way possible, because if opinions on a soap opera board affect you that much then there might be a more deeply-seeded issue going on that may be addressed.

Now, best wishes to you, and this is the last time I will correspond with you publicly. 

Please register in order to view this content

[Contessa Donatella]

Please register in order to view this content

All you're gonna say only relates to the past. Has no bearing whatsoever on anything current. Okay, as you wish. We'll stamp you circa July 2005. Works for me.  

[AdelaideCate007]

Kin Shriner has played out far more embarrassing stories over the years than the Scott and Liesl romance. He's also always had an age appropriate love interest. I sincerely doubt that after all these years he's suddenly mad about a romance that was basically harmless.

[titan1978]

If anything, he was happy to be used consistently! He complains when they have nothing for him.

This whole strange episode is starting to remind me of posters from years gone by, like way old school days. The folks that always had sources that were just spilling stuff that was very fannish. And their favorite weapon was threatening to withhold their source.

Let me just ask a question- now that so many are accessible online, why would they rehash this behind the scenes stuff with a non peer that just runs off and posts it around the internet? Because other overly involved people then go right back to them to ask if it is true.

Soap fans are just wild sometimes. I think many soap people invented the parasocial thing.

Edited February 7, 2024 by titan1978

[Vee]

I know from experience that Donna used to be connected lo those many years ago. And some of what she puts out there as new information may well be correct. But tbh at least half of what she says now is just stuff she is gathering from chatting on Twitter or wherever. Like, you telling people that you talked to a soap writer on Twitter who theorized that maybe PM is rewriting the previous HWs' scripts before March isn't you getting a line on new information; it's just you and someone else problem solving together and making a supposition. But it's presented as a hot tip and gospel. (I personally suspect Mulcahey and Korte will be ghostwriting perhaps well before March, but I'm not touting my suspicion as confirmation.)

Do I think she means it that way? No, not always. But she doesn't always think before she just posts anything (and she's far from the only person on this forum with that problem). And yes, I've had her on Ignore for months too; I just keep getting stuff quoted on the page or referred to by others.

[Jeff]

+1 @Liberty City  Just supporting my friend, not getting involved in the debate.

Edited February 7, 2024 by Jeff