Jump to content

GH: April 2024 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Yeah, I am definitely not saying Vanessa isn't both those things at all.  I agree she's earned it.  And at the end of the day she might be a little more work, but the upside she brings is worth it.  Maybe Frank doesn't want the headache and that's up to him.  Seeing Vanessa/Brenda as only a vehicle for MB/Sonny's happy ever after does irk me (if true) because Brenda is so much more than that.

And it becomes a double standard when Genie/Vanessa are treated as "difficult", but Steve, Mo, and Tony are just fighting for their characters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

It really cost ABC nothing to give Tony and Genie favored nations contracts- which means what one gets the other gets. They should have the same money and as proved to be the sticking point when she quit in 2002- equal time off. I know she came and went more, but some of that was because of crappy treatment next to Tony. They had almost equal pay in the 90’s through her quitting, and all both of them negotiated for was more time off repeatedly/favorable schedules.
 

They also both had clauses that they could quit every 13 weeks without penalty too with enough notice. I bet nobody has that anymore. And they got a payout if the network got rid of them before their whole contract. But that was back in the days before the budgets got involved in contract negotiations.

Edited by titan1978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's like what I always say: you can get away with acting like a diva if you have the goods to back it up.  It's only a problem when your behavior is as shitty as your performance, or vice-versa.

IMHO, GH needs Vanessa/Brenda, because Carly in particular needs Brenda.  In fact, Carly probably needs Brenda more than even Sonny does, because Brenda - again, IMO - is the only character who can fight Carly's fire with fire of her own.  IOW, Brenda brings out the best in Carly.  (Or the worst, depending on how you look at it, lol).

Carly by herself as a lead (anti-)heroine is okay, but Carly and Brenda...?  That, my friends, is like having a license to print money.

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

They seem to be dragging to appease May sweeps expectations. But unless that damn wedding leads to a massacre, I am not interested in it or this couple. 
 

 

Michael Easton is as charismatic as a piece of rotting wood. I hate seeing him on this show and have no use for this character. 

Edited by BetterForgotten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's been the #1 thought running through my mind for the last few dozens of posts, and for every post about Vanessa Marcil. The double standard is so bad that even those of us who KNOW there's a double standard can't fall prey to it anyway.

Those actors you mentioned -- Steve, Mo, Tony -- were NEVER scrutinized in the same way as Vanessa Marcil. There was never the same passion in that discussion, either. Frank's relationship with them was never discussed in the same terms, with the same language.

And no, Ingo isn't proof that there isn't a double standard. If a woman pulled the same crap as Ingo -- then and since -- she would have been pilloried beyond belief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Please register in order to view this content

The best part of the last two days was seeing Dax shirtless.

And Aiden making crispy fries in ME fryer!

Edited by Soapsuds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Lol.  I have always said watching Carly's head explode was the best part of Brenda's last return.  LW just gave the unhinged portrayal perfectly and VM and LW sparred great together. 

I am not disagreeing with most of your points especially about Vanessa, but what does Ingo have to do with it?  It wasn't a sexist thing-it was a safety thing.  Steve being allowed back with open arms is more of an issue than Ingo who will mostly likely never be back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I brought up Ingo in case anyone thought "Well, Ingo has been criticized a lot, so it's not only women who are trashed." To me it doesn't matter that it was a safety thing. The double standard applies because of gender.

Ingo will likely never be back but we don't have these recurring discussions about Ingo's relationship to Frank, or his demands on the set, or about him being difficult. And yes, Steve is an issue, especially since he was able to return with seemingly so little discussion or pushback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don’t really see Maurice leaving as much as he bitches about it. Anyone that listens to his YouTube show knows he doesn’t do well with his mental health and not working somewhere he is well respected.

And the drama with Vanessa is the will she won’t she. She isn’t on my radar for co-worker complaints. She’s a lot like Rena in that she demands Brenda has a certain look in order to help her play the character.
 

I know she was promised one thing and the show tried to do something else with her last return (I will forever thank her for not letting them create a romantic backstory where she slept with Dante).

Riche still socializes with her, as does MVJ. She and Guza got along. Her co-stars like her. I think the issue is the tried and true show wants all the eggs in their basket, and she wants a level of control or freedom or both that they have no problem giving to MB and TG in his day. But they balk at listening to a woman.

RC was never going to be a good fit writing Brenda. Of all the Valentini writing teams, the current one has the best shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I like Brenda. I like VM. Issue is she wont do anything longer than a year and then bolts. How can you write long-term when as soon as the story gets gangbusters VM walks. 

Thats why I am not shocked taht GH wanted her to stay. That she wanted to stay and it looks like PM is writing for her. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I can't fully remember, but I don't think they tried to get Beth Chamberlin back. I think Laibson/McTavish likely saw Beth as old news and wanted to move Philip on; either that or have her return only when Philip was closely tied to a new woman. Thanks as always for these recaps. I think I had stopped watching around this time and mostly kept up by reading in the soap magazines. Bridget's degradation was horrible to watch, as the character had grown so much over the years and was clearly regressed just to be a foil for a couple viewers had zero investment in. 
    • Having the majority of the cast on those low numbers is no way to tell story. And just 2 dayplayers for the month. So sad for the #1 soap.  
    • I believe it was. And this is actually one of the cases where I wouldn’t mind some dumb soap opera bringing back from the dead. They gave Mishael, Amanda, with all of Hilary’s connections but none of the personality except for fleeting moments. Hilary absolutely should’ve just left town. They decided to kill her and the baby. Just baffling,
    • That was Mal Young right? He thought a tragic death was a better option than crafting a story where Hilary leaves town. Was it a case of punishing someone who wants to leave? And then they have to jump through hoops to bring the actress back.
    • Ooo @TaoboiI will say I just watched Amanda give it to Abby and I loved it. Honestly just made me miss Hilary more. I will never understand or get over that decision to kill her off. Also call me crazy but I could definitely see the Damian actor playing NuTed on BTG. Very much still enjoying the Lily attraction.
    • I rewatched these episodes---they broke my heart. Somehow, Nola had seen Vanessa leave the hospital, and follows her home, and Maeve just lets out this primal scream---chills went down my spine. And knowing the history between them---never quite liking the other and always getting on each other's nerves (to put it mildly)---makes it a much richer to have them put it all aside in the moment and be family to each other. I've never seen/heard what Maeve thought of the story itself, but she did want a break, so it's not like she was fired and then brought back. Yes, Vanessa could be this stubborn and unwilling to ask for help. She'd pretty much always been an "I can do this on my own" type of woman, although when she first came to town, she would still run to Henry. But after she met Billy, she stopped relying on her father. It's part of the reason she (briefly) got addicted to pills after Bill's birth---she was determined to take care of him all by herself and became obsessed with the idea she was the only one who could. Of course, nothing before to this extreme. I should say, there's no way (IMO) they could've told this story---Vanessa letting her loved ones thinking she'd died---if her father Henry had still been alive. She never would've been able to do that to him. And it does chafe that she's letting Bill believe it, when her mantra had been all about protecting him since the day he was born. I honestly don't recall what I thought about it at the time. But now I'm thrilled she's free of Matt at least. LOL.
    • I had no idea Peter Reckell was 70. He doesn’t look or feel it and I guess I thought Bo and Hope were closer in age than 9 years. Wow even the new writers had to have Jack praise Leo. Melissa Reeves continues to slip back in effortlessly as Jennifer. I like Ari and Holly being old friends. Holly learning about John’s death reminded me of how John used to call her Nikki if my memory is serving me right. Doug who happily sleeps in high school Holly’s room shirtless and in his underwear is now asking about birth years. How old is he anyway?    The Cat and Chad romance is insulting. 
    • Her husband is Marty Levy. Chocolate Fortunes (her company) was started in 1987.  So that explains the mystery of 'Whatever happened to Pam Peters?' She had been running a successful business for decades.
    • KMH's Emily was a harbinger for the lack of dignity many characters would face in the last decade of ATWT. On paper, many of the stories given to Melanie Smith's Emily could have been extremely sleazy, but she was treated with respect and understanding in the writing. By 1996 the show went from often not knowing how to write for KMH's Emily to giving her outright reprehensible material. There were breaks from this treatment, but not enough, with even those breaks often being poorly written or just used to make her look even worse (like her grotesque rape story turning into her using her rape to destroy Margo's marriage).  By the last years I don't even know what the hell they were doing. Wasn't there some kind of mother-daughter whoring story with Emily and Alison? Wasn't Emily getting beaten up by johns? Whenever I think of how they wrote for KMH's Emily I'm reminded of Pauline Kael's quote about Ann-Margaret's '60s movie persona - calling her "dirty" and saying the people who made the movies "knew what men wanted to do to her."  Even as much as ATWT started hiring softcore actors in the mid/late '90s, the Emily treatment was on a whole other level. I have never known what audience they thought they were going to be attracting.
    • At this point the options are 1. Leslie is going to be caught out, arrested and jailed. Hit and run, blackmail etc. 2. She gets off due to lack of evidence. Second option keeps her on the show but how are they going to keep her a viable character? No one should want to have anything to do with her. If they keep her around, won't other characters come off looking stupid for putting up with her? I'm interested to see where they go with this character/story and hope not to be disappointed.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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