Jump to content

GH: May 2024 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Was that his real life wife in the scene with him?

5.21.2024

HW: Elizabeth Korte & Patrick Mulcahey

BDW: Chris Van Etten

SW: Stacey Pulwer

DIR: Jillian DeDotte

I say make Charlotte Gibson currently a SW, the new HW. 

Positions held[edit]

All My Children

  • Script Writer (1997-2001)

As the World Turns

  • Breakdown Writer, Headwriting Team (2002-2005)

Days of Our Lives

  • Breakdown Writer (2006-2008)

General Hospital

  • Script Writer (June 30, 2016 – present)

Guiding Light (Hired by David Kreizman)

  • Breakdown Writer, Headwriting Team (October 2005 - August, 2006)
Edited by John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Yup.  Robin/Jason didn't have love scenes for years because of obvious reasons.  They weren't overtly hot like, say, Sonny/Brenda, but they had passion and love and tenderness that was visible and you believed their love.  It's not impossible to do.  JS/AS just seem overtly against even showing that undercurrent.  Perhaps it's out of respect for their partners.  I am truly not judging anyone for their beliefs, but at some point the line has to be drawn.  This just isn't the job/pairing/lifestyle for you if that's how you want to portray yourself on camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don’t think it’s a fireable offense if the EP/network didn’t outline these expectations before contracting these actors. It’s on the EP for catering a role to an actor’s preference and the limitations that entails. 

But if the expectations were outlined to the actors and there is no specific clause in their contract against it, then yes, I do consider it a fireable offense to not play what’s written - at the end of the day, it’s network TV, not porn. 

I don’t think the characters should have to mirror the actors personal beliefs if it’s not consistent with who those characters are, but I don’t excuse the EP/network from this if this is a limitation they’ve gotten the show into and now have to work around. 

Edited by BetterForgotten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'll be honest, I think it should be.  No one should be forced to do anything, but at some point the job might just not fit your needs anymore.  Many soap stars have been fired for less.  

I could see if it was really objectionable content, but two married fictional people faking a fictional love scene for a few minutes does  not cross that line for me.

But at least there would be a free role for GT to take if AS gets the boot!  

Please register in order to view this content

Edited by carolineg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I, personally, don’t care one way or another if AS is fired or remains for the record. 

I don’t particularly think she brings anything unique to the table and I think BLQ can be played by a dozen other actresses sufficiently. This has nothing to do with how she plays love scenes however. 

Edited by BetterForgotten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But, that opens the door for an HR shoot in the #MeToo era. It's just too messy and too uncomfortable for me to justify firing a female actor for refusing to film love-making scenes. Clearly, the job fits her needs without doing the love scenes, otherwise, I do think she'd quit of her own choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I get your point.  It does makes sense and it is a slippery slope with all of this.   I think I'd have more sympathy if AS was newer to the business or didn't know how soaps worked.  She does and chooses to openly speak out about how she basically dictates the character of Brook Lynn.   To me it's still crossing the line of an actor having too much say in a character vs. a modesty issue.   I misspoke.  The job perhaps fits HER needs at this point, but not the shows.

I think the show could do a lot better with casting Brook Lynn, but GH has many more pressing problems at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why?

I...tend to agree. 

This is a tricky situation, especially in the post-#MeToo era.  For better or for worse, love scenes have become an intrinsic part of the storytelling on soaps, so to have an actor or actors refuse to participate in those kinds of scenes on ANY grounds is, well, frustrating, lol.

But, on the other hand, if you fire an actor simply because they won't do love scenes, or because they won't show even a modest amount of skin, you're opening up yourself and your show to lawsuits.  Plain and simple.

IOW: as boring as JS and AS/Chase and BLQ are, we're kind of stuck with them, with how the writers have to write for them, and even with how they choose to play - or, rather, NOT play - even the smallest moments of affection between them, until something changes.

I agree with all of this.  I, too, respect how JS and AS feel, but you can't tell me that it's not tying a lot of other people's hands at the show.

I know that if *I* were HW, I'd be hesitant to write for them AT ALL - let alone something as potentially salacious, say, as an infidelity story - for fear of how they think their kids will respond to the material down the road.  (As if my job was to worry about their kids' emotional well-being, lol.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, there really isn't a "right" answer on how to solve this situation.  I wouldn't outright fire either of them because their beliefs aren't wrong or awful.  I think in less than a year Brook will get pregnant and the show will end up "running out of story" for both characters and let them live happily ever after off screen for awhile.

Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.



  • Recent Posts

    • Nielsen Ratings for this same week 39 years ago May 5-11 1986. North & South Book II mini-series pre-empted a number of ABC shows. What the heck was NBC’s Fast Copy about?    

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • I think the arrival of the Spauldings (Alan/Elizabeth/Phillip) caused the erosion of Sara's character on the show since Elizabeth took over Sara's place in the whole Justin/Jackie story.  Sara's brief marriage to another deceptive man sounded like it paled in comparison to the previous deceptive man story that she had played the decade beforehand.. and it was probably done because of the whole Alan/Jackie/Mike/Elizabeth cluster that took off story wise.   I know the show had introduced Brandy, the woman Justin cheated on Jackie with... but I don't believe she lasted more than a year.. and didn't make much of an impression. While the Dobson's were good at writing/juggling multiple characters/stories.. they weren't perfect though they did manage to make use of characters not in the front burner like Sara, Ann, etc. I do know that Sara/Adam looked to be starting up at the end of the Dobson era with a jealous/regretful Barbara looking on.. which played out during the Roger/Holly rape story and Hollys prison story.   I don't know if Marland was as inspired by that story when he took over
    • If you ever make it to the Paley Center in NYC (fka Museum of TV and Radio), in their viewing room, you can watch Days 1/1/73 featuring Denise Alexander as Susan. It’s her last month on the show before switching to GH.
    • Overall I was impressed with this week and fall out from the revealation.  I am looking forward to seeing the Nicole/Dana showdown next week.  I do wonder if June is going to be tied to Hayley.  
    • I thought Adam and Sara got married? Although I do not remember any mention of her when Adam returned for Blake's weddings. But MA certainly got the short end of the stick storywise, as Marland's obsession with therapy reared it's head. 
    • Didn’t Meg Bennett return to SFT as a writer in the last few years. I always wondered if they tried to get her back as Liza.
    • Millette Alexander got the short end of the stick once they killed off Joe. The Justin thing was a non-starter. Then she was briefly married to Alan's corrupt lawyer and HE was killed off. She was paired briefly with Adam and that ended because she believed Holly over Roger about the rape. Definitely, Marland had zero interest in her except as the therapist for the many, many of his female characters who needed therapy. It's not odd she left the show. One of the rare 1978 episodes on YT shows Alan going to Cedars for a physical check-up. He ends up with Sarah as his doctor. In between making mysoginistic comments about women doctors, he also openly flirts with her. It's very obvious they were chem testing Sarah and Alan. It's a really good scene. Bernau is both obnoxious and charming and Millette is amazing, trying to be pleasant and profesional without rolling her eyes at him, but at the same time maybe a LITTLE bit attracted to him. An interesting what-might-have-been. So it appears the Dobsons were actively looking for someone to pair her with, they just never found the right one for a long-term story.
    • I'm happy to read whatever you provide, @Paul Raven. 

      Please register in order to view this content

       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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