Interesting that Patricia Mauceri is promoting herself as having created the role of Carlotta Vega when in fact she herself was a recast. The original Carlotta was Lou Dobbs' worst nightmare, a domestic who didn't speak a word of english. English challenged as she was, she did understand everytime her employer, the grand dame of La Boulaie barked at her. Only when the the non-english, non-on camera speaking character/actress assist Dorian in some crime did they recast the role with the stunning, thin and english speaking Mauceri. The original was an aged and " rubenesque " straight out of central casting refugee from " Quinceanera" and "Sin Nombre"
Posts: 1305 | Location: NY.N.Y USA | Registered: September 03, 2002
Are we any closer to getting full scoop on the Austin Peck situation on ATWT? It seems unfair for Peck to have his dirty laundry aired while the married actress he did the deed with enjoys anonymity. And what other factors contributed to the show's disdain for him? It must be major to make him that unpopular. Even Y&R and Victoria Rowell didn't seem to have this level of beef. DAYS seems to agree if they turned him down flat.
As for the star having sexcapades with female friends, apart from sounding wildly inappropriate, is that another reference to AMC's "endowed" nuScott? The Suds Reports and Soapgeists are filled with this kind of dirt; is this behavior par for the course, Nelson, or do you cherry pick the most aberrant weirdness?
Wish I could be as warm and fuzzy as Mimi Torchin on GL's last few weeks. I suppose if I had the history with the show she's had I could be more enthusiastic, but I've only watched the show for about seven or eight years, and the last two or three have been the pits. The endgame is no exception. I hate the Phillip storyline. It feels terribly contrived, and thus manipulative. And they didn't even give him a real disease. At one point they talked about spores, and now there's a radical bone marrow treatment that has never been done before, but his disease (symptom-free up to this point) has been so nebulously defined that any reference to it inspires unintended laughter. Hate that the show's heroine Reva is benched while Jeffrey plays hero in a ridiculous storyline with Edmund. Hate that the Mallet-Marina-Shayne endgame didn't make any sense. I think the Billy-Vanessa engagement was rushed to give us a warm-fuzzies farewell -- better if the show bothered to write for them the last few months.
I'm with her on one aspect, though: I too loved Doris's coming out scene to Ashlee. Orlagh Cassidy and Caitlin Van Zandt were both terrific. But that's the exception and not the rule.
As the show signs off, these last few weeks have felt like hasty, haphazard cleanup, cynically designed to sweep all our angry emotions under the rug and awkwardly supply a happy ending to appease audience uproar. We're angry. We should be angry. And we should stay angry because the perpetrators of the show's death have not been held accountable, and possibly never will. Worse, they're guiding the hatchet men on a Sherman's March to the company's last remaining soap, ATWT.
"A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide." - Roger Ebert, from the introduction to "Awake in the Dark" (2006)
Nelson....has Maria Bell been drinking out of a leftover cup from Lynn Marie Latham??? I fear she is treading down the very same self destructive road that Latham did by killing off yet another member of the core Abbott family.
The show (and the Abbott's) never recovered from John's death. Now, they want to kill off Colleen, a character (and actress) who has finally taking off with viewers. Tammin Sorsuk (i know i botched her name) has been kicking ass as of late. I wasn't thrilled that Bell killed off such a huge staple character like Brad, but now they want to kill off Colleen. For what??? All to reignite the Abbott/Newman feud??
Just by Victor bringing Mary Jane (Patty) to town did that. Why would they kill off yet another character who has ties to a prominent family in Genoa City???
I feel Bell is in panic mode because of all the negative press her show has received over the last few months. Honestly Nel, i think there are too many cooks in the Y&R kitchen these days.
There is no single leader of that show. Bill Bell steered that show successfully ever since it began. When you have one vision, one goal...you are more successful in life.
To me, Rauch, Bell and Sheffer are clearly at odds because the show is suffering terribly.
I say get rid of Rauch and Sheffer, bring in Ed Scott as EP and Kay Alden back as a writer. She was much more successful on Y&R than she ever was on B&B.
And damn, where was Brad Bell's wife Colleen when he was getting all of those smooches from Lang??? LOL You know Brad paid for that when he got home on Emmy night!
Originally posted by MARKPGH: I say get rid of Rauch and Sheffer, bring in Ed Scott as EP and Kay Alden back as a writer. She was much more successful on Y&R than she ever was on B&B.
I agree with everything you said - except Kay Alden. Her Y&R was boring as hell and went nowhere. Nina and Tomas Del Cero arguing over how to write a manuscript? Glow by Jabot kids loitering by the Abbott pool? The stupid Victoria/Gary stalker storyline? Just to name a few of her lame storylines.
I do agree that Y&R needs to can Sheffer and Rauch - and bring back Ed Scott. MAB needs to tighten the reign at Y&R and channel her vision - without the interference of the other cooks in the kitchen.
I wanted Rauch and Sheffer fired before they started. The warning signs were there from the beginning. One good thing that will come out of all of this is some people will stop excusing Sheffer's bad writing by overstating the quality of his tenure on ATWT. Maybe, the LML bashing will finally cease. Was LML the one who decided to kill off John Abbott? I thought the previous regime decided to kill him off.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Crystal,
i don't know if someone mentioned it the other day (and Nelson i think you did) but seriously, how fantastic is Beth Maitland as Tracey. She is the real deal and has such a presence and is very strong and enjoyable to watch.
The interesting angle with this possible upcoming death that I won't name even though i'm sure anyone here seems to be aware that it looks like its happening is seeing Victor have to take responsibility for the events he put in motion by bringing Patty back. The writing for Tracey last week was a small slice of what I'm hoping other people would say more of because she dug into him and it would be nice if a character just screamed at him and he was forced to let it penetrate the surface a bit more because so often he chooses to just stand there - on one hand I know this is the character but it can be SO maddening to watch!
Posts: 38 | Location: NY | Registered: June 20, 2009
Originally posted by Crystal: I wanted Rauch and Sheffer fired before they started. The warning signs were there from the beginning. One good thing that will come out of all of this is some people will stop excusing Sheffer's bad writing by overstating the quality of his tenure on ATWT. Maybe, the LML bashing will finally cease. Was LML the one who decided to kill off John Abbott? I thought the previous regime decided to kill him off.
The interesting thing about both LML and MAB's tenure on Y&R that they both started off so strong. Then it just went downhill (granted MAB still has a few decent storylines on the air). Kinda makes me wanna know why the big discrepency? Is it simply just trying to find/maintain the stamina amidst the pressure of writing 5 episodes a week? I dunno? :T
Originally posted by survivorkylie: The interesting thing about both LML and MAB's tenure on Y&R that they both started off so strong. Then it just went downhill (granted MAB still has a few decent storylines on the air). Kinda makes me wanna know why the big discrepency? Is it simply just trying to find/maintain the stamina amidst the pressure of writing 5 episodes a week? I dunno? :T
I think in both cases it's that there is/was no one to say, "No! You can't do this! No, you must finish this story! No, this is not a good idea. No, tell this storyline beat because you're going too fast!" Plus, both women had praise at the beginning of their tenure [LML won an Emmy months into her reign], and I'm sure (like Carlivati on OLTL and Sheffer on ATWT) that it went to their heads. I read what MAB has to say, and it's shocking to me that she does not see how bad YR is. It's the same feeling I got/get when Carlivati defended the rapemance or defends the character of Stacy.
I also think it's just easy for stories to seem, or be, more exciting when the writing is transitioning into new hands. It's like walking into a room and seeing the furniture's been rearranged. It seems great at first, but then after using it for a while, you may find that some or all of the pieces don't work where they are, and the writer is too attached to the new arrangement, or blinded to its faults, to make the right changes.
Maria's comments from last week were pretty surprising to me. Can she really not see how craptastic some of the things on that show have been, not because of lulls in the action, but because of the stories themselves? The upcoming death is a bad idea as far as I'm concerned. You can't always justify decisions like these with a week of good performances and pseudo-consequences that could easily have been achieved by other means.
Carlivati seems to have the less concerning problem, at least to me, of just not recognizing what of his work is good and what's bad. I think that's understandable, but there should be some way of gauging a story before the fans react poorly to it. I will say, though, I think OLTL is, for the most part, good at making adjustments because of fan reaction to things where appropriate.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: EmmyLoser,
Actually David Chisum and Rebecca Stabb haven't joined the cast of DH they have been cast in an T-Mobile commerical that will air during DH. It will be a continuing soap opera commerical that airs once a week during DH. Their characters from the commerical will also make cameo apperances in DH episodes. so he's not technically going to be on DH.
Praying The Daytime Emmys air on TV in 2010!
Posts: 20043 | Location: just outside Providence, Rhode Island | Registered: July 28, 2002
Just wanted to echo the feeling that Beth Maitland has been WONDERFUL! She always is whenever she's brought back to Genoa City, and that scene with Victor was great. I'm expecting fireworks from her and the rest of the cast with the upcoming death (although I agree that it's a HUGE mistake).
The Abbott siblings are definitely one of the best families on TV. The chemistry between all the actors is unbelievable. If only LML hadn't committed that stupid mistake of killing off John...
Originally posted by 742: Are we any closer to getting full scoop on the Austin Peck situation on ATWT? It seems unfair for Peck to have his dirty laundry aired while the married actress he did the deed with enjoys anonymity. And what other factors contributed to the show's disdain for him? It must be major to make him that unpopular. Even Y&R and Victoria Rowell didn't seem to have this level of beef. DAYS seems to agree if they turned him down flat.
As for the star having sexcapades with female friends, apart from sounding wildly inappropriate, is that another reference to AMC's "endowed" nuScott? The Suds Reports and Soapgeists are filled with this kind of dirt; is this behavior par for the course, Nelson, or do you cherry pick the most aberrant weirdness?
Wish I could be as warm and fuzzy as Mimi Torchin on GL's last few weeks. I suppose if I had the history with the show she's had I could be more enthusiastic, but I've only watched the show for about seven or eight years, and the last two or three have been the pits. The endgame is no exception. I hate the Phillip storyline. It feels terribly contrived, and thus manipulative. And they didn't even give him a real disease. At one point they talked about spores, and now there's a radical bone marrow treatment that has never been done before, but his disease (symptom-free up to this point) has been so nebulously defined that any reference to it inspires unintended laughter. Hate that the show's heroine Reva is benched while Jeffrey plays hero in a ridiculous storyline with Edmund. Hate that the Mallet-Marina-Shayne endgame didn't make any sense. I think the Billy-Vanessa engagement was rushed to give us a warm-fuzzies farewell -- better if the show bothered to write for them the last few months.
I'm with her on one aspect, though: I too loved Doris's coming out scene to Ashlee. Orlagh Cassidy and Caitlin Van Zandt were both terrific. But that's the exception and not the rule.
As the show signs off, these last few weeks have felt like hasty, haphazard cleanup, cynically designed to sweep all our angry emotions under the rug and awkwardly supply a happy ending to appease audience uproar. We're angry. We should be angry. And we should stay angry because the perpetrators of the show's death have not been held accountable, and possibly never will. Worse, they're guiding the hatchet men on a Sherman's March to the company's last remaining soap, ATWT.
Why are you watching Guiding Light?
WILLIAM PETERSEN: Well, this is a shock. The only explanation for this is that somehow in the last year, every one of you tried to act with rubber gloves and tweezers.
Posts: 6619 | Location: NY | Registered: December 01, 2002
Originally posted by 742: Are we any closer to getting full scoop on the Austin Peck situation on ATWT? It seems unfair for Peck to have his dirty laundry aired while the married actress he did the deed with enjoys anonymity. And what other factors contributed to the show's disdain for him? It must be major to make him that unpopular. Even Y&R and Victoria Rowell didn't seem to have this level of beef. DAYS seems to agree if they turned him down flat.
As for the star having sexcapades with female friends, apart from sounding wildly inappropriate, is that another reference to AMC's "endowed" nuScott? The Suds Reports and Soapgeists are filled with this kind of dirt; is this behavior par for the course, Nelson, or do you cherry pick the most aberrant weirdness?
Wish I could be as warm and fuzzy as Mimi Torchin on GL's last few weeks. I suppose if I had the history with the show she's had I could be more enthusiastic, but I've only watched the show for about seven or eight years, and the last two or three have been the pits. The endgame is no exception. I hate the Phillip storyline. It feels terribly contrived, and thus manipulative. And they didn't even give him a real disease. At one point they talked about spores, and now there's a radical bone marrow treatment that has never been done before, but his disease (symptom-free up to this point) has been so nebulously defined that any reference to it inspires unintended laughter. Hate that the show's heroine Reva is benched while Jeffrey plays hero in a ridiculous storyline with Edmund. Hate that the Mallet-Marina-Shayne endgame didn't make any sense. I think the Billy-Vanessa engagement was rushed to give us a warm-fuzzies farewell -- better if the show bothered to write for them the last few months.
I'm with her on one aspect, though: I too loved Doris's coming out scene to Ashlee. Orlagh Cassidy and Caitlin Van Zandt were both terrific. But that's the exception and not the rule.
As the show signs off, these last few weeks have felt like hasty, haphazard cleanup, cynically designed to sweep all our angry emotions under the rug and awkwardly supply a happy ending to appease audience uproar. We're angry. We should be angry. And we should stay angry because the perpetrators of the show's death have not been held accountable, and possibly never will. Worse, they're guiding the hatchet men on a Sherman's March to the company's last remaining soap, ATWT.
Why are you watching Guiding Light?
Partly out of habit, but mostly out of loyalty to a medium it helped invent. It's a great legacy, even though I've watched it for less than a decade, and I want to see it through to the end. However, that does not preclude me from discussing the sorry state it's in thanks to those who have run it into the ground.
I don't know why we should single out my comments among the many posters who express dissatisfaction over the shows; if we all stopped watching the soaps that were letting us down, may as well shut down this forum today.
"A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide." - Roger Ebert, from the introduction to "Awake in the Dark" (2006)
Because you hate 99% of everythingon GL (and are not paid to watch it) the only thing your comments on GL bring up to me is why do you watch it?
WILLIAM PETERSEN: Well, this is a shock. The only explanation for this is that somehow in the last year, every one of you tried to act with rubber gloves and tweezers.
Posts: 6619 | Location: NY | Registered: December 01, 2002
I've answered the question more than once. Either you accept my answer or you don't.
"A movie is not good because it arrives at conclusions you share, or bad because it does not. A movie is not about what it is about. It is about how it is about it: about the way it considers its subject matter, and about how its real subject may be quite different from the one it seems to provide." - Roger Ebert, from the introduction to "Awake in the Dark" (2006)
