More Dramatic Than the Show: Behind the Scenes

[stealinghome]

I think Kalinda leaves alive, but after a narrow brush with death. Actor availability may also influence how Kalinda exits - Jill Flint's availability, especially. If she's available for AP's last episode, I can see Kalinda being written off with Lana.

Indeed. I've wondered if things with Bishop will explode and Kalinda will be placed into Witness Protection, quasi "riding off into the sunset" with Lana. The real question is if anyone in Chicago knows she's alive (because I too suspect Kalinda will come very close to death, hence my suspicion that it might be WPP).

 

My guess--and this is just a guess--is that the Kings will want to leave Kalinda alive, at least, with the vague hope that maybe AP will make a cameo in the series finale if the stars align.

Edited March 12, 2015 by stealinghome

[Kromm]

Point being, the Kings strung fans of K/A along for a good long time - I bailed out early in S5, but I know other fans who continued to hope through S5 because the Kings would occasionally make these vague comments that something might come up, and then of course they threw in the Alicia phone calls to Kalinda in the aftermath of Will's death. It's only when that didn't actually lead anywhere and S5 ended with the actresses still not having had a scene together that even the diehards gave up. Nobody I know came into S6 thinking it would be any different from S5. And now the Kings want to assure us that there will be something before AP leaves. Oddly I actually do believe them on that, simply because AP is leaving. They'll write some kind of goodbye scene for Alicia and Kalinda. Of course, it might be over the phone, but there'll be something. 

I now HOPE it's over the phone. Here's why,

 

Many TV viewers are suckers.  They don't think much about TV or how it's actually made.  But there's been enough of a public stink over this that if the show ends the relationship with a phone conversation, maybe it will be an Emperor Has No Clothes type moment for a lot of people, where they suddenly realize "hey, I read all those rumors about Julianna Margulies and Archie Panjabi not speaking, so maybe they aren't actually speaking to each other on the other end of those fake phones they put in the actor's hands when they filmed this".

 

Or not.  People generally DO want to be fooled.  It's easier that way.

[CleoCaesar]

This thread is juicier and more entertaining than the past two seasons of the show.

[crashdown]

My personal spec for Kalinda--cracky though it might appear--is that Bishop is going to ask her to take Dylan and disappear, because he realizes that Dylan will be in constant danger if he stays.  I'm not sure why Kalinda would *agree* to this, mind you, but they're' clearly building Dylan up for a major role in whatever is going to happen.  Kalinda leaving to be a soccer mom in Canada (or somewhere) would be about the last thing anyone would have expected, and I think doing that would appeal to the Kings' sense of the perverse.  And that way, her last conversation with Alicia can be for parenting advice (really funny, since Alicia has become about the worst parent ever!).

[Black Knight]

I see what you mean, Kromm - the spectacle of a goodbye between Kalinda and Alicia being conducted over the phone while Kalinda is saying goodbye in person to everyone else would attract the notice of some viewers. But you realize that it's also possible for the show to do a scene where Kalinda and Alicia appear to be in the same room together but really aren't. This show can't manage Orphan Black effects, but it could manage the hoary Another World effects of the 80s and 90s. Since Kalinda and Alicia rarely touched even when they were best friends, it wouldn't be hard at all. And like you said, there's been a public stink, so the show just might resort to that if they still can't get JM and AP onset together. Normally I would think that's completely nuts, but this has all been so unprecedented that who knows? If you had told me before all this that it was possible for a TV show that revolves around one character to have one of the other major characters not appear in a scene with the main character for two seasons' worth of episodes, I would not have believed you. There have been many feuds between coworkers on TV sets, but they've always had to keep working together until/unless one of them is dropped from the show. Going to these lengths, and for so long, is indeed new ground for TV.

 

crashdown, I've thought about the possibility of Kalinda taking Dylan too. The Kings might even have her and Dylan and Bishop go off all together - kind of like that time Sweeney decided to have a relationship with the woman who was suing him for paternity after stealing his sperm. It is cracky, but like you say, the Kings do have a sense of the perverse.

 

There's also the matter of Matt Czuchry, as it happens - at the start of this season he was noncommittal about whether he would return for a seventh season if there was one and if the show wanted him. I really doubt Cary gets written off in the season finale, but it isn't completely out of the question.

[crashdown]

I'm sure that Cary isn't being written off--he's popular, and he was one of the featured cast members at Paley LA.  And yes, I've also considered that Bishop might leave with Kalinda and Dylan, which would have hilarious sitcom potential.  But I don't think so--I think if it happens, Bishop is going to make a sacrifice to ensure Dylan's safety.  Kalinda has said that she doesn't want to be doing "this" ten years from now.  Raising a kid is about as far from "this" as it gets!

[Noreaster]

In a word: yes. For a while it was just Kalinda/Kalicia fans who noticed. But the Kings have been asked about, it in multiple interviews, by just about every major TV site at this point. Buzzfeed even ran an article on it. So, while I understand that it may not stand out to some people, it's been very noticeable to a pretty large chunk of the audience for a while now.

I guess I meant for viewers who don't pay attention to internet chatter, how many actually notice anything awry with the show?  I wonder if most people like myself, who were not invested in the Alicia/Kalinda relationship, really care much.  The show clearly didn't want to make an issue of it by inserting all those Alicia/Kalinda phone scenes.  Actually, for the vast majority of my TV-watching, I avoid the discussion boards and interviews and such. I'm usually happy to go with the showrunners' vision and the stories they want to tell. I go hard-core on a couple of reality TV competition shows but rarely for the fictional shows.  

 

I mean, this is all fun gossipy stuff, but it's probably nowhere as big a deal as some are making it out to be.  

Edited March 12, 2015 by Noreaster

[milkyaqua]

I actually like the idea of Kalinda with a kid.

 

I doubt Matt C is going anywhere either.  He has said regarding the Kalinda exit that he has no idea as far as how they resolve their relationship how it works out.  He said that he'd seen scripts for epi 21 and 22 and nothing so far.

 

Like I said ealier, right now, they need to tie up their loose plot ends by the time this season is over (the SA race in particular).  Their last season shouldn't be about trying to sort out the nonsense from this season.

[photo fox]

I'm not invested in the Alicia/Kalinda relationship at all, but I've noticed it. Not because of the number of episodes, but there have definitely been scenes that I felt, based on history, both women should have been in. I've already mentioned the lack of Kalinda at Will's memorial. But also so many times this season! Kalinda was totally entwined in the Cary trial storyline, and often that meant Alicia was absent from those scenes for the weakest of reasons. It really made Alicia look bad to me, because it made it seem like she didn't really care that her partner was on the brink of going to prison. She was basically like, "oh, that's an interesting development, phone me when it's over." I can only think that without the AP/JM "thing", Alicia would have been a bigger part of that fight.

I think it also accounts for the massive divide between the "law stuff" and the "politics stuff" that's been happening this season. Since Cary and Kalinda are whatever they are, and the first half of the season Dianne was wrapped up over there as well because of the trial, they've basically created a whole second cast of characters for Alicia to interact with. I almost feel like I'm watching two different shows at times. Peter was better integrated into the law stories in the first few seasons than Alicia is now, and CN is just recurring!

[Noreaster]

Fair enough.  Some people notice, some people don't.  Due to reading these boards, I realized the issue about a year ago and haven't been able to ignore it since then.  At the same time, the Kalinda character is dispensable to me so I don't really care all that much.  

 

However, in response to some of your other points, I disagree quite a bit.  If I'm understanding correctly, it seems like you're suggesting that whole storylines are being dictated by the JM/AP discord. I agree last season when Will died, that not having Alicia and Kalinda together in the same scene (besides the phone calls) is reflective of the behind-the-scenes stuff. And there are probably scenes here and there written in ways to accommodate this issue. But trying to attribute whole plotlines to the JM/AP stuff? I don't know about that. 

 

The law and political divide makes a lot of sense to me. The show can't really develop the political story if Alicia is in court all the time.  Maybe our differing views are a function of how one feels about the storylines. I have liked a lot of episodes this season. I'm quite in favor of the Alicia election path and the additional actors and characters involved in that plot. I also feel the Alicia character is becoming more and more unlikable as time goes on, but I actually like that and think the showrunners are deliberately taking the character in this direction.

 

I'm sort of done with the legal stuff in terms of what it means for the Alicia character.  They have already proven she's an excellent lawyer. What else is there to show?  The law stuff these days seems to be more about the guest stars, quirky judges, etc. They probably need to start pitting Alicia against some of the other leads.  The show did that with the Florrick/Agos split.  But then Will died so the show had to change direction and went back to merging the firms.  Now it's Alicia running for office and going against the strong David Hyde Pierce character. I enjoy seeing that and I like DHP a lot . This storyline also serves to advance Alicia in a Hilary-direction (which I like), but the writers may also be looking to pit the character against the other leads in court eventually (assuming Alicia wins, this storyline sets up for next season's court cases). The SA against Diane/Cary/etc.

 

Anyway, this is my really long-winded way of saying these storylines make a ton of sense to me.  Sorry I rambled.  I just don't agree that the show and the writing is hampered by the JM/AP stuff as much as everyone is saying.  The show is pushing the Alicia character forward in pretty significant ways in my opinion, and the Kalinda character doesn't really fit in the Alicia growth trajectory. 

Edited March 12, 2015 by Noreaster

[GHScorpiosRule]

Here's the thing. For me, anyway.  It has been mentioned by others on this thread, but I will give at least two examples, which is why I have the opinion I do about the Kings and Julianna Margulies.

 

I didn't know this back in the day, well because, I wasn't alive...but in I Love Lucy, it was a well known fact that William Frawley and Vivian Vance could not STAND each other. Yet they continued on, being professional and did their job. Same with Lucille Ball and Vivian. I don't know that they hated each other, because in later years, I read in this one book I have, that they became close.  That's called being Professional and doing your job, and leaving your personalities stuffed away somewhere else.

 

Now it wasn't until I got the DVDS for Remington Steele, that someone told me that Pierce Brosnan and Stephanie Zimbalist didn't get along.  You couldn't prove it by me, from the episodes I watched.  It was Doris Roberts who revealed that tidbit in the interviews.

 

I wasn't a regular watcher of Moonlighting, but even I heard how Bruce Willis and Cybill Shepard didn't get along. Not sure if it came through on the show or not or what.

 

My long winded point is, that both Margulies and Panjabi should have left whatever personal feelings they had at the door and just done the job.  Of course, based on everything I've read and heard (interviews), it seems that it was Margulies who refused to do this.  And the Kings just let her.  They are the show runners; the creators. They should have put their foot down with Margulies.  Unless when she became producer, she took so much of the pie that she can tell them what she'll do and what she won't?

 

She ain't all that.  This was an ensemble show.  It's been proven Margulies can't carry a show on her bloody own.Canterbury Law anyone?

 

So basically, I don't care who had a problem with whom. They ALL should have just shown up for work and done their fucking job.

 

Oh yes, Chris Noth? He and George Dzundza, who played Max Greevey in the first season of Law & Order? Butted heads and didn't like each other, either. But they did their fucking job. And Dzundza left because he was told/thought the show would be filmed in Vancouver, which was closer to his family, than New York, so left after the first season.

 

Then there was that Writer's Room show that used to come on Sundance. Last year, they were talking about The Good Wife. And the ONLY people from that show that appeared? The Kings, Margulies (naturally!!! [insert sarcasm]) and a couple of producers. No sign of Baranski, Czuchry, Josh, Archie...you know the other cast members that also had part in making this show a hit? It was ALL.ABOUT.ALICIA. She's the STAH, don'tchaknow.  And that slap she gave Peter in the pilot? That was a REAL slap; Margulies didn't pull her punches with that.  What I found most insulting to my intelligence was the producers saying that they had legal advisors and that what they put out on the show, was "realistic."  And this producer should know because he used to be a lawyer.

[milkyaqua]

Oh, yes.  I'm old enough to have heard about the drama behind-the-scenes on I Love Lucy.  According to Tallulah Bankhead who was one of the last guest stars towards the end of the show's run, she said the tension was so thick on that set you could cut it with a knife.  And Vivian Vance and Lucille Ball did go on to star in The Lucy Show until Vance's death.

 

There have been shenanigans on shows forever.  Don't forget that in addition to Moonlighting, that Cybill Shepard didn't love the attention that Christine Baranski got on the Cybill show.

 

As has been said, if it's something you were paying attention to, the Alicia/Kalinda not sharing scenes on screen is noticeable regardless of the "you slept with my husband" thing since we've all worked with (some people anyway) we'd just as soon push down a flight of stairs (or maybe that's just me) but you still interact  because you have to.

 

And as for the Alicia going in a different path from the legal stuff, sure, I could get behind that.  But frankly, I think TPTB have bungled it.  Alicia had an initial reason for running for SA but now exactly what is her reason?  It also hasn't helped that it seems as though the Kings have just thrown stuff at the wall to see what would stick and gone with that instead of made it cohesive.  Which brings us to their last few interviews where they have addressed this themselves when asked about it (implying that other people have noticed the chaos as well) and said, oh, all the confusion is intentional.  Okay.  Fine.  It's intentional.  Fix it.  Although claiming something was intentional is par for the course with them.  Every time someone has asked them about why this or that seems so messy, they go into their, "Oh, that's the way we planned it," mode and "the audience just doesn't get it."  Once maybe, but this seems to happen frequently with them.

Edited March 12, 2015 by milkyaqua

[Noreaster]

Agreed that the Kings' word is not really to be trusted. They've bungled a bunch of storylines, randomly dropped some without explanation, spin things quite a bit in interviews, etc. Which is why I say how can we trust anything they say ever? Many of these "JM is at fault" arguments center around the Kings' interviews.

[Maherjunkie]

 

nd that slap she gave Peter in the pilot? That was a REAL slap; Margulies didn't pull her punches with that.  What I found most insulting to my intelligence was the producers saying that they had legal advisors and that what they put out on the show, was "realistic."  And this producer should know because he used to be a lawyer.

How do you know?  Chris said it was much ado about nothing.  Was there animosity between the two?

[GHScorpiosRule]

How do you know?  Chris said it was much ado about nothing.  Was there animosity between the two?

 

Because Margulies said it was a real slap, that she put her whole hand/arm into it. I'm not saying there was any animosity between them; just that the slap was REAL and not Hollywood "faked.'

[tinderbox]

I guess I meant for viewers who don't pay attention to internet chatter, how many actually notice anything awry with the show?  I wonder if most people like myself, who were not invested in the Alicia/Kalinda relationship, really care much.  The show clearly didn't want to make an issue of it by inserting all those Alicia/Kalinda phone scenes.  Actually, for the vast majority of my TV-watching, I avoid the discussion boards and interviews and such. I'm usually happy to go with the showrunners' vision and the stories they want to tell. I go hard-core on a couple of reality TV competition shows but rarely for the fictional shows.  

 

I mean, this is all fun gossipy stuff, but it's probably nowhere as big a deal as some are making it out to be.

I haven't missed an episode of TGW. Count me as one of those viewers who knew nothing about this AP/JM stuff until yesterday when I came to this board, to catch up. Now that I've read every post dedicated to this subject, I feel stupid for not seeing what has been happening, right in front of my eyes, for TWO seasons. My, God! HOW could I have missed this?

I will admit to finding it odd that Kalinda and Alicia didn't actually share any scenes when Will died. I remember almost longing for a scene between the two characters but must have been pacified by their telephone exchanges.

My reaction to this conflict is complete surprise, for sure, but more importantly I'm disgusted by the fact that two professional actors couldn't suck it up and do their jobs....for the sake of the show and for their own reputations. I have no idea whose "fault" this is or why/how it all happened. I almost don't care!

[Ohmo]

I almost feel like I'm watching two different shows at times. Peter was better integrated into the law stories in the first few seasons than Alicia is now, and CN is just recurring!

 

Agreed.  I loved The West Wing, so I could totally get behind a political campaign.  I'm probably one of the few people who liked S6 of WW (the campaign between Alan Alda's character and the one played by Jimmy Smits.)  However, I HATE Alicia's campaign this season (with the exception of Marissa. I like her.)  I think that the campaign completely makes Alicia look inept and in over her head.  Julianna gave an interview to CBS This Morning where she said that she loves being out of the courtroom because the shooting days are so long in court.  However, that's where I think the character of Alicia should be.  That is her strength, in my opinion.  I get the distinct sense that Julianna and the Kings are currently crafting some sort of vision this season, but it's seriously not working for me.  I just watched "Dark Money" and am behind by one episode.  From some of the comments that i've read, the episode is an acquired taste.  I'm sort of dreading it.

 

As to the Archie and Julianna issue, the example that comes to mind for me is Mandy Pantakin and Thomas Gibson from Criminal Minds.  I stopped watching that show early on, but I was well aware that the two men got to a point where they did not share scenes.  In my opinion, when that happens for a prolonged period of time, something is UP, and I'm not talking about the story.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Ohmo

[Noreaster]

Because Margulies said it was a real slap, that she put her whole hand/arm into it. I'm not saying there was any animosity between them; just that the slap was REAL and not Hollywood "faked.'

I think your earlier post suggested there was animosity by JM.  Along with the writer's room show on Sundance example.  Which I don't really get why it's bad.  JM is indeed the star of the show.  And that type of show seems like it's more appropriate to include writers and producers rather than multiple cast members.  But then again I don't watch that show.  

 

I haven't missed an episode of TGW. Count me as one of those viewers who knew nothing about this AP/JM stuff until yesterday when I came to this board, to catch up. Now that I've read every post dedicated to this subject, I feel stupid for not seeing what has been happening, right in front of my eyes, for TWO seasons. My, God! HOW could I have missed this?

I will admit to finding it odd that Kalinda and Alicia didn't actually share any scenes when Will died. I remember almost longing for a scene between the two characters but must have been pacified by their telephone exchanges.

Yeah, I think if I never read these boards, I might still be unaware.  But once made aware, it's hard to not notice.  

[Darian]

 

 

Then there was that Writer's Room show that used to come on Sundance. Last year, they were talking about The Good Wife. And the ONLY people from that show that appeared? The Kings, Margulies (naturally!!! [insert sarcasm]) and a couple of producers. No sign of Baranski, Czuchry, Josh, Archie...you know the other cast members that also had part in making this show a hit? It was ALL.ABOUT.ALICIA. She's the STAH, don'tchaknow.   

I wouldn't read into that. I've watched every episode of The Writers' Room, and there is usually only one actor from whatever show they're featuring. I think once or twice, there were two. For Dexter, Michael C. Hall was the only cast member to appear. For Breaking Bad, Bryan Cranston was the only actor. American Horror Story, Lily Rabe. Parks and Rec, Amy Poehler. Etc. 

Edited March 13, 2015 by Darian

[maraleia]

The thing is the Kings and JM are the perfect example of accolades going to one's head and it's affecting the show. Since Christine Baranski has said nothing about it I believe that she was the wronged one during the run of Cybill Shepard's show and has, unfortunately, been victim to the fallout on this show. Just look at her screen time and the stories they've given her. They haven't been substantive for quite awhile and I believe that JM is afraid of CB's talent so much that Alicia has to be the center of the universe all the time.

I'm also sick of the Kings having the same guest stars back when their story has reached its logical conclusion just because they are prestige talent. Maybe I'm just getting tired of shows that think too highly of themselves. It also bothers me that JM has refused to get on twitter because most stars of shows are on twitter and promote the show that way. It's like she is too good for it or she can't handle dealing with the public so she avoids it at all costs.

[CleoCaesar]

I'm also sick of the Kings having the same guest stars back when their story has reached its logical conclusion just because they are prestige talent.

 

Preach it. The same idiotic guest stars over and over again. Really, who at this point goes, "Yay Colin Sweeney!" Or "yay Louis Canning!". Elspeth Tascioni. Patty Nyholm. Neil Gross. Nancy Crozier. Viola Walsh. Literally any of the judges. Hell, Lamont Bishop. Any of those repeat guest stars gets a Pavlovian "oh for eff's sake, not him/her again".

 

The Kings really think they are so quirky and hip, and that viewers just love the same schtick repeated over and over again. Spoiler alert: wrong.

[Reishe]

 I have no idea whose "fault" this is or why/how it all happened. I almost don't care!

I understand what you mean. And if it didn't affect our perception of the actors' future work, I'd agree that it didn't matter at all. But I would be careful about assuming both actors are prima donnas. It could be that only one of them has a problem and the other is simply the object of their displeasure; in that case, the writers/showrunners may just take the easy way out and avoid putting the two in the same room. And as has been mentioned above, if the obstinate party is JM, she is also the person with the power, being the top-billed actor plus exec. producer.

[milkyaqua]

As for frequent guest stars, Mike Colter (Bishop) and Carrie Preston (Tascioni) have both been cast in upcoming shows.  So their availability for say, the final season may not be guaranteed.

 

 

 

Since Christine Baranski has said nothing about it I believe that she was the wronged one during the run of Cybill Shepard's show...

 

I think most of us who watched and followed the show pretty much came to this conclusion from the start.

 

 

 

And as has been mentioned above, if the obstinate party is JM, she is also the person with the power, being the top-billed actor plus exec. producer.

 

Yes, a reasonable conclusion for some.  She's the titular star even if TPTB try and sell this as an ensemble, it's JM's show so-to-speak.  Everyone else is part of an ensemble and except with perhaps attributes/nuances they add to their characters, they are on a lower rung than JM.  Which isn't to say she has so much power as to be able to dictate everything going on with the show.  Sometimes the network will put their two cents in (the Kings have said the network would prefer it if the show had a broader appeal) and well we see how well that worked for season two of Sleepy Hollow...

Edited March 14, 2015 by milkyaqua

[LakeLover]

I mentioned this before, but in a former life, I wrote reviews for ER. I had the opportunity to meet with a producer, and we had breakfast together. We talked openly about the show, and one of the things he said was, "Julianna is a bit of a princess." That's all I have to offer here :)

[Noreaster]

I understand what you mean. And if it didn't affect our perception of the actors' future work, I'd agree that it didn't matter at all. But I would be careful about assuming both actors are prima donnas. It could be that only one of them has a problem and the other is simply the object of their displeasure; in that case, the writers/showrunners may just take the easy way out and avoid putting the two in the same room. And as has been mentioned above, if the obstinate party is JM, she is also the person with the power, being the top-billed actor plus exec. producer.

Likewise, if it turns out that AP is the primary cause of the conflict, then it may be harmful to JM's reputation to speculate that JM is equally or more responsible.  

 

I'm not quite sure if this is worth bringing up, but here goes. I feel that many times, stronger women tend to get the brunt of the blame or held to higher standards. Not saying that's what's happening here in The Good Wife speculation, but in the media and in a lot of industries, many strong women with any sort of power are often characterized as divas or bitches or whatever. Men in similar positions are not usually criticized to the same extent. I wonder if some people are quick to blame JM simply because between her and AP, she is the woman with more power. 

 

Let me propose another theory. At some point, the show made the decision to discontinue the Alicia/Kalinda friendship for storyline reasons. Maybe it was because JM felt strongly about it. Or maybe the Kings changed their minds. Or maybe it was the network and outside influences. We all know that the premise of the show is based on real-life political wives.  Could someone not directly involved in the show feel strongly enough about the Alicia/Kalinda storyline to get the network to nix it? Say a political wife that feels like it would have negative implications on her real life.  Hey, anything's possible. 

 

Regardless, let's go with the idea that it was simply a storyline decision to nix the Alicia/Kalinda friendship and that the two actresses got along just fine on the set.  But now, AP is pissed about it because she feels that it hurts her character and her visibility on the show.  She makes a big stink about it.  She complains to the writers and the producers.  Maybe she even assumes JM dislikes her. The showrunners tell her it's just a storyline decision and it's nothing personal.  AP is not happy and can't overcome this to do even small scenes with JM in a civil manner.  The producers/the writers/JM/whoever say screw it.  Let's write around it.  And here we are.  

 

So what do you all think about this theory?  I say no less plausible than the others touted here.  

[Kromm]

So what do you all think about this theory?  I say no less plausible than the others touted here.  

I don't think it's nearly as plausible, because as popular as Kalinda is as a character, it STILL would have been easier (and ultimately probably FAR less damaging) to simply fire Archie, if that were the case.  The show is not called "The Good Investigator", after all.

[stealinghome]

This. If the root of the problem was all Panjabi, why wouldn't the show just have fired her like a season (or even two seasons) ago? Moreover, if she's the one who caused her and Margulies to be unable to film together, then why on earth would Panjabi still be saying she wants Kalinda/Alicia scenes? If she now dislikes JM so bad that she is the reason they can't act together, it doesn't really make sense that AP would still be stanning for Kalinda/Alicia. Wouldn't she be happy in her JM-less bubble and pushing for it to stay that way? But instead, the facts: Panjabi is consistently on the record as saying she wants more Kalinda/Alicia, and by extension to act alongside JM, while Margulies is on the record as shutting it down constantly. (Also: why wouldn't the show just say STFU and get over it to Panjabi, if she was the problem? What power does Panjabi have to affect things like screentime and character arcs? You know, the kind of power that producers usually have. Because last time I checked, Panjabi had no power like that at all.)

 

Frankly, the fact that the show has kept AP on in this weird limbo for so long is a big sign that the problem is far more with JM. Clearly the Kings were hoping to wait out JM's temper tantrum. If only they knew....

 

I wonder if some people are quick to blame JM simply because between her and AP, she is the woman with more power.

No, I don't think this is right. I would reformulate the sentence slightly: I think many of the posters here are blaming JM over AP because 99.9% of the evidence that we have points to, whatever the origins of the JM/AP feud, the lack of Kalinda/Alicia screentime being entirely JM's fault, and as the woman with more power she is also in a position to let personal grievances dictate storyline and show direction decisions in a type of manner that is clearly occurring, and in a way that, again whatever the origins of the feud, AP has no power to do.

 

ETA: Which is not to say that there isn't, often and obviously, a gendered element to criticism of powerful women. ITA that terms like "diva" or "princess" (not picking on you LakeLover, just using it as an example) get applied to women when similar terms would never be applied to men (who get called, if anything, "difficult"--for the sake of their art the implied subtext, so we're supposed to give them a partial pass, because they're Tortured Artists doncha know?--and I do believe it takes way more bad behavior for men to get called out). But. Conversely, I don't think that means that there aren't powerful women who behave in at best unprofessional ways, and I don't think they should get a free pass for unprofessional behavior, either. So in this case, I don't think JM is being targeted for criticism because she's a powerful woman. I think she's being called out here because, imo, 99.9% of the evidence points to the Alicia/Kalinda embargo being her doing, and it's a majorly unprofessional exertion of her (substantially greater than AP's) power over and at the show.

Edited March 15, 2015 by stealinghome

[l star]

I tend to fall in the way overblown camp. Outside of the projections onto the JM/AP situation, how many negative things have we heard coming out of this set? I remember a lot of positive comments but any negative ones aren't ringing a bell. How many negative things have we heard about JM or AP as professionals? I'm pulling a blank again. I also don't remember hearing anything about different sides among the actors/crew/producers. If JM was this giant diva who is beating up on innocent AP, wouldn't someone else have a problem with JM over it? I think there is definitely tension behind the scenes on the show, but I think it is more likely that this situation is a product of that tension than it is that the JM/AP falling out caused it.

 

We know that Josh Charles had intended to only return for a few eps but JM talked him into staying for 15. Considering from what I've read the production schedule wasn't interrupted, that is a big secret for a lot of people to keep for a long time. A set that is too badly fractured can't pull something like that off.

 

JM does have a lot more power as both the star of the show (the show has a strong ensemble cast but it is not an ensemble show- JM is the star with the ensemble supporting her) and a producer. But it's been six seasons and Alicia still hasn't dumped Peter. JM has disliked that dynamic a lot longer than the A/K one. They've actually gotten more closely linked. I think if you take a lot of factors like JM not liking the A/K dynamic, the backlash over the husband plot, the writers' admitted increasingly hard time finding a spot for Kalinda in the story, their frustration with not getting the recurring guest stars they want for her story, whatever higher up the chain bullshit is going on, and likely a bit of fallout between the actresses and you get this mess.

 

I don't believe that one player in all this mess is to blame for its entirety. There are too many moving parts. That's not to say that JM and AP are innocent either, just that TGW is a business. It's not their personal playground. JM may be above AP in the food chain but there are plenty of people above her with money on the line. If this was as simple as a fight between actresses, it would have been dealt with long ago like it has been with much bigger stars for decades. 

The thing is the Kings and JM are the perfect example of accolades going to one's head and it's affecting the show. Since Christine Baranski has said nothing about it I believe that she was the wronged one during the run of Cybill Shepard's show and has, unfortunately, been victim to the fallout on this show. Just look at her screen time and the stories they've given her. They haven't been substantive for quite awhile and I believe that JM is afraid of CB's talent so much that Alicia has to be the center of the universe all the time.

I'm also sick of the Kings having the same guest stars back when their story has reached its logical conclusion just because they are prestige talent. Maybe I'm just getting tired of shows that think too highly of themselves. It also bothers me that JM has refused to get on twitter because most stars of shows are on twitter and promote the show that way. It's like she is too good for it or she can't handle dealing with the public so she avoids it at all costs.

Alicia is the center of the universe all the time because the show is about Alicia. No matter how strong or likeable the supporting characters are, that is one thing the show has never varied from. This is Alicia's show. And that is not something JM just pulled out of her ass. This show has always been Alicia's show.

 

Your criticism of her with regards to Twitter is reaching a bit for me. She's not a fan of social media. She's said that a dozen times and she is certainly not alone in the world. Though a lot of celebrities use it, it is not to my knowledge considered part of the job description for CBS. I don't think all the actors on TGW even use it.

I mentioned this before, but in a former life, I wrote reviews for ER. I had the opportunity to meet with a producer, and we had breakfast together. We talked openly about the show, and one of the things he said was, "Julianna is a bit of a princess." That's all I have to offer here :)

This doesn't surprise me. She's smart, gorgeous and talented and I think she fully considers herself smart, gorgeous and talented. That doesn't make her a bad person or even a bitch. Just 'a bit of a princess' and not particularly likeable in a lot of ways to those of us looking in from the outside. I am jealous though! There are so many questions I would love to know the gossip about with the early ER cast.

Edited March 15, 2015 by l star

[Noreaster]

I don't think it's nearly as plausible, because as popular as Kalinda is as a character, it STILL would have been easier (and ultimately probably FAR less damaging) to simply fire Archie, if that were the case.  The show is not called "The Good Investigator", after all.

Why would things have to be that extreme? If a creative decision is made to nix the Alicia/Kalinda friendship, then there are already going to be far less scenes between the two characters. Now we're just talking about those few scenes where Alicia would be asking Kalinda to do investigative work.  It's easy to cut them out.  

 

I think the show could cut all those scenes (or turn into phone calls) where Diane is asking Kalinda to do investigative work and I probably wouldn't even notice.  Those scenes are really not that important to the overall story.  

 

This. If the root of the problem was all Panjabi, why wouldn't the show just have fired her like a season (or even two seasons) ago? Moreover, if she's the one who caused her and Margulies to be unable to film together, then why on earth would Panjabi still be saying she wants Kalinda/Alicia scenes? If she now dislikes JM so bad that she is the reason they can't act together, it doesn't really make sense that AP would still be stanning for Kalinda/Alicia. Wouldn't she be happy in her JM-less bubble and pushing for it to stay that way? But instead, the facts: Panjabi is consistently on the record as saying she wants more Kalinda/Alicia, and by extension to act alongside JM, while Margulies is on the record as shutting it down constantly. (Also: why wouldn't the show just say STFU and get over it to Panjabi, if she was the problem? What power does Panjabi have to affect things like screentime and character arcs? You know, the kind of power that producers usually have. Because last time I checked, Panjabi had no power like that at all.)

 

Frankly, the fact that the show has kept AP on in this weird limbo for so long is a big sign that the problem is far more with JM. Clearly the Kings were hoping to wait out JM's temper tantrum. If only they knew....

First, this is taking the word of a biased party. We're now taking AP's word at face value? Second, it's possible that AP wants more Alicia/Kalinda scenes, yet someone else besides JM is making the decision to nix them altogether. Has AP singled out anyone in her comments? If not, why is everyone leaping to the conclusion that JM is calling all the shots?  

 

My scenario is basically that a creative decision was made to end the Alicia/Kalinda friendship. Completely justifiable, regardless of who made the executive call. But this storyline decision understandably led to AP's frustration with the show. There is now tension between AP and JM because AP assumes JM is responsible (which could be true). Maybe JM is annoyed that AP would take this so personally since it's really a professional decision. Whatever. The two now just don't get along. The showrunners/writers then choose to keep AP and JM apart completely because it doesn't make much difference to them. The Alicia/Kalinda friendship is dead anyway.  We're talking about a few inconsequential scenes.  

 

I don't understand why for this scenario to be true, AP would need to be fired. That seems extreme. Instead, the writers can do what they have been doing since. Create other storylines for Kalinda. Integrate Kalinda more with some of the other characters.  All of this has to be done anyway given the loss of the Alicia/Kalinda friendship.  

 

In my scenario, this is very much a professional falling out.  Rather than unnecessarily making anyone a bitch or a diva.  Of course, it's possible that JM is one.  Or AP is one.  Or both.  Again, my problem is that so many people are automatically assuming that JM is a bitch/diva based on very little information. Why is it that JM must be having a temper tantrum?  It just doesn't make sense to me. 

[meisje]

I mentioned this before, but in a former life, I wrote reviews for ER. I had the opportunity to meet with a producer, and we had breakfast together. We talked openly about the show, and one of the things he said was, "Julianna is a bit of a princess." That's all I have to offer here :)

This doesn't surprise me. She's smart, gorgeous and talented and I think she fully considers herself smart, gorgeous and talented. That doesn't make her a bad person or even a bitch. Just 'a bit of a princess' and not particularly likeable in a lot of ways to those of us looking in from the outside. I am jealous though! There are so many questions I would love to know the gossip about with the early ER cast.

 

Very early on when TGW started receiving a lot of critical acclaim and the viewers got on board as well, I think there was some misconception about what it was about the show they loved. For me, it was always about the ensemble and JM/AF was a good cog in that wheel, but I never would have gotten into the show or continued watching if it had become all about the AF character in the first or second season. Sometimes -- often actually -- showrunners, network execs, and stars all get a bit off track about why something is a success. CBS was taking a lot of hits about airing broad crap back in the early TGW days and they wanted to trot out their artsy, critical darling once they realized people wanted more. I think they just got very confused about what the "more" was that people wanted. The division between what the press picks up as the rave/success and what people actually love about a project are so rarely the same.

 

I get a bit confused trying to think of what work Julianna has done that makes her the obvious star (other than classic execs' tunnel vision). Yes, I recall her in ER, but much of her fame from that roll had to do with her being the love interest for George Clooney and leaving the show early when he was essentially gone for good and her character was quickly losing ground without George around. It also had a lot to do with ER being a new type of drama, and an ensemble above all. When did JM carry a show or movie? I honestly just can't recall a time. I'm sure she's raking Chase money in with a tractor, but it's not exactly Emmy worthy.

 

Last year, when interviewed after Josh left the show, Julianna made a remark about how Josh's contract was shorter than the standard contract and how she wanted his agent and his deal, and she was really emphatic about that as though she was being held back in some way. I started to really wonder about the cracks in the show then, given that sort of delusion. I mean, okay, let her have a shorter contract so she can go make another Ghost Ship or whatever she did before TGW; there really wasn't a degree of fame or offers to make her the de facto lead here. And personally, I have zero preference about whether a man or woman gets the accolades or takes heat for being a dick to work with, so I have no horse in that race. My horse was in TGW being unique and an enjoyable, intelligent and ensemble show.

 

There's also the matter of Matt Czuchry, as it happens - at the start of this season he was noncommittal about whether he would return for a seventh season if there was one and if the show wanted him. I really doubt Cary gets written off in the season finale, but it isn't completely out of the question.

 

I'm sorry to say I'd be happy as a clam for Matt to go, though I would end up all pretzel-y from crossing all of my fingers, toes, arms and legs that he could get another good role, because he's going to be the final reason I tune in if I manage to make it through this season. I love many of the actors, though not many have appeared in this season or for more than a few minutes, but I'm confident Christine B and Alan C and many more will land more roles and it would be a delight just to see them get the lines/screen time they did a season ago. I mean, these are people who have true star power and the careers to back it up, and whose personalities are never the story (hurrah!). If some balance can't be restored for a season 7, then screw it. I don't own stock in Chase or JM, so get it to-fucking-gether writers...

[CleoCaesar]

I get a bit confused trying to think of what work Julianna has done that makes her the obvious star

 

Well the show is called The Good Wife and she plays the good wife. :) On a more serious note, she was in 135 episodes of ER. That is 5+ years of being on one of the biggest network hits ever. She had tons of visibility and name recognition. This entire show was molded around the character of Alicia Florrick, so naturally her portrayer is going to be the obvious star of the show.

[Ohmo]

In my scenario, this is very much a professional falling out.  Rather than unnecessarily making anyone a bitch or a diva.  Of course, it's possible that JM is one.  Or AP is one.  Or both.  Again, my problem is that so many people are automatically assuming that JM is a bitch/diva based on very little information. Why is it that JM must be having a temper tantrum?  It just doesn't make sense to me. 

 

The only point where I agree with you is that this is a professional falling out.  If it is true that Archie has said that she wants more Kalinda/Alicia scenes, that further supports my belief that Julianna, while bitch may be a strong word, is at least throwing her professional weight around.  If these two professional women are having a squabble, the producers aren't saying, "Fine, you two don't get along.  Noted.  The Kalinda/Alicia friendship is popular.  At the very least, the two characters should share scenes together even if they are never again the best of friends.  So, we're going to do some scenes together (Archie) and sometimes Alicia and Kalinda won't be together (Julianna).  That has not happened.  Temper tantrum?  Maybe, maybe not, but things are going in the way that Julianna wants them to go.  Which kind of blends into my point with the second quote. 

 

(I know the second quote is by another poster.  My response to both has kind of blended together.)

 

Well the show is called The Good Wife and she plays the good wife. :) On a more serious note, she was in 135 episodes of ER. That is 5+ years of being on one of the biggest network hits ever. She had tons of visibility and name recognition. This entire show was molded around the character of Alicia Florrick, so naturally her portrayer is going to be the obvious star of the show.

 

 

TGW is a CBS show.  Many CBS shows have a formula where the cast rotates around the star.  They are not really ensemble shows in the way that viewers think that they are.  To take this away from the idea that Julianna is a woman, I'm going to bring up an example where I know this to be true where it involves a man: Mark Harmon on NCIS.  Don't kid yourself: NCIS runs in the way that Mark wants it to run.  That's not rumor.  That's not speculation.  That's fact.  Mark and the first EP (and creator of the show) got into a very public dispute about the way the show was managed.  Mark threatened to quit.  The EP was bounced instead.  When NCIS: LA was spun off, Mark noted that he wasn't a particular fan.  He appeared on LA once, and to my knowledge, has not returned.  He loved the idea of the New Orleans spin-off, and coincidentally, he's a producer of that show.  Michael Weatherley, Pauley Perrette, and Sean Murray have all gone on record, in digital and print sources, as saying that they all know that Mark heads the show.  Michael Weatherly (who could get a leading role n his own show if he so wished) has even called NCIS "Harmon's sandbox and we're all playing in it."

 

I 1000% believe that TGW is Julianna's sandbox, and Archie Panjabi is still on the show because Julianna isn't stupid.  She knew that Kalinda was still popular, so the smart play (from her POV) is to keep Kalinda on the show for the length of Archie's contract.  That's exactly what appears to be happening, so no, I don't believe the "or both" in the first post that I quoted.  I think Julianna operates the same way that Mark does.  Sure, they collaborate with the producers, and they don't dictate everything.(NCIS killed off Mike Franks.  MH said in an interview that he went to one of the writers and said, "Are you sure about this?"  The writer in question laid out his reasons, and Mark was fine with it.)  However, the big stuff, the important stuff does not happen or is allowed without Mark's blessing, and I firmly believe the same holds true for Julianna.  In my opinion, this situation is exactly as Julianna wishes it to be.  (Given her comment, "Josh Charles, what were you thinking?) if JM could have figured out a way to change Josh's mind, that would have gone her way, too---in my opinion.)

Edited March 15, 2015 by Ohmo

[stealinghome]

Yes, I do agree that while what I personally enjoyed about TGW was the ensemble more than Alicia, JM has been the show's face since Day 1. She's definitely the show's star. I would also say that JM is at her professional apex right now--ER for sure made her a name, but I don't remember her having nearly the amount of critical acclaim for ER she has (deservedly) gotten for TGW. I mean, she was really well liked on ER, don't get me wrong, but imo TGW has pushed her star into another stratosphere.

Why would things have to be that extreme? If a creative decision is made to nix the Alicia/Kalinda friendship, then there are already going to be far less scenes between the two characters. Now we're just talking about those few scenes where Alicia would be asking Kalinda to do investigative work. It's easy to cut them out. ...

First, this is taking the word of a biased party. We're now taking AP's word at face value? Second, it's possible that AP wants more Alicia/Kalinda scenes, yet someone else besides JM is making the decision to nix them altogether. Has AP singled out anyone in her comments? If not, why is everyone leaping to the conclusion that JM is calling all the shots?

My scenario is basically that a creative decision was made to end the Alicia/Kalinda friendship. Completely justifiable, regardless of who made the executive call. But this storyline decision understandably led to AP's frustration with the show. There is now tension between AP and JM because AP assumes JM is responsible (which could be true). Maybe JM is annoyed that AP would take this so personally since it's really a professional decision. Whatever. The two now just don't get along. The showrunners/writers then choose to keep AP and JM apart completely because it doesn't make much difference to them. The Alicia/Kalinda friendship is dead anyway. We're talking about a few inconsequential scenes.

I don't understand why for this scenario to be true, AP would need to be fired. That seems extreme. Instead, the writers can do what they have been doing since. Create other storylines for Kalinda. Integrate Kalinda more with some of the other characters. All of this has to be done anyway given the loss of the Alicia/Kalinda friendship.

I strongly disagree that the decision to nix the Kalinda/Alicia friendship was a creative decision, for all the reasons that have been stated before on this thread (including comments by the Kings), so we'll agree to disagree on that. But if it was, and the Kings truly DO feel that Kalinda has no place in Alicia's world anymore, it really doesn't make economic sense for the show to keep Archie Panjabi around for 2+ seasons, and more to the point pay her for 2+ seasons. As others have pointed out, this show is called The Good Wife--everyone orbits around Alicia (increasingly so over the last few seasons). If you've decided that one of your characters no longer fits with Alicia, really what you're saying is she no longer fits in the show's universe, so what sense does it make to keep around an actor who you've decided isn't going to interact with the lead at all? (Again, show me a show like this where one of the main supporting actors hasn't interacted with the lead in 2+ seasons.) We don't have to use the term "fired" here--we can substitute written off or let go. But economically if nothing else, if creatively you truly feel Kalinda doesn't belong on the show and there's no future for the character, why would you keep paying AP? Write her off, let her to go a better gig, and go sign another regular (or more high-profile guest stars) with the money. imo, on a show like this, it's just completely illogical to think that you can really keep a character around when they can't interact with the lead. (Which has been borne out in practice, 'cause it's no secret the show has really struggled to find Kalinda storylines since 4b.)

I also disagree that scenes in which Alicia and Kalinda would naturally be together are that easy to avoid. Easy examples, off the top of my head, are Will's funeral last season and Cary's trial this season. As others have noted above, the writers have had to go out of their way to NOT write Kalinda and Alicia into those scenes together (especially the Will scenes from last season). Okay, maybe Kalinda and Alicia shouldn't be having one on one scenes, but they should at least be in the occasional group scene together. The fact that they can't even be in group scenes together suggests that something is really up, beyond "mild professional disagreement leading the Kings to keep them separate because it's easier." The actors should just be told to suck it up, but obviously something is preventing that. But the beef has to be pretty big at this point.

Also, yes, I am tending to take AP's word at face value (in no small part because it's better for her if Kalinda and Alicia share scenes--self-interest is a powerful motivator). As Black Knight said above, if the point of this exercise is to go on THE FACTS AND NOTHING BUT THE FACTS, suggesting that AP is lying every time she says she wants more Alicia/Kalinda interaction is truly speculative. Thinking that AP is running some Machiavellian PR campaign is a stretch, imo--especially when you also have JM happily announcing to the world that the Kalinda/Alicia friendship is DOA, nothing to see here, move along folks. And again, people are assuming that JM is at least one of the parties responsible for nixing the Kalinda/Alicia friendship because of JM, AP, and the Kings, she's the only party saying she thinks Kalinda/Alicia don't need to be friends. The Kings' "we're not getting into a public fight with Julianna" was beyond telling. When something happens that one party of three is on the record as wanting and the other two are on the record as not wanting, it's not really a stretch to look at the one and think they have something to do with it, unless the suggestion is that the Kings were also being deeply Machiavellian in that whole "we're not going to publicly disagree with Julianna" interview.

I 1000% believe that TGW is Julianna's sandbox

Oh yeah. I mean, the woman got production of the show changed from LA to NYC! And that was before the show even started airing, and before she was a co-producer!

But it's been six seasons and Alicia still hasn't dumped Peter. JM has disliked that dynamic a lot longer than the A/K one. They've actually gotten more closely linked.

Actually, JM has gone back and forth over that in interviews. I remember one interview--I want to say it was toward the end of S4--where she said something like "You know, I used to hate Peter and Alicia, but then I started thinking, isn't this really interesting...." But I haven't kept track of press for the show since then, so I'm not sure if she has continued in that line of thinking or reverted to her previous stance in subsequent interviews. Does anyone know?

I remember a lot of positive comments but any negative ones aren't ringing a bell.

Well, Matt Czuchry did pretty much (classily) confirm that there is stuff going down BTS on the show. Edited March 15, 2015 by stealinghome

[merylinkid]

You cannot tell me something is going on backstage.   Today Alicia had more scenes with Canning and David Lee than she had with her own law firm.   What's the point of giving Alicia her own firm if she is never there and never deals with anyone there?   

[Kromm]

In my scenario, this is very much a professional falling out. Rather than unnecessarily making anyone a bitch or a diva. Of course, it's possible that JM is one. Or AP is one. Or both. Again, my problem is that so many people are automatically assuming that JM is a bitch/diva based on very little information. Why is it that JM must be having a temper tantrum? It just doesn't make sense to me.

To me, while it's not the same thing as proof, the concept of Occam's razor ("the simplest explanation is most often the truth") applies a lot here. We can certainly construct other scenarios that lead to the same result, but they require far more jumping through hoops to explain the various facets of the situation (and I'm including the Kings' behavior and the public statements made by all parties, as well as who hasn't appeared with who in which scenes or public events).

I strongly disagree that the decision to nix the Kalinda/Alicia friendship was a creative decision, for all the reasons that have been stated before on this thread (including comments by the Kings), so we'll agree to disagree on that. But if it was, and the Kings truly DO feel that Kalinda has no place in Alicia's world anymore, it really doesn't make economic sense for the show to keep Archie Panjabi around for 2+ seasons, and more to the point pay her for 2+ seasons.

This is certainly a big piece of this. Kalinda's main function was to provide a kind of back-end counterpoint to the front end of the same storyline, led by Alicia. Once that no longer made sense, then Kalinda made much less sense as a character on this show. Admittedly the show has increasingly gotten schizophrenic overall with A/B storylines with little intersection, but Alicia is supposed to be the intersection between them. So Alicia and Kalinda supposedly not making sense in the same frame is inherently illogical. Friends, enemies, reluctant co-workers, whatever, them continuing to pay Archie's salary for several extra years instead of letting out of her contract years ago seems mostly like a cover for the situation, to keep a bad situation under wraps.

Edited March 16, 2015 by maraleia

[momlyd]

If all of this backstage drama is true, I blame the Kings for not being the grownups in the room and letting a conflict spiral out of control

ETA Way to f up a show. Good luck finding work beyond this mess.

Edited March 16, 2015 by momlyd

[Noreaster]

But if it was, and the Kings truly DO feel that Kalinda has no place in Alicia's world anymore, it really doesn't make economic sense for the show to keep Archie Panjabi around for 2+ seasons, and more to the point pay her for 2+ seasons.

Of course it makes economic sense.  A TV show is a business.  If the show believes that AP/Kalinda will continue to draw viewers even without the Kalinda/Alicia storyline, then why wouldn't the show keep her around?  

 

I also disagree that scenes in which Alicia and Kalinda would naturally be together are that easy to avoid. Easy examples, off the top of my head, are Will's funeral last season and Cary's trial this season. As others have noted above, the writers have had to go out of their way to NOT write Kalinda and Alicia into those scenes together (especially the Will scenes from last season). Okay, maybe Kalinda and Alicia shouldn't be having one on one scenes, but they should at least be in the occasional group scene together. The fact that they can't even be in group scenes together suggests that something is really up, beyond "mild professional disagreement leading the Kings to keep them separate because it's easier." The actors should just be told to suck it up, but obviously something is preventing that. But the beef has to be pretty big at this point.

If we're arguing for occasional group scenes and no 1-on-1s, then it's really not hard to write around. Was it such a disaster to not have Kalinda and Alicia together for the Will scenes?  I don't think so.  It would have been better, but doesn't really matter much plotwise. What percentage of viewers even noticed? Likewise for the Cary trial (which in my opinion, was a bad storyline but that had nothing to do with the lack of Alicia/Kalinda scenes).

 

As far as I can tell, this beef is big only in the minds of ardent Alicia/Kalinda fans and maybe those people really into gossipy stuff.  

 

Also, yes, I am tending to take AP's word at face value (in no small part because it's better for her if Kalinda and Alicia share scenes--self-interest is a powerful motivator). As Black Knight said above, if the point of this exercise is to go on THE FACTS AND NOTHING BUT THE FACTS, suggesting that AP is lying every time she says she wants more Alicia/Kalinda interaction is truly speculative. Thinking that AP is running some Machiavellian PR campaign is a stretch, imo--especially when you also have JM happily announcing to the world that the Kalinda/Alicia friendship is DOA, nothing to see here, move along folks. And again, people are assuming that JM is at least one of the parties responsible for nixing the Kalinda/Alicia friendship because of JM, AP, and the Kings, she's the only party saying she thinks Kalinda/Alicia don't need to be friends. The Kings' "we're not getting into a public fight with Julianna" was beyond telling. When something happens that one party of three is on the record as wanting and the other two are on the record as not wanting, it's not really a stretch to look at the one and think they have something to do with it, unless the suggestion is that the Kings were also being deeply Machiavellian in that whole "we're not going to publicly disagree with Julianna" interview.

Interviews are not facts. Those are "she said" stuff.  I'm not saying AP is outright lying or has this master plan to delude the public, but it's not as if she's speaking objectively.  If AP was ever behaving badly, it's not like she would talk about it.  She can also want more Kalinda/Alicia scenes and still be a bitch or diva behind the scenes.  Like maybe she thinks she's all that after winning an Emmy and how dare the showrunners end the Kalinda/Alicia friendship and decrease her screentime.  No one knows. (To be clear, I don't really think any of this. What I do think, given the lack of any real information, is that AP behaving unprofessionally is just as likely as JM behaving unprofessionally.)  

 

And again, how do AP's comments about wanting more Kalinda/Alicia scenes translate to JM calling all the shots?  The Kings themselves also have never said that JM put an end to all Kalinda/Alicia scenes. People are just assuming that. Speculation, not facts.  

 

No one is disagreeing on the other stuff.  Yes, JM doesn't like the Kalinda/Alicia friendship.  Yes, there's a good chance that the relationship was nixed because of JM. But that doesn't automatically make her a diva/bitch/whatever or throwing a tantrum or saying that she absolutely won't do any scenes with AP. 

 

I have to say the more this discussion goes on, the more I think it's simply Kalinda/Alicia fans upset with the end of the Kalinda/Alicia friendship and with JM having a part in that.  Which is fine.  But the rest of the speculation and vitriol toward JM just seems like too much for me.  

[Noreaster]

To me, while it's not the same thing as proof, the concept of Occam's razor ("the simplest explanation is most often the truth") applies a lot here. We can certainly construct other scenarios that lead to the same result, but they require far more jumping through hoops to explain the various facets of the situation (and I'm including the Kings' behavior and the public statements made by all parties, as well as who hasn't appeared with who in which scenes or public events).

Occam's razor would be the writers just didn't feel like writing Kalinda and Alicia in the same scenes anymore.  That is the simplest explanation.  Everything else requires making assumptions and more complex narratives.  

[Kromm]

Of course it makes economic sense.  A TV show is a business.  If the show believes that AP/Kalinda will continue to draw viewers even without the Kalinda/Alicia storyline, then why wouldn't the show keep her around?  

 

If we're arguing for occasional group scenes and no 1-on-1s, then it's really not hard to write around. Was it such a disaster to not have Kalinda and Alicia together for the Will scenes?  I don't think so.  It would have been better, but doesn't really matter much plotwise. What percentage of viewers even noticed? Likewise for the Cary trial (which in my opinion, was a bad storyline but that had nothing to do with the lack of Alicia/Kalinda scenes).

 

As far as I can tell, this beef is big only in the minds of ardent Alicia/Kalinda fans and maybe those people really into gossipy stuff.

You may correct that not as many people noticed as we think. In fact, comments by many people here in the nature of "oh, I never noticed until I read this thread" supports that--although most of them also have also implied it seems darn obvious once it was pointed out to them.

The problem is the interpretation of the word "together". Remember, we're not just talking about actual conversations between them (remember, the phone calls don't count since we all know it doesn't actually require them to be in the same place or in fact even speak remotely, in real life). We're not even talking about near proximity. We're talking how even in group scenes we can't have them in distant opposite sides of the same room.

[pennben]

 

Occam's razor would be the writers just didn't feel like writing Kalinda and Alicia in the same scenes anymore.

 

Your logical explanation, when the creators said that the relationship between Alicia/Kalinda was the heart of the show for so long, is that the writers just got tired of writing that, so they stopped?  You don't really believe that do you?

Edited March 16, 2015 by pennben

[Noreaster]

You may correct that not as many people noticed as we think. In fact, comments by many people here in the nature of "oh, I never noticed until I read this thread" supports that--although most of them also have also implied it seems darn obvious once it was pointed out to them.

The problem is the interpretation of the word "together". Remember, we're not just talking about actual conversations between them (remember, the phone calls don't count since we all know it doesn't actually require them to be in the same place or in fact even speak remotely, in real life). We're not even talking about near proximity. We're talking how even in group scenes we can't have them in distant opposite sides of the same room.

Right, the writers are purposely not having Kalinda and Alicia in the same scene. But does it change the plot and how they write other scenes and storylines to any significant extent? It's not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.

Your logical explanation, when the creators said that the relationship between Alicia/Kalinda was the heart of the show for so long, is that the writers just got tired of writing that, so they stopped? You don't really believe that do you?

The topic at hand is why Alicia and Kalinda have zero scenes together. Not why the Alicia/Kalinda friendship is nixed (which explains for most of the decline in scenes between the two).

To be clear, I'm not trying to argue in favor of any of these theories. Just trying to explain why I think it doesn't make sense to argue so adamantly in favor of any of them. Very little factual information available.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Noreaster

[OptimisticCynic]

Right, the writers are purposely not having Kalinda and Alicia in the same scene. But does it change the plot and how they write other scenes and storylines to any significant extent? It's not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.

The topic at hand is why Alicia and Kalinda have zero scenes t

I think it shows a loss of a lot dramatic potential. When Alicia left the firm and she and Will had that big falling out, we were able to see that on screen. They explored how the fracture of that relationship related to both characters.

To me it's not worth introducing an important relationship, then throw in the plot "twist" (though clearly a retcon) of Kalinda having slept with Peter if you don't see Alicia and Kalinda having to interact after that. You could argue they did that for a little bit but I don't think to the dramatic potential of the quality the show once had.

So to answer your question, I do think it changed the show in limiting story possibilities to not even have them share a scene together.

[Noreaster]

I think it shows a loss of a lot dramatic potential. When Alicia left the firm and she and Will had that big falling out, we were able to see that on screen. They explored how the fracture of that relationship related to both characters.

To me it's not worth introducing an important relationship, then throw in the plot "twist" (though clearly a retcon) of Kalinda having slept with Peter if you don't see Alicia and Kalinda having to interact after that. You could argue they did that for a little bit but I don't think to the dramatic potential of the quality the show once had.

So to answer your question, I do think it changed the show in limiting story possibilities to not even have them share a scene together.

I agree the plot twist was stupid. But if the show made the decision (and the writers are told) to end the Kalinda/Alicia friendship, what dramatic potential is left between the two?

I feel like people want to debate the decision to end the friendship. But isn't this topic about the reason for the complete lack of Kalinda/Alicia scenes? Separate issues, no?

[OptimisticCynic]

I agree the plot twist was stupid. But if the show made the decision (and the writers are told) to end the Kalinda/Alicia friendship, what dramatic potential is left between the two?

I feel like people want to debate the decision to end the friendship. But isn't this topic about the reason for the complete lack of Kalinda/Alicia scenes? Separate issues, no?

My point was even if they were to end the friendship that doesn't mean scene interaction needs to end. Case in point how they handled Will and Alicia after she left the firm.

You have two characters that viewers are invested that were once very close and one feels a sense of betrayal. Seems odd to not want to explore the awkwardness and hurt feelings after the fall out. To me the plot twist is incredibly stupid if not willing to explore that.

[pennben]

The topic at hand is why Alicia and Kalinda have zero scenes together. Not why the Alicia/Kalinda friendship is nixed (which explains for most of the decline in scenes between the two).

I'm aware of that, I was responding to the notion that:

Occam's razor would be the writers just didn't feel like writing Kalinda and Alicia in the same scenes anymore.

I just don't believe that is what is really going on. Also, I don't think Occam would agree either!:)

Edited March 16, 2015 by pennben

[Noreaster]

I just don't believe that is what is really going on. Also, I don't think Occam would agree either!:)

 

Hey, why not?  It's even backed up by the Kings' latest comments with the whole "intentional" and "stay tuned" stuff. Why over-analyze when we have the showrunners' word? I think Occam might agree! :)

 

ETA: I was sort of joking.  But giving it a little more thought, this more simple scenario works just fine. Let's face it. The writing on this show is terribly inconsistent. Characters and stories are often underdeveloped. Plenty of questionable plot twists with no real follow-through.  Storylines dropped at random. We might all be confusing bad writing with the idea that there must be something bigger behind-the-scenes with the actors. 

 

Bad writing + a little JM/AP tension would just about explain everything.  What say you, Occam?

Edited March 16, 2015 by Noreaster

[kdm07]

Well, this has certainly been an...illuminating read. If this BTS drama is one of the reasons why the quality of the show has dropped then I hope that AP's exit might get those creative juices flowing again. I doubt it but one can hope.

[Gregg247]

As a longtime fan of TGW, I had no idea any of this stuff was going on behind the scenes.  To be honest, I kind of noticed that there had been fewer scenes between Alicia and Kalinda, but then again, there have been fewer scenes between Alicia and EVERYONE on the show recently, except for the guest stars.  This is why I hope Alicia loses the election and gets back into the courtroom.

 

As far as Kalinda is concerned, her character hasn't exactly been tossed into Siberia with a shovel and 5 bean seeds and told to fend for herself.  Of all the supporting characters, she seems to get the most consistent screen time.  She always has a personal relationship (or 2) front and center, she has a scary subplot with Lamond Bishop right now, and she still does all the investigative work for the other characters (what happened to the blonde lady who was her assistant/competitor?).  She almost has her own separate show going on right in the middle of this one!  Of all the supporting players, she seems to be the first-among-equals -- at least for screen time.

 

Personally, I'd like to see more of Eli.  He's my favorite character aside from Alicia (yes, I still LIKE Alicia!), but as much as I like "funny" Eli, I also liked the smooth operator he was in the early seasons, when he knew everyone important in politics and was a real player.  

[whatsatool]

Agreed that Alicia seems to be on an island.

[whatsatool]

My guess is the Emmy for Kalinda is the reasons.