HeatLifer July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 That sure looks like him. I actually like the kid when he's a bit toned down, but somehow I'm not surprised Spencer's next stop is what appears to be a very tasteless Ryan Murphy show. I don't think he'll be here long if that continues. Spencer having a prime time gig before some other folks makes me giggle. 1 Link to comment
KerleyQ July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 also, hurrah, Tyler is getting the arm tattoo removed! https://twitter.com/Tyler2929/status/618862392496119808 Can we somehow transfer that tattoo right on over to BryDawg? He needs it. 5 Link to comment
kristabell July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I started watching because my two great aunts, who babysat me during the summer and when I was sick, watched. I started watching at five (don't judge me.) I watched the whole ABC lineup, from Loving to GH. Like I said, I was young, so I didn't know half of what was going on; but I loved some of those characters. I grew up watching amazing women; I wanted Blair Cramer to be my best friend; and I wanted to be Anna Devane. There were enough girls at school who also watched that we had a small clutch and would talk about it at recess. Over time, with school and life, I stopped watching for big chunks of time. But I came back to AMC when Finola Hughes started there; I always came back to check in on OLTL because I love KDP and Blair; and I tried to check into GH from time to time, but most of the characters I'd loved were already gone. Over time, the shows deteriorated in quality considerably, including writing, production, and budget. But I came back for the characters I loved. If there was anything I could squeeze out of watching those characters, regardless of ridiculous plot, I would stay. But then the characters I loved got written out or written badly or constantly abused by the writing. There weren't anymore awesome women left. And I wasn't interested in watching an amoral sausage fest. As people said upthread, it is the characters and the relationships that bring people back; and those don't exist anymore. As far as the "younger generation" watching, I feel comfortable in saying no, they don't. I teach high school, so I hear a lot about my students' favorite shows. They watch House of Cards, OITNB, Empire, Scandal. I don't think it's a coincidence that these shows have strong female characters and are much more diverse (in addition to being ten thousand times better written and acted, of course.) As I believe Dandesun said upthread, daytime soaps capture nothing of what it's like to live in the world in 2015. An environment with nothing but rich, white people dealing with their ridiculous rich, white problems isn't anything anyone can connect with. Are there even any POC writers at GH? What is the age of the youngest writer they have? How many female writers are there? Daytime soaps are rehashing the same scripts and plot lines that soaps were doing twenty and thirty years ago (only they were better done the first time.) They aren't relevant; they aren't interesting; and they certainly aren't groundbreaking. The fact of the matter is, there is too much quality entertainment out there to invest in daytime soaps, especially for a potential new viewer. Aside from all of that, this is also an issue with viewing habits more generally. Network TV hasn't revamped its SOPs for fifty years. But viewing habits have changed, especially for those under 30. Very few people I know have TVs; and if they do, they use them to watch Hulu and Netflix. No one I know, myself included, has cable anymore. I would venture to say, even people who watch most episodes of daytime TV,watch via DVR. Serialized drama is certainly possible, but not via this medium anymore imo. 1 Link to comment
dubbel zout July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 An environment with nothing but rich, white people dealing with their ridiculous rich, white problems isn't anything anyone can connect with. To be fair, a lot of prime-time TV is about rich people dealing with their ridiculous rich problems—but the casts are often more diverse, so the shows might feel fresher. GH's biggest problem in my mind is a lack of imagination in story and casting. Link to comment
Tiger July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Spencer having a prime time gig before some other folks makes me giggle. It makes me nauseous. Sorrynotsorry if this comes across as rude, but I think the actor sucked on Red Band Society, sucked on Grey's, and sucks on TFGH. In other words, how da fawq haven't Fin, Maura, Rick, Becky, Laura, Jason, Dom, others landed d primetime and/or movie work? I think those named and others are worlds better than many many many actors that do land primetime and/or movies. 2 Link to comment
ulkis July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 They have. But soaps are steady work. Laura started out in daytime and never left, I don't think she's ever really tried outside of daytime. I think if Becky hadn't joined GH at 20, she probably would have quit acting and found another career for herself. She's never really seemed to want to do any acting outside of GH. Maura also started in daytime young and never really left. I think she was 22 or 23 when she started out on ATWT. 5 Link to comment
yowsah1 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 To my knowledge, Rebecca Budig is not currently on contract. Yet. I frankly half-expect it any day. I hope to God someone at the network steps in and puts a stop to that shit How do we know the network isn't ordering up all these "gets"? Link to comment
jsbt July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Because it fits a long pattern for Frank and Ron. The days of Frons the micromanager are gone. 1 Link to comment
Francie July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) It makes me nauseous. Sorrynotsorry if this comes across as rude, but I think the actor sucked on Red Band Society, sucked on Grey's, and sucks on TFGH. In other words, how da fawq haven't Fin, Maura, Rick, Becky, Laura, Jason, Dom, others landed d primetime and/or movie work? I think those named and others are worlds better than many many many actors that do land primetime and/or movies. They have. But soaps are steady work. Laura started out in daytime and never left, I don't think she's ever really tried outside of daytime. I think if Becky hadn't joined GH at 20, she probably would have quit acting and found another career for herself. She's never really seemed to want to do any acting outside of GH. Maura also started in daytime young and never really left. I think she was 22 or 23 when she started out on ATWT. I was going to say that Jason, Laura, Becky, and Dominic have chosen to stay with a steady gig. I didn't know personally anything about Maura, but it sounds like it's the same for her. Finola had a couple prime time opportunities, but none of the shows took off. One show was cute and might have lasted awhile, but ABC put it up against Cheers. She was on Blossom in its final two years. She starred in a failed Spelling show that lasted only a season. If she hadn't already committed to AMC and moved to New York, she probably would have been on Charmed more often. But her guest starring gigs were very popular. In Hollywood, a lot of it just comes down to luck. Being in the right project that takes off. And even so many actors get great fame on one television show, but when that one ends, they never can replicate its success. Edited July 16, 2015 by Francie 2 Link to comment
twoods July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I started watching in the 80's on the stairs while my mom would watch the show at 2pm. I loved it. Now, it's hardly recognizable. I think the ratings would go up if they brought back the vets and back burned shitty characters we don't care about. Or better storytelling- I'm not picky at this point. I can't with Bryan Craig. I used to justify his actions because he was young and I have a soft spot for Morgan, but he is out of control. Plus, he's got to be in a lot of debt with all his spending. Calm down, dawg! 1 Link to comment
HeatLifer July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I'm actually surprised, though, that JT hasn't gotten something. Back in the day, I had a feeling Josh Duhamel was going to be a star. I had the same feeling in a way about JT years ago. I don't know what happened. My predictions have fallen off. Link to comment
UYI July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) DeLurking a moment...does "younger" viewers even watch daytime soaps? Or maybe the better question is do enough watch to make a real impact on ratings? Though they don't by any means represent all of America, no one I know who are in their late teens or 20s watches daytime soaps. I'm 26, and while I don't watch regularly I have loved soaps since my middle school days, and believe it or not I know of other viewers even younger than I am who love soaps and post in various soap forums. We may be the exception to the rule, but we're out there. And for the record, I LOVE the history on soaps, and I actually do care about the history about soaps with other actors, too, although I understand why it's something GH doesn't need right now. Then again, I'm a nerd for almost anything involving TV history of any kind, so there's that to consider, too. :) ETA: Count me as another one who didn't start because of her mom. My mom DID watch the soaps, but mainly before I was born--different ones here and there. My paternal grandmother did watch ATWT, though. I remember her watching it when I would visit in the summer. Edited July 16, 2015 by UYI 4 Link to comment
jsbt July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 JT stayed where his bread is buttered. I can't blame him. Link to comment
ulkis July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I blame him a little, for looking like he was on suicide watch for about a year. But overall, no, I don't blame him that much. 1 Link to comment
HeatLifer July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) Eh, JT has tried and is probs still trying to leave. He just hasn't been offered anything. Edited July 16, 2015 by HeatLifer 1 Link to comment
jsbt July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I blame him a little, for looking like he was on suicide watch for about a year. I don't - I wanted to die watching that shit. 5 Link to comment
WendyCR72 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I don't - I wanted to die watching that shit. +1 And as much as I haaated Purina like the fiery pits of hell, I think Samtrick may be even worse. Patrick isn't a character at this stage. Just Sam's sex toy and cardboard cutout who exists to please Sam while she goes on about her hitman "dead" hubby. But hey, a paycheck is a paycheck, right? 2 Link to comment
jsbt July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Patrick is definitely not a character at this point. Without the maximum saintly iteration of Sabrina to prop up he is far more of a nonentity, and I do feel bad for JT. That being said, IMO nothing is worse than Patrick/Sabrina in full tilt Happy Ending mode. Patrick and Sam could be a great couple, it's just that RC rushed them together and has put them on autopilot since for the sake of plot. They could be anyone, doing anything so long as there is a triangle element for Jason. 9 Link to comment
Oracle42 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) I know this was a ways back but no thank you on the Todd appearance. I loved most of Todd's run on OLTL. I even liked RoHo's Paul on ATWT (only in stories with Emily though). I've been a RoHo fan for a long time and I hate RC's Todd. HATE.RC's writing for Todd was always pretty terrible but what difference is there, at this point, between Wacky!Todd and Wacky!Franco?I actually hate seeing his face so much that I started skipping the entire day when he was in the previews and now I just don't bother to watch most of the time even when he's not on Edited July 19, 2015 by Oracle42 3 Link to comment
Francie July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 What is the age of the youngest writer they have? I don't know their ages, but O'Connor, Van Ettan, and Sickles have the average mental development of a 12 year old. And with that we got Roger Howarth throwing up on The Chew. 2 Link to comment
Sake614 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Sickles is probably late 30s-early 40s. The thing is, I really liked his writing on OLTL. He wrote almost all of the episodes featuring little Sam, and it was terrific. I don't know what happened when he joined GH, but I wish he'd channel his inner OLTL writing.... 6 Link to comment
TeeVee329 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) Sickles is probably late 30s-early 40s. The thing is, I really liked his writing on OLTL. He wrote almost all of the episodes featuring little Sam, and it was terrific. I don't know what happened when he joined GH, but I wish he'd channel his inner OLTL writing.... Agreed. He wrote some really good stuff for Kish. And his whole referencing other television shows thing, I don't remember him ever doing that on OLTL. Edited July 16, 2015 by TeeVee329 2 Link to comment
Francie July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I'm still a bit resentful, in that I suspect that at least part of Logan's disillusionment is all about Tony Geary whispering in his ear about the horrors of Little Jake's return and the destruction of Guza's "brilliant" dead kid story and Dark Luke, and I am tensely awaiting an exit interview in which Logan eats all of Tony's AARP wisdom about this up unquestioningly. But I'll take my critique where and how I can. I just upticked this yesterday, but I wanted to expand on it, because I had somewhat the same thought, though more unformulated, at Logan's twitter comments. Logan's take on the Jake resurrection is very likely what jsbt said above. It ruins what he (and Tony) thoguth was a maginificent storyline. I get the feeling (and could be wrong) that his issue has nothing to do with the hilarious we-explained-it-on-a-commercial-break REASONS! given to the audience for accepting the resurrection or with the fact that they plopped Jake down and then just went 'ho hum,' on to the next storyline! Logan liked a lot about 2014's GH. He said that it was one of the two shows that should have been nominated for best show. He's much more on board with the wacky villains having the run of the place than, I suspect, the mainstream audience. I'm interested in his take on Denise. He worships the ground Maura West walks on. But there's no question that the 11-week slump started almost simultaneously with her appearance. I'm not saying that that one storyline is the cause of the slump (instead, I believe the opposite and that it's been a long time coming), but it can't be denied that "Denise" is one of the biggest flops this show has ever seen. It's positively Eckert level. 1 Link to comment
TeeVee329 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 You Know Who just got cast on "Days of our Lives", which means there's no chance he's going to show up on GH. YAY! http://www.soapoperadigest.com/content/exclusive-john-paul-lavoisier-joins-days 9 Link to comment
Box305 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I thought of you guys when I saw that news. Haha. 1 Link to comment
LeftPhalange July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) Logan liked a lot about 2014's GH. He said that it was one of the two shows that should have been nominated for best show. He's much more on board with the wacky villains having the run of the place than, I suspect, the mainstream audience. What's happening with Dead Now Alive Jake is far worse than the stupid villains that come back from the dead IMO. At this point I don't think anyone expects a villain to stay dead for good and when they come back at least there's some type of explanation given, even if it is completely ridiculous. With Jake we saw him get run over in the street, be declared brain dead, and have his organs donated. Now he's back somehow and we're supposed to believe it without even a single explanation given on screen because Ron knows damn well this shit is ourageous. You Know Who just got cast on "Days of our Lives", which means there's no chance he's going to show up on GH. YAY! http://www.soapoperadigest.com/content/exclusive-john-paul-lavoisier-joins-days Until Days writes his character out after six months. That's happened several times in the last year. Edited July 16, 2015 by LeftPhalange Link to comment
Francie July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 What's happening with Dead Now Alive Jake is far worse than the stupid villains that come back from the dead IMO I agree if it were just the villains coming back from the dead. But I would put Dr. O running the hospital on the same level as Jake showing up due to Helena's convenient timing and non-existent (to us) explanation. YMMV. 2 Link to comment
SlovakPrincess July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) It's all 50 shades of bullshit at this point. This attitude of "but it's a soap, logic doesn't apply!" really chaps my hide. It's lazy, bad, infuriating storytelling, regardless of the genre. If the soap press writers had any self respect, they would have pointed it out much sooner. The fact that that guy didn't realize GH was going off the rails in 2014 makes him look silly. The only good thing that happened was Michael turning on Sonny ... which has now been ruined. Edited July 16, 2015 by SlovakPrincess 13 Link to comment
Oracle42 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) You Know Who just got cast on "Days of our Lives", which means there's no chance he's going to show up on GH. YAY! http://www.soapoperadigest.com/content/exclusive-john-paul-lavoisier-joins-days That's actually pretty good casting, I hope it sticks. Is it wrong that I kinda want him to end up in a relationship with a character who played his sister on OLTL? Cause I do. Sorrynotsorry Edited July 16, 2015 by Oracle42 Link to comment
Box305 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I didn't see this posted: http://tvsourcemagazine.com/2015/07/iceberg-ahead-whats-behind-general-hospitals-ratings-collapse/ I thought she made a lot of good points and I'm waiting rather impatiently for a certain head writer to flip out over it. 6 Link to comment
Artsda July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 That's a great choice by DAYS for Phillip. 1 Link to comment
ulkis July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) It's all 50 shades of bullshit at this point. This attitude of "but it's a soap, logic doesn't apply!" really chaps my hide. It's lazy, bad, infuriating storytelling, regardless of the genre. If the soap press writers had any self respect, they would have pointed it out much sooner. The fact that that guy didn't realize GH was going off the rails in 2014 makes him look silly. The only good thing that happened was Michael turning on Sonny ... which has now been ruined. the thing is, he did. I remember he wrote "Franco has GOT to go" last year and then Laura Wright wrote that that was rude and he quickly said "I meant Franco not Roger". Yeeeeah, Michael Logan. Sure. That['s why I'm irritated. He knew how bad it was and yet he continued to make like it was fine. Edited July 16, 2015 by ulkis Link to comment
Dandesun July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) the thing is, he did. I remember he wrote "Franco has GOT to go" last year and then Laura Wright wrote that that was rude and he quickly said "I meant Franco not Roger". Yeeeeah, Michael Logan. Sure. That['s why I'm irritated. He knew how bad it was and yet he continued to make like it was fine. Laura Wright was doing that lecture-tweeting about how few soaps there are left and that everyone needs to show them love rather than criticize them. Ugh. The problem, sweetie, is that soaps ignored critics who love the industry way too long and found themselves in a place where they started dropping like flies. When you're down to four, you don't suck it up and praise them just because they're the only ones left. You face facts and start being honest about the problems that resulted in them teetering on the brink of extinction. Franco and Roger should be gone. They've long over-stayed their welcome and they have no actual purpose on the show. Saying so got a wrist-slap from LW because she was paired with him at the time. But the fact is, you can't do the 'participant medal' game anymore. The shows need to earn their right to be on the air especially since so many others have been taken off and they really aren't doing that. Edited July 16, 2015 by Dandesun 13 Link to comment
ulkis July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Here is the tweet in question: https://twitter.com/tvgmlogan/status/475070644556529666 Franco needs to go. Like, asap. Am I right or am I right? And Laura's pithy response: not cool. Link to comment
Dandesun July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) Yeah, I would bet actual money that if Logan tweeted that Franco needed to be gone asap now, LW wouldn't say a word in response. Her air time no longer hinges on him. Edited July 16, 2015 by Dandesun 4 Link to comment
Sake614 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Okay I double dog dare someone to post that review to Ron's twitter page. Link to comment
tvgoddess July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 In regards to the younger viewers, I'm online friends with a couple of younger ones (1 late teens, a few mid-late 20's viewers). So they are out there, but nothing like when I started watching Guiding Light back in the day at age 13 in 1984. Days, please keep JPL forever. Thanks. 2 Link to comment
Dandesun July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Okay I double dog dare someone to post that review to Ron's twitter page. He wouldn't take a damn thing from it other than the fact that he and Frank are a 'powerhouse duo.' 9 Link to comment
magnolia11 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 "Another member of the great unwashed who doesn't grasp my genius! BLOCK!" 6 Link to comment
jsbt July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I suspect Logan's motive for attack is his close, slavish relationship with Geary, yes. But I'd like to believe that Geary becoming angered by this storyline only liberated Logan to talk more about stuff he's always glossed over. He isn't the only one finding himself in that position with GH recently, he's just the most influential. He's made some good points, and not just about the Jake SL, and it's that long-overdue critique I can appreciate. That being said, anything he has to say about the terrible undoing of TG's Luke I would take with a grain of salt. That "TV Source" article gets better and much more sharp as it goes, but the beginning - claiming the network is responsible for the troubles, and pushing the mob - is nonsense. I mean, the fucking mob is the least of this show's problems right now. When I look at the crisis GH is in today, the problems begin with the freakshow characters Ron won't give up on, the terrible storylines Ron won't give up on, and the slipshod pacing, editing, airtime share and characterization. The issues range from superficial to systemic. Saying "oh, it's the mob" or "it's the network" is an old copout. Brian Frons is gone and the mob is still at a much, much lower ebb than it has been in a decade, with it never being one of RC's priorities. What's wrong with GH now is entirely, fundamentally different. And to the article's credit it digs into a lot of that later on. 9 Link to comment
Dandesun July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I'd really like to know just how much the networks interfere when it comes down to it. And what does 'the network' mean anyway? In a lot of ways, I find it to be a total distraction attempt. Like 'we are the plucky little indie show that the suits are trying to bring down!' Ummm... I wonder just how many executives even realize daytime is still around. I cannot imagine that 'the network' sits around and has meetings on what to do about the soaps. I've been charmed and swayed by rumors in the past of 'network' wanting the same thing I did but, ultimately, during these times when soaps are floundering so... I really don't think they care that much. It's a way for the shows to cast blame elsewhere and simultaneously conjure up a bogey-man. NO ONE can tell me that network is demanding the constant baby rabies. They sure as fuck can't tell me that network demanded that Sonny be given Avery back. I mean, come on... I just can't buy that they are that involved in the story beats. 8 Link to comment
KerleyQ July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 You Know Who just got cast on "Days of our Lives", which means there's no chance he's going to show up on GH. YAY! http://www.soapoperadigest.com/content/exclusive-john-paul-lavoisier-joins-days Those poor Days viewers... I didn't see this posted: http://tvsourcemagazine.com/2015/07/iceberg-ahead-whats-behind-general-hospitals-ratings-collapse/ I thought she made a lot of good points and I'm waiting rather impatiently for a certain head writer to flip out over it. I love that she mentioned Shawn's poor aim. 1 Link to comment
SlovakPrincess July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 I think the network probably gives general directives. Like, Maurice is the recognizable star, make sure he has screen time. Or: ratings should be up, do something light and attract younger viewers. Then this writing team somehow turns it into: undo the Michael / Sonny drama in one episode! Wacky Franco antics! 3rd graders proposing to each other!! 4 Link to comment
TeeVee329 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 NO ONE can tell me that network is demanding the constant baby rabies. They sure as fuck can't tell me that network demanded that Sonny be given Avery back. I mean, come on... I just can't buy that they are that involved in the story beats. I don't think any network executive was like, "You know what this show needs? Someone wearing a ridiculous wig!". 10 Link to comment
Oracle42 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 (edited) So you don't believe a network exec demanded that the only romances allowed on the daytime soap opera be between either a group of 10 year olds or between a "reformed" serial killer and a woman with the mental/emotional maturity of a 15 year old? Edited July 16, 2015 by Oracle42 6 Link to comment
HeatLifer July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Patrick and Sam could be a great couple Half of their problem is the writing/story. The other half is they (IMO) have -15% sexual chemistry. They haven't, to this day, shared ONE passionate kiss or embrace. It's mindblowing. 3 Link to comment
Oracle42 July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 Yeah, they have potential on paper but onscreen they're totally lacking in romantic chem - but they're still more watchable than Sam/Silas 3 Link to comment
Francie July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 The only things we do know about "the network" is that: 1) For the live shows, it demanded a wedding and a shooting; 2) It allegedly doesn't allow contracts to be given to actors who are 50+ years old; and 3) Nathan Varni is their messenger boy. Everything else is complete and total guesswork. And you know what I have to say about that? Well, let the guesswork begin! If I had to guess, the network is behind: 1) Passanante's role, whatever it may be. I think she has a bit more power than just break down writing. 2) A scaling back or stop of the kid's quad and Dr. O. I think Ron would love to do more, and it isn't that he's lost interest. They're on less because he's been reined in on that front. 3) WDV still being there. I think the network also nixes a lot of ideas and Ron winds up throwing shit against the wall, in exasperation. But I also think his original ideas that he loves are also largely shit. I think Frank is responsible for hiring Billy Miller; Michelle Stafford; and Rebecca Budig. He then turns to Ron and says, "write for them!" Link to comment
tvgoddess July 16, 2015 Share July 16, 2015 1) Passanante's role, whatever it may be. I think she has a bit more power than just break down writing. When is she supposed to start? Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.