From: owner-port-charles-digest@lists.xmission.com (port-charles-digest) To: port-charles-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: port-charles-digest V1 #12 Reply-To: port-charles-digest Sender: owner-port-charles-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-port-charles-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk port-charles-digest Friday, January 2 1998 Volume 01 : Number 012 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 21:35:25 EST From: AnneBPT Subject: Re: GH/PC: Tony and Bobbie In a message dated 97-12-30 19:01:16 EST, you write: << God I hate Tony!!! The presumptuousness of that man. He accepts the fact that Carly has had an affair. He logically knows that the time he thinks Carly and Jason slept together could have resulted in her pregnancy. However he calls the baby his son. That man is in denial about a few things. Also, today he had no concern for Carly's welfare.>> Well I guess I'm stepping in here to stick up for Tony. I don't understand why he has to be concerned about Carly and her welfare. I don't blame him one bit. Yeah I know he WAS planning to marry her at one time, but given what he has found out about her-- I don't understand why he should be expected to worry about her. Now if her life was hanging in the balance a year from now when things have settled down a bit maybe he'd be more understanding. But from his point of view right now he honestly doesn't care if she lives or dies. People seem so ready to jump on Tony for his attitude towards Carly, but she's done a heck of a lot more to him than he has to her. It wasn't his fault she snooped into his private papers to find out he was suing for custody. She caused that confrontation all on her own. That's just one tiny thing in a long line of lies and deceit. I'm trying to think of one truthful thing she EVER told him in their entire relationship. I'm not sure ther is anything-- I mean the whole thing started with the lie about her being Bobbie's daughter and not telling him. I think he was right about why he had to keep the custody suit secret. Look what's happened since he found out. He's lucky she didn't just skip town. He's calling the baby his since he thought of it as his all along until now. I don't think he wants to even consider that it might be Jason's. His whole relationship and future disappeared in front of his face, he's trying to hold on to what he probably thinks is the one good thing to come out of the mess with Carly. The same can be said for AJ-- look what she did to him, and he is expected o be worried about her welfare? I don't think so, I think that might be considered unrealistic. I have to say though, that I like the character of Carly, always have. I think you have to have someone like that on a show. There's a difference between veiwers I think, some like characters because they are good people, others like them because good or bad they are good characters. Carly is a good character, not necessarily a good person, played to perfection by Sarah Brown. Anne - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 21:35:59 EST From: AnneBPT Subject: Re: GH/PC: Carly/Jason/Robin In a message dated 98-01-01 17:23:34 EST, dkgooden@email.msn.com writes: << Most of you will probably disagree with this, but oh well. I wish that Robin were out of the picture. I know that you all have have high hopes for Jason and robin. However I think that Carly and Jason have a kind of chemistry that Robin and Jason don't have. >> The last time Robin and Jason were together they were not all that thrilling. I couldn't see any of what I once liked about them. They never had the appeal of Robin and Stone, but they were okay. I like his relationship with Carly too, most of the time. I'm getting a little bored with Jason in general though. He's been too one note. I can't see him as a major leading man. I'm worried GH is becoming the "Jason, and Carly Show,". or the "J-C and Brenda Show." You throw in a little Stefan and an almost evil Luke, and there is GH. What the heck I like PC better anyhow:-). Anne - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 21:46:01 EST From: SCassidine Subject: Re: GH/PC: Carly/Jason/Robin Anne, You bring up a good point about the "Jason and Carly" Show, but however, "Carly" will be on hiatus when Sarah Brown leaves for all of Jan and some of February, so GH just may turn around. Amy - - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 22:30:40 -0500 From: "Donald K Gooden" Subject: GH/PC: Mac/Felicia Does any one care to guess about this whole Mac/Felicia/James/Tess thing? I really have no idea what is going on. What is James's and Tess's point any way. A Felicia/Mac storyline could have been so good a few years ago. They were actually enjoyable to watch a few years ago. However, now Felicia and Mac seem so stale. I saw a picture of Kristina and Jack on the cover of Soap Opera digest yesterday. Jack Wagner is definitely someone I would love to have back on the show. I never really saw much of felicia and Frisco. I have only seen whatever they have done in the last few years, and that hasn't been a lot. I remember when felicia was having hallucinations about Frisco appearing in her apartment. That caused her to call Kevin which in turn set off my most favorite Lucy and Kevin fight. Oh yeah this might be interesting to note. I recently found someone that has over 300 GH tapes dating back to 1981. I will post the web address later so that anyone that wants to see the list of tapes that this person has may do so. I presently have misplaced the URL. Oh well I will look it up later. This might be a real find for those of you who are die-hard GH trivia fans. Jamila - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 07:44:55 -0800 (PST) From: Cagey Subject: Re: GH/PC: Rumors At 06:50 PM 1/1/98 -0500, Jamila wrote: >I was at the GH hotline, and I found this. I thought it was kind of cute so >I thought I would share. Which of the following do you think are most >plausible, and which do you think could never happen in a million years. S P O I L E R S ? I T H I N K N O T ! >>AJ decides to find Carly- and stalks her movements in Cyberspace -- >following the trail of mysterious e-mails she is sending to someone unknown >... he finds her working in a Pretzel factory Actually, she's Alexis' daughter, and she's finally reading all that email that her mom sent her months ago . > >>Jagger returns to PC to reclaim Brenda.......this reignites the >Jagger/Brenda/Karen triangle and leaves Jax out in the cold. Brenda on PC? One desperately hopes not. > >>Carly's baby is born with a heart condition which is exactly the same as >the one AJ was born with. Did AJ have a heart condition when he was born? I remember the ruckus about the birthmark... > >>Brenda watches the TV Movie Lucy and Desi and has another breakdown when >she believes that "Desi" is actually Sonny. ROTFL! >>Jason hits his head and thinks he is a rock star. He hits the road with >Eddie Maine, leaving the entire empire to Carly. Bwahahahaha! >>Helena sets her sights on Edward Q. Lila would run over her. >>Carly will name the baby Morgan Morgan. Hahahahaha! Or John Morgan after her father. Or Bob Morgan after her mother. >>Luke will be determined to be Nicholas' father, Stefan will be in shock, >Helena will be at her wits end and Alexis will take over the family. It's that potent, and long lasting, Spencer sperm. >>Sarah and Lizzie's mother will return to Port Charles and accuse Audrey of >letting the girls run wild. And remove them from Port Charles, right? Please? Pretty please? >>Alexis will steal Stefan's computer. And set fire to the study with it. Thanks Jamila. Those were highly amusing. - --kg - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 09:41:44 -0800 From: Julie Subject: Fwd: Re: GH/PC: GH or PC? [This is from Julie. She's having trouble posting right now, so I'm sending it for her. -- Taiyin] On 01/01/98 21:36:17 anne wrote: > >This question was posed on my other PC list and I wondered what everyone >thinks on here. Which show is better right now-- GH or PC? Which do you >prefer and why? i hope this message goes through, because i'm REALLY missing not being able to post to the list! it's so frustrating not being able to respond to anything! :) anyway, on the off chance this DOES work, i'll throw in my two cents. or at least i'll try, because i'm kind of torn. i'm really liking gh SOOOOO much better now than anytime in recent history, that i'm tempted to say gh is better than pc, even if it's only a case of confusing "most improved" with "best." don't get me wrong, there are still things i DETEST about gh. (can we say sara, or kat and bat, or the whole james/mac/tess/felicia thing (thus far anyway), alan's pill popping, and his attitude towards aj, or ESPECIALLY the anti-sonny venom that's been spewing lately.) however, the things which are good, in my view, are OUTSTANDING. for example: one word--alexis. alexis and luke, alexis and stefan, alexis and helena, alexis and nikolas, hell, even alexis and ned (who?). that woman could be paired with a lamppost and still be emmy-worthy. i'm terribly sad (on a selfish level) that she's having a baby, because right now she is by FAR the most interesting character (to me) on gh, especially in her scenes with luke. speaking of which, he's my number two. the man is amazing. yes, luke-the-character can be more than a tad annoying...but put him in a scene with carly, or alexis, and i'll forgive ANY of his annoyances. i actually find myself hoping laura DOESN'T come back anytime soon (i know, what heresy!), because i find luke MUCH more interesting with almost anyone than with her. (yes, i wasn't watching during l&l's glory days.) >Jason was interesting at first with his brain damage, but now he's too blank >and one note. I hate all this "Jason doesn't lie" stuff because there is such >a thing as a lie of omission. jason's actually been growing on me lately. i still don't get his loyalty to carly, but he's been showing some interesting sides of himself recently. when he went to apologize to brenda, for example. or when he made it clear to luke that his relationship with sonny did NOT automatically translate into a tie to jason. and i really loved his talk with bobbie after he refused to approve carly's hysterectomy--especially in light of the fact that he knows bobbie is carly's mother. i figure by the time robin comes to town (soon? anyone know?) jason will be turned around in so many different directions that his emotionless gaze will HAVE to crack...and that will be interesting to see. in addition, i was thinking the other day as the q's gazed in adoration at the newest addition to the family, and jason just looked at them all like they were animals in a zoo, that this whole baby thing could make for some very interesting scenarios for jason--even though i think the plausability of this charade has been stretched much too thin. i don't believe for a second that jason would have looked at poor confused emily, who was tripping over her words in embarrassment while trying to politely ask if it were remotely possible that he could REALLY be the father of carly's baby, and STILL not come clean about the truth. i wish emily had pushed just a TAD farther, and said something to the effect of "but what about robin?" based on his past relationship with em, i can't believe jason would lie to HER. and i agree, he's lying, even if he isn't saying the words out loud. >Carly despite her evil deeds, I tend to like, >though she has been so over exposed I'm getting sick of her. i agreed completely, until she named jason the baby's father. up to that point i was THOROUGHLY sick of her. how much belly-rubbing can we actually WATCH, after all? but things are starting to get interesting with her (finally!), so i'm finding her much more watchable now. >Brenda and the insanity thing-- well I've had enough already. >I am not thrilled with the vilification of Sonny and the all the >anti Sonny propaganda i agree there. i think vanessa marcil is handling herself beautifully, but i do NOT want to watch J&B, the sequel. and the anti-sonny bit makes me see red. >He did this most notably with Jax, when he first came on. It made me crazy to >see Jax daily and K&L maybe twice a month. It seems the Q's are getting the >short end of it this time. really? i think the q's are going to be QUITE involved, especially with this whole jason and the baby thing. bottom line, i'm actually INTERESTED in gh again, which make me VERY happy! the stuff that i hate, i hate much more than anything i hate about pc... but along the same lines, i don't like anything on pc as much as the things i love on gh. gh inspires greater extremes with me than pc does--possibly because of its longer history--so while i think almost all of pc is very good, i think parts of gh are outstanding, and basically i'd say that i like a show which sometimes reaches outstanding better than a show that is consistently very good. >PC has some romance(Kevin and Lucy, Karen and Joe, Frank and Julie) and some >good potential romances(Matt and Ellen--or Grace, Eve and Scott-- or Chris). i agree, gh has been sorely lacking in that category. (i do NOT count kat/bat or nik/sara!) and karen and joe have more sexual chemistry than any characters i've seen in a long time. but frank and julie, quite frankly, leave me cold. the other day, in front of the fireplace--there was just NO spark whatsoever to make me believe they felt ANYTHING for each other. but the matt/ellen and eve/scott/chris things are definitely capturing my attention as well. so absolutely, pc wins in the romance dept. >A lot of time they honestly seem like REAL people, there is some fun, some >teasing, some realistic dialogue. I like shows like Thanksgiving, or parties >where they all get together. They do this kind of thing really well right >now. i agree i guess, but part of what i like about gh is that they DON'T seem like real people. i don't know anyone like alexis, or luke, or jason, which is part of what makes them fun to watch. i think that's kind of what guza meant when he talked about gh and its characters being larger than life. they're not SUPPOSED to be realistic--they're supposed to be extraordinary. >Yeah I'd probably go along with you all and vote for a pretty quick end to the >Rex thing. I don't find it as bad as everyone else I guess. I think it was >a good idea to kick the show off, and probably Februar sweeps will see the end >of it. We shall see i hope. i can't stand rex. and i find this entire story a little ludicrous. i can't imagine ANY judge giving custody of serena to a complete and total stranger, even if he IS her uncle (not a particularly close relation, incidentally) when they could give custody to her grandparents, or the woman who gave birth to her. so i find the whole subject moot. that, and i just hate rex! :) >A lot of people seem annoying that Rex is on to them, but I am confident that >in the end he won't be the winner. Maybe he doesn't have everything as well >figured out as he thinks he does. > >See there's a difference between the shows for me right there-- I have a >legitimate hope that the PC writers will think up something that might >surprise me. I haven't regained that hope on GH yet. now there i disagree. i don't think for a second rex can win. it's just not possible. so whatever they come up with won't surprise me in the least. however, things like having luke dig up alexis's history (while implausible), and carly passing jason off as the father of her baby (while impossible)... THEY surprised me! tv shows in general have a way of being extremely predictable, but gh has a history of throwing curve balls. like bj's death, or robin being hiv+, both of which caught me completely off-guard. (i didn't think for a SECOND they would actually do the equivalent of sentencing robin, who's been on the show most of her life, to death. but then, i didn't predict alan would come up with a cure for aids! ) >I like PC as a half hour show. I like the pace, I think things do move along >just fine. I think some things others don't like maybe I do. I like a slow >buiId for certain things. They have taken time with relationships so it makes >you anxious for say Scott to kiss Eve, or something to happen with Matt and >Ellen. i like pc's half-hour format, too. to be honest, if it had started out as an hour show i'm not sure i would've watched. i definitely enjoy pc for what it is...but i can't help viewing it as an appetizer, with gh as the main course. >Anyhow to sum up this extremely long post: ditto! :) >I'm starting to enjoy GH more, but >I find it no contest that PC is the better soap right now-- FOR ME. and...NOW...i'd have to say gh, for ME! up until the luke/alexis scene on the docks it would've been either a toss-up, or no contest pc (depending on the day), but since then gh has recaptured my interest, and reminded me why i liked it in the first place. guza's right--gh's characters ARE larger than life--and so are its actors. parts of the pc cast are extremely talented, but i don't think they have ANYONE who can compete on the level of nancy lee grahn, or tony geary, or maurice benard (sob!), or even sarah brown. pc is coming together very nicely--but now that gh is starting to get its act together again, it just has too much history to build on and play with for pc to win, in my book. >JMHO, same here! julie - ------End forward message--------------------------- - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 10:52:24 -0800 From: Taiyin Subject: Re: GH/PC: GH or PC? Well, since I'm never lacking for an opinion, I figure I'll jump into this one, too. BTW, I was positively giddy to see how much mail I had to download this morning. Actually, I was already giddy (I bought a new car yesterday -- a convertible!!!... sorry, too happy to stay quiet... if I were someone else who had to deal with me today, I'd smack me just out of sheer disgust.), but seeing all this conversation was fabulous. I think I'm in love with 1998 already. Now, onto the matter at hand... At 09:36 PM 1/1/98 EST, AnneBPT wrote: > >I think PC is a LOT better than GH. This summer and fall it wasn't even worth >considering--- PC was so far superior. Now GH is getting better, though I am >not a member of the "Guza is God Club." I agree on all counts. This summer I gave up watching GH for weeks on end. And I also agree that I don't think Guza is the end all, be all, either. Though, since you can't stand Luke , I suspect that my reasons for liking Guza are probably part of the same reason that you are less fond of him. I LOVE what Guza does with Luke. Love, love, love it. I prefer Luke when he's dangerous -- and since Guza's been back, Luke's been more and more the way I like him. As much as I love Claire Lebine, and as grateful to her as I am for some of my favorite things GH ever did (Kevin and Lucy, Stone/AIDS, Monica's breast cancer, BJ/Maxie, etc.), the one thing I disliked about what she did was that she domesticated Luke way too much. >Jason was interesting at first with his brain damage, but now he's too blank >and one note. I hate all this "Jason doesn't lie" stuff because there is such >a thing as a lie of omission. I'm actually the reverse when it comes to Jason. At the beginning I was wholly uninterested. I liked Jason before, even if he was more than slightly boring, and so his head injury annoyed me. It wasn't until recently that he's become interesting to me at all. Despite the fact that I think Sonny's exodus does more damage to Jason's character (from the audiences POV) than it did even to Sonny's, for the most part I love that Jason makes a lot of sense. He has the habit of boiling things down to their most basic element. Like when he asked AJ if he saw someone bleeding on the street if he'd just h*lp them, or wait to see if everything they'd done in the past few months met with his approval first. So, while I still want AJ to go to battle wtih Carly (in whatever context), I agree with what Jason is saying. THAT is why I like Jason. And yes, Jason's lies are lies of omission, but it's a nice change from Carly "Everytime I open my mouth a lie just pops out" Roberts. >Carly despite her evil deeds, I tend to like, >though she has been so over exposed I'm getting sick of her. Carly is fun to watch most of the time, for me. However, until the day she blurted out to Tony that Jason was the baby's father, not him, I was so sick of her that I'd fast-forward through her whenever she was on. Now, though, she's absolutely amazing. I think I'm just astounded that anybody who can lie as much as she has been, hasn't been busted yet. ;-) >Brenda and the insanity thing-- well I've had enough already. I am so sick of Brenda it defies words. I can't stomach any more of her, period. I REALLY wish Vanessa had just left when Maurice did. Not only could we have had a nice happily-ever-after for S&B (which I would have liked, even though they were digusting me by the end), but then we would have to suffer through more of this. And, despite the fact that Brenda really did give WAY too much of herself to Sonny to ever have a healthy relationship, I find this whole losing her mind over him bit to be more than slightly offensive and misogynistic. And what I REALLY hate is everyone continually painting Brenda and Sonny as having an unhealthy relationship, while painting Brenda and Jax as having a healthy one. Excuse me? Brenda and Sonny never PRETENDED to have a healthy relationship -- that was part of their appeal. You knew they were terrible for each other, that they often brought the worst out in each other, but that they were hopelessly addicted to each other. Brenda and Jax, however, are constantly billed as a "healthier" couple, which is absurd. They are the postchildren for Co-dependents R Us. And watching Jax tie Brenda's shoes on a daily basis is not only a waste of two very good actors, but also a real drain on what could have been an interesting story. And don't even get me STARTED on the disappearence of V. >I am not thrilled with the >vilification of Sonny and the all the anti Sonny propaganda we have to listen >to spewing from Jax's mouth all the time. I hate that part, too. And that's why I LOVED last week when Alan, essentially, told Jax that he was no better than Sonny. Fabulous. And about damn time, too. >This leads me to something that worries me about Guza. He never has been good >at telling a balanced tale. He shows his favorites every scene, every day for >weeks and weeks. Then he'll give Monica (or Kevin and Lucy when they were on) >a good day or two, as if a storyline is starting-- then you don't see them for >three weeks again. Well, my biggest concern with Guza is that he does SUCH an incredible job with the Spencer/Cassadine stuff (and, IMO, he does), that he neglects pretty much everything else to that end. And, so far, it seems that his solution for that problem, instead of getting everyone else their own stories, it to slowly, but surely, ensnare them in the Spencer/Cassidine battle (on one level or another), as well. The bit about ELQ/Jax teaming up to get the Indonesia division back was the perfect example. And now Stefan threatening Jason. I mean, yes, so far he has kept other stories brewing, but I dislike the fact that everything gets boiled down to the most basic Spencer/Cassadine level. >He did this most notably with Jax, when he first came on. It made me crazy to >see Jax daily and K&L maybe twice a month. It seems the Q's are getting the >short end of it this time. The Qs got the short end of the stick last time, too. >I am interested though in a few storylines and I couldn't say that two months >ago. I want to see what happens with the baby mainly. Who will end up with >it? When will Bobbie find out about Carly? Agreed. This Jason twist has made this entire thing more interesting. The only thing, though, is that, IMO, we never EVER got any sign of Carly bonding with the baby. It was always a means to an end -- Tony. So, now her whole, constant "nobody is going to take my baby" thing feels very out of left field. I mean, I would never doubt that a mother loves her baby, but considering the way she has used this baby since the moment she found out about it, it's ringing a little hollow now, that the welfare of the baby is her biggest/only concern. >PC has better characters right now-- all around better and more fleshed out >characters. In fact I like almost everyone on PC-- Julie is sometimes >annoying, but other than that I'm happy. They have taken the time to let us >get to know these characters. I agree. Can't stand Rex, though. Julie wrote: >i agree i guess, but part of what i like about gh is that they DON'T seem like >real people. i don't know anyone like alexis, or luke, or jason, which is >part >of what makes them fun to watch. i think that's kind of what guza meant when >he talked about gh and its characters being larger than life. they're not >SUPPOSED to be realistic--they're supposed to be extraordinary. This I agree with. Now that the characters are sort of expanding in scope, I don't necessarily mind the lack of intimacy as much. I mean, Luke coming out with all of Alexis' past DEFINITELY came out of left field. But the way the whole scene came together was so spectacular that I coule forgive the fact that we never knew that Luke was even looking into that in the first place. It's a trade off, I think. Anne wrote: >PC has some romance(Kevin and Lucy, Karen and Joe, Frank and Julie) and some >good potential romances(Matt and Ellen--or Grace, Eve and Scott-- or Chris). Absolutely. PC kicks GH's but all over upstate New York when it comes to romance potential. They keep shoving Katherin and Stefan down our throats , and that alone is enought o kill my romantic id. Yuck. The only thing worse is Sarah and Nikolas. Double yuck. >How about the Scott-Eve-Chris triangle potential? I mean this can be very >very good. Like someone (Taiyin I think) said, this is one where it is hard >to choose. I have waffled from one camp to the other on this, where I'm >usually firmly on one side or the other. I like Eve with both of them. She >has different relationships with each of them. Exactly. And, aside from my inherent and unconditional preference of Kevin and Lucy over any and every couple in the history of daytime, I must say that Eve is proving to be one of the most compelling things about PC for me. And I am LOVING the Scott/Eve/Chris stuff -- completely and totally. Like I said before, I have NEVER been torn like this when it comes to a love triangle. Never, ever, ever. It's almost infuriating, because I love her with whomeever she's with in any given scene. ;-) >GH right now is a wasteland in the romance department. I don't see any spark >with Stefan and Kath, and they are probably the most "together" couple on GH >right now. I did like the idea of Ned-Alexis, but that's shelved for now. I've developed this involuntary "tick" when it comes to kat and Bat. Everytime Stefan and Katherine are on the screen, before I even realize it, the word "revolting" pops out of my mouth. I can't h*lp it and most of the time I don't even realize it. And then I hit fast-forward again. >What else is even on the horizion? Jax-Brenda redux? After she's all but >admitted she never really loved him the first time. I agree. And they were a big priority for Guza, too. The most blatant disappointment about his return, for me. At least there was a chance at jax and V before Guza came back. >Maybe Jason-Robin? They >left me cold this last time together in Paris, but I suppose it might be >interesting to see what will happen with Carly thrown in the middle of their >relationship. I'm actually very, very eager to see Robin added to this Jason/Carly/AJ mix. >I'm sorry, but for me Nik-Sarah just doesn't light any fires >LOL. No, but they make me want to light a fire UNDER them. >Remember to that Guza's idea of grand romance was Tom and Felicia on the roof. >And of course the never to be forgotten "honey" scene. I don't think he >really gets romance. Nor do I. And for me, that is the single biggest reason to be GRATEFUL that Kevin and Lucy are on PC right now. Lynn Latham, despite my attempts at staying detached and reserving judgement, has been doing an astoundingly insightful and tender job of writing for them. She is showing a sensativity to them that no one has shown since they first slept together at the beginning of 1995. >I like the friendship aspects of PC too. Karen and Julie, or Kevin and >Elllen, Scott and Lucy, or Frank and Joe as brothers. All of the interns >share a camaraderie that I really enjoy. I agree. I think part of it is that Lynn Latham tends to be much more character/relationship driven than individual/character driven (if you know what I mean). Guza tends to write the characters as living much more in a vacuum; Lynn is writing them as being more pliable, which, IMO, is why I like her writing style better. No one person is going to respond the same way to every other person. Everybody has different relationships with different people, so everyone sees different sides to everyone else's personality. I don't think Guza quite gets that. >A lot of time they honestly seem like REAL people, there is some fun, some >teasing, some realistic dialogue. I like shows like Thanksgiving, or parties >where they all get together. They do this kind of thing really well right >now. I agree with that, too. I think the inter-presonal stuff on PC is vastly superior to GH. >Yeah I'd probably go along with you all and vote for a pretty quick end to the >Rex thing. I don't find it as bad as everyone else I guess. I think it was >a good idea to kick the show off, and probably Februar sweeps will see the end >of it. We shall see Well, according to a buzz in SOU, the rumor mill is cranking with the posibility that Rex will be history after this sotryline wraps up. >Kevin and Lucy are having a little fun sneaking around. I like that of >course:-). See, and for me, these two make a comparison between GH and PC moot. Even long before Claire ever left GH, K&L were the ONLY reasons I would EVER watch. There were huge parts of the show that I couldn't stand, but K&L kept me tuning in, anyway. K&L were why I started watching PC, and as long as they are there, I will continue to. If they were to permanently break them up, forget it. I'd quit watching both. >Anyhow to sum up this extremely long post: I'm starting to enjoy GH more, but >I find it no contest that PC is the better soap right now-- FOR ME. Well, considering that the only way I could compare the two is if I take K&L out of the mix, I'd say that... it's probably pretty close to a tie. Though, it is leaning in PCs favor. GH's imporvments lately, despite whatever reservations and/or objections I may have to some of what Guza does, have been very good and impressive and compelling. However, I adore Eve and the relationships that are getting forged on PC are far more interesting to me (most days) than the vast majority of The Next Installment of the Spencer/Cassadine War. However, I also agree with Julie about the one thing that makes GH awesome, and it's one thing that PC doesn't have: Nancy Lee Grahan. Now, if they'd just bring Tracy back... then we'd have to talk again... ;-) Taiyin... more long-winded than usual, today... "Been held-up at gun point by your mother lately?" -- AJ to Ned - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 14:04:56 -0800 (PST) From: Cagey Subject: Re: GH/PC: GH or PC? Taiyin wrote: >Well, since I'm never lacking for an opinion, I figure I'll jump into this >one, too. I refuse to comment, on the grounds that it might get me in trouble . S P O I L E R S H O ! >I prefer Luke when he's dangerous -- and since Guza's been back, Luke's been >more and more the way I like him. My only quibble...his so called "caring" looks at Carly have looked remarkably like glares, to me. If I were trying to analyze Luke, I'd say he's pissed beyond belief that Carly is still in town. But I won't try to analyze Luke ;) I will say that I loved his exchange with the Qs about the baby! >So, while I still want AJ to go to battle wtih Carly (in whatever context), >I agree with what Jason is saying. THAT is why I like Jason. I'm still no fan of the new AJ (I want to smack him everytime he comes on screen; sorry, Jill), but the brothers have been playing off of each other very well of late. I think Jason would have helped Carly because she was a friend, but having both Tony and AJ laying claim to her baby, just as the Qs insisted that he was "theirs" after he became Jason Morgan, is a darned good rationale for his keeping up the pretense. And, as a comment on Friday's show, may I ask what in the hell A.J.'s remark about Jason being used to cleaning up Carly's mess was about? At what other time has Jason come to Carly's rescue? >Well, according to a buzz in SOU, the rumor mill is cranking with the >posibility that Rex will be history after this sotryline wraps up. That doesn't surprise me. The situation he's been written into, he'll either need to kick the bucket, or go to jail. I'm hoping for the latter, being the sole on-list member of the Rex rooting gallery . - --kg - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 14:49:32 -0800 From: Taiyin Subject: Re: GH/PC: GH or PC? >Taiyin wrote: > >>Well, since I'm never lacking for an opinion, I figure >I'll jump into this >>one, too. Cagey wrote: >I refuse to comment, on the grounds that it might get me in >trouble . Pfft! Hush you! >S >P >O >I >L >E >R >S > >H >O >! > >>I prefer Luke when he's dangerous -- and since Guza's been >back, Luke's been >more and more the way I like him. > >My only quibble...his so called "caring" looks at Carly >have looked remarkably like glares, to me. If I were >trying to analyze Luke, I'd say he's pissed beyond belief >that Carly is still in town. Kind of hard to blame him, really. I mean, now that Carly isn't trying desperately to hold onto Tony, she doesn't really have much to lose when it comes to Bobbie learning the truth about who she is. Luke, however, has a hell of a lot more to lose. If I were Luke I'd be more than a tad concerned that the truth was about to come out. >But I won't try to analyze Luke ;) Always a prudent policy. >I'm still no fan of the new AJ (I want to smack him >everytime he comes on screen; sorry, Jill), but the Well, as much as I loved Sean, I think that Billy is doing a really good job. I think the only thing that was really better with Sean was that his AJ was very taken with Carly -- and their chemistry was ASTOUNDING. That night they slept together in Jason's room at Jakes... wow! Sarah's chemistry with Billy is very different; I like it, but it's not nearly as sexual. >I think Jason would have helped Carly because she >was a friend, but having both Tony and AJ laying claim to >her baby, just as the Qs insisted that he was "theirs" >after he became Jason Morgan, is a darned good rationale >for his keeping up the pretense. I agree. Like when he told Tony that you can't own a kid and Tony said that custody was very much like ownership. That exchange said a lot about both of them. Though, I must say that Tony's insistance that Jason's involvement with Carly had something to do with Jason's latent anger over his post-accident treatment was just dumb. It made Tony look paranoid and stupid; not to mention the fact that it showed how low an opinion of Jason he really has - -- even before this fiasco. >That doesn't surprise me. The situation he's been written >into, he'll either need to kick the bucket, or go to jail. >I'm hoping for the latter, being the sole on-list member of >the Rex rooting gallery . Get Rika over here, too, then. She likes Rex also. Taiyin "Been held-up at gun point by your mother lately?" -- AJ to Ned - - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 02 Jan 1998 15:52:23 -0800 From: Taiyin Subject: GH/PC: Logan Interview with Jane Elliot Just because she is one of my all-time faves, and I thought parts of this were very interesting... Logan interviewed her a in December: Jane Elliot aka Tracy Quartermaine on The City Though Emmy Award winner Jane Elliot -- the beloved, supremely gifted veteran of Guiding Light, All My Children, Days of Our Lives and, of course, General Hospital -- has not been seen onscreen since the demise of The City, I get a constant avalanche of letters asking for (OK, demanding) a Q&A. So guess who Santa delivered? Let's cut to the chase, Jane. When are you coming back to GH? The most important thing in my life is my children, and I have finally managed to create for them a quality of life that I feel good about -- and that life is on the East Coast. I would go back to GH in a hot minute if I felt good about raising my kids in Southern California -- and I don't. Really, really good friends of mine like Lynn Herring and Deidre Hall are raising their children there -- but for me it's not an acceptable way of life. I was raised on the East Coast and when I became a mother I went back to my roots, to what I know -- the seasons, the contrast. Never mind L.A.'s pollution, the earthquakes, the crime, the congestion, the completely unacceptable public-school education, it's something even more primary than that. You get a kind of stimulation in a seasonal environment just waking up in the morning -- your clothing changes, your diet changes, where you can go and what you can do changes all because of the weather. I love the part of Tracy Quartermaine, I love GH, I love the people there, but I love my children more. You could play Tracy at age 107 if you wanted to -- do you envision a day when the kids are packed off to college and your life would turn back to a full focus on acting? Absolutely. And I'd love to go live in Southern California again. Are there days when you miss acting? My life is very fulfilling. I love my life. I'm a regular cookie mom. I volunteer in the classroom. I'm at every school function. I do it all as if there was some husband here supporting me, and there isn't. The truth is, I really don't have time to miss it. The only time I miss acting is when I go and see some extraordinary piece of work that I wish I could play -- the kind of work that makes me wish I could jump right into the movie screen and participate in the wonderful game those people are playing. Like? Like L.A. Confidential. I'd love to act with Kevin Spacey. He was so incredible in that film. And... my short-term memory leaves something to be desired... what was the movie with the English actress playing Queen Victoria? Mrs. Brown! Yes! Judi Dench, baby, that is the Best Actress Oscar this year! Judi Dench! I have watched her act since I was 17 years old, and she gets better and better and what she was in that movie was incredibly simple. That is my favorite film of the year. Astounding. Yes, astounding. When I see actors who really, really get it, then that's when I say, "Oh, God, oh, God, I wish I could be there." But beyond that, life is very fulfilling right now -- and the truth is, if I had unlimited funds I wouldn't even think about working. So would you take a lead role on a New York soap? [Laughing] I'd her have a small role that pays me a lot of money. Yeah, like somebody's gonna waste you on a small role. I love to act, and it's the easiest way to earn a living when you're raising kids. If GH was in New York, I would be crawling on my belly like a reptile to be asked back on that show. I would beg for my job! Did ABC ever discuss taking Tracy to either of its other two New York soaps when The City folded? No. Would that have been unwise? The reason I ended up doing Tracy on The City was that they lost their diva, Morgan Fairchild. All My Children and One Life to Live already have their divas. They don't need Tracy. She takes up too much room. With Robin Strasser and Erika Slezak and Hillary B. Smith and Kassie DePaiva, there are lots of wonderful, strong, fascinating women to watch on OLTL, and AMC has Julia Barr, Susan Lucci, of course, and Robin Mattson. I just don't think Tracy fits in. Well, we certainly need someone of your ilk on Guiding Light. There is no queenpin character in Springfield. Isn't Maeve Kinkead still there? No, I'm talking about a ball-busting powerhouse kind of character. Alexandra! Hey, you know [GH head writer Bob] Guza went on the record in my Q&A saying he would take you back anytime, anyplace, under any circumstances and he'd make it work. You could at least come back and do another short-term stint like you did with the Lois storyline. I read what he said and he said, "If the powers that be let me." Yes, that is true. But it should be obvious to everyone -- Wendy Riche included -- that the Quartermaines need help. But they don't need me. What they need to do is get somebody into the Quartermaines who is pivotal and who can get that family working again. Personally, I would love to see Carla Soleito move into the Quartermaine mansion. I would love to see Amy Van Horne go after every man in the house, including Edward, to pay Tracy back for what she did to her father. Amy is one actress who has that spark and fire. She is a consummate performer, and I'd love to see her in a situation that allowed her to play a different aspect of female against each of the various men in the house. Interesting! But nobody asks me what I think. Well, I do. And a whole lot of fans are waiting to hear it. I am buried under "We want a Jane Elliot interview" letters. I'm not kidding you! But about Amy: You know, I never did understand why Wendy told me that she was absolutely blown away by Amy's audition for Port Charles -- in not one but two roles -- and she didn't hire her for either one. Well, she'd be perfect for GH. Jason's in the mob, and Amy is a Mafia princess with a huge axe to grind against Tracy, which brings Tracy into the house without actually bringing Tracy into the house, and it puts this marvelous actress there who has the same kind of danger as Tracy. Well, that's damn generous of ya, but we really want you. Well, thank you. But I think the only reason that everybody wants me is because they haven't been given anybody else to take my place. There is never only one solution. I may be good, but I'm not the only actress on the planet. You know, there was a time when I asked them to recast Tracy, because her absence deprives Stuart Damon, it deprives Leslie Charleson, Wally Kurth, John Ingle, it deprives all of my friends of the kind of work they all used to do when Tracy was on the canvas. I don't feel good about that lost dimension. I love those people and the work they do. I would like to see someone in there giving them the same stimulation. Is it even possible to reclaim those incredible Quartermaine glory days? I don't see how, without you and David Lewis. Sure, Stuart Damon becomes David Lewis and Leslie Charleson becomes Anna Lee, and that original Edward-Lila dynamic could work again. They could put a bitch with one of those boys, someone who starts manipulating everyone and going after the money any way she can get it -- which was all Tracy ever did -- and it can work! The war was always between Edward and Lila, and also between Alan and Tracy. You can set up that kind of conflict in a different generation. It doesn't have to be Tracy and Alan. It can be Ned and A.J. Or it can be Lois and somebody, if Lois is coming back. I don't know if she is or not, but I sense she will. The humor is really outta whack. In the old days of the Qs, the humor was based on character; now it's usually based on situation. The Thanksgiving episode with the turkey burning and them sending out for pizzas and getting robbed by the three Pilgrims who were working for Tracy was among the worst things I've ever seen on daytime, and that's saying something. You were even made guilty by association. Did you see it? No. Well, count your blessings, honey. Nobody can do what you and David Lewis did. That's what great stars are all about. The reason stars are stars is because they're like nobody else on the planet. So I think we should just move the whole show to New York. Hey, you never really assessed -- on the record -- your experience as a producer on Loving. Would you do that job again? When I no longer have kids to raise, what I want to do is produce. At this point it is unrealistic for me to put in a 60- to 70-hour week, which is what you do as a producer. It's the most fulfilling of all, because you get to use every single part of you -- you can use what you know about acting, about the audience, about story, about problem-solving - -- and share it. As a mom, you problem-solve from morning till night, so when you get into a managerial position in soaps, it's really the same thing. Producing is bringing the best out in people. It's making matches between people -- getting a good acting couple on the screen, getting a good writing team together, getting a good directing team together. The people who produce with the greatest success are those who are willing to shoulder a huge burden. And the ones who live in a state of chaos are the ones who empower too many people around them. You know, this business has gotten sort of murky in the last decade because just about everything is done by committee. And to me, that which is done by committee is chaotic and confusing and diluted. And in every situation where someone stands alone, the situation thrives. Do you see that changing? Can daytime drama pull out of that murk? Absolutely. Everything in life is cyclical. Everything. The leaves come on the trees, the leaves fall off the trees. The sun goes up, the sun goes down. To think that you can get on a roll and stay in control and at No. 1 is naive. That's not the way life is. But in order to change things, it would involve a toppling of the very structure of the entire daytime drama business. Nowadays there is so much money involved, so many entities to be satisfied, so many hands on deck at any given point. For any kind of salvation, it would seemingly require a massive rethinking, a massive overhaul. It's not going to happen overnight. There is no quick fix. That's the biggest -------- -- I don't know if you can quote me on that -- in business today to think that there is a quick fix. Slowly but surely things will turn around because they do. Why is The Young and the Restless so successful? Why is The Bold and the Beautiful so successful? Because there is one man at the top! And he gets to call all the shots. But what more does it take than opening your eyes to see that? Everybody in this business is aware of how Bill Bell works and the success it has brought him, but nobody wants to borrow that philosophy. The same goes for Jim Reilly and his single-vision storytelling. The top-three shows are single-vision shows - -- well, Days was until Reilly left. That says it all, but the ABCs and the P&Gs don't get it. They see it but they don't get it. Evidence doesn't make them change their ways. It's not a question of changing their ways. You cannot turn an orange into an apple. The people who don't get it will meet their demise. That's all. They will ultimately be replaced by those who will be more successful. Why is Guiding Light so successful right now? Because it has a man who is willing to put himself way out on a limb and say, "It's my way or no way at all." And guess what? The show's turned around! It's the best soap to watch right now. Now, argue you may with Paul Rauch's technique. He's a grumpy old fart. And he's the last person I would have predicted would have done such an effective overhaul. For the most part, his choices have been very selfless -- which is more than can be said for, say, the choices being made at As the World Turns. What he has done has been done for the benefit of the show, the history, the audience. He's demanding and uncompromising and very clear about what he wants and how to get it done. Now, Paul cooled his heels for years because his style of producing went out. They tried a different style of producing, the "Like me, please like me" style of producing where everybody was everybody's friend, where everybody was comfortable knocking on the producer's door and asking for what they wanted. Well, that's not working anymore so we're going back to the old style, which is where you revere the person at the top, where you are afraid of the person at the top. I believe in my heart of hearts that there is a middle ground, where you can be uncompromising and focused and still be nice. And still make people feel good about what they're doing. There are the Gloria Montys of the world. She's a fabulous producer but I never wanted to get on her wrong side because she's mean as a snake when things aren't going her way. The shows you mention -- Y&R, B&B, GL -- are run by men. How much does that figure in here? I think the most successful environments are those where there's a good mix. When there's a preponderance of either maleness or femaleness, they are less successful. A roomful of men permit bad behavior in each other -- and the same goes for a roomful of women. Men and women together bring out the best in each other, because there's an element of restraint and it gets to be about the work and not about all the other stuff. Well, the Bell shows and GL certainly have women as producers, writers etc. What's the difference when the buck stops with a guy? You know where I'm going here, of course. As horrid as it is to say it, one must wonder if men aren't better suited for this job. The female producers are concerned about being liked and let it get in the way of the job; the male producers don't give a damn. The top three shows -- Y&R, B&B and Days, as well as GL, which is the only show to raise its ratings in 1997 -- all have male leaders. I don't know that we're talking coincidence here. It depends, and there's one book that has helped me a lot -- Dare to Discipline -- and it's about being willing to be disliked. It doesn't mean that you're going to be, just that you have to be willing to be. When you lay a line to your children and say, "This is the way it is," your 13-year-old is going to grumble and slam the door and behind your back scream: "What a bitch!" into his pillow - -- but I know what I'm doing is right for this human being. And the same goes for any managerial position. Being the head of the household and being the head of the show is the same thing -- you have to be willing to let your subordinates go into their offices and scream into their couches: "What a bitch!" It's the difference between being in the editing room and deciding "Where is the edit in this scene? Where is the cut?" as opposed to "How do you feel about me making the decision about the cut? How do you rate me as a leader?" It's not about any of that -- let's just get the damn job done! To think that in this period of communications skills and psychotherapy and trying to increase productivity and trying to put people in a nurturing environment, we've strayed from the real point! And part of that occurs when you have to create by committee. When you've got 20 people sitting around a desk -- where there used to be four -- you now have to look for management assistance to get the 20 people to communicate properly. Now everything's a big deal. At the same meeting you must now have two people from P&G, two people from NBC, two people from the show and a bunch of writers -- and each has their say. Each has an equal piece of the pie, each person has a right to be pleased with the final decision -- now how are you going to get eight or more people to come to the same decision? You can't. They compromise, they acquiesce, the vision goes out the window. And everyone ends up walking out of the room feeling unsatisfied. So what's to be done here? The bottom line is that it isn't working so it will change. How long it's going to take to change, I have no idea. - - ------------------------------ End of port-charles-digest V1 #12 *********************************