Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



Hello, soap fans -- and welcome to Daytime Royalty!

For those unfamiliar, we are an uncensored community for fans and lovers of the daytime genre. We have a no-holds-barred atmosphere in regards to the shows, writers, actors etc. but we do not allow member bashing in any form.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member, please log in to your account to access all of our features.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Soaps.com talks with Sandra Robinson
Topic Started: Dec 15 2008, 12:02 PM (2,471 Views)
Ponz
Member Avatar


PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 02:02 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 01:58 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:00 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 12:46 PM
Well, no matter who the writer, that's often how new characters start. After all, wasn't Marlena brought in for Mickey?
Can't remember but you made a good point.

If fans acted like this, we wouldn't have Marlena. We wouldn't have Roman and, therefore, the Brady's. Marlena was a just a mere psychiatrist then. Roman was just a cop protecting Marlena (hmm...sound familiar...hello Rafe). Characters have to start somewhere and new blood is needed because some of the characters are beyond tired story-wise and that isn't just because of the writing either. New characters are needed to mix things up. Higley has actually brought in some good ones but they have left, some because of her and on their own volition or because of backstage BS. It's not like most of them are still left. We only have Daniel, Rafe, and Melanie left really. Brady is an established character. Any other new characters like Charlotte and Dr. Baker aren't really character that seem to have legs yet but they may at some point so I don't lump them in just yet.
I wouldn't assume Higley wants these characters to catch on. Look at how she's screwed over/ignored the two pairings (Lumi/Kaman) she created in '03. The woman doesn't invest in any story, character or couple on a long-term basis. She's addicted to short-term gimmicks, "events" and general randomness.
That isn't her fault.

Alot of the randomness was because of the Ed Scott debacle. Look at the direction the show was going in around May. We had Sami caught between Lucas and EJ. Philip and Chloe were an item and perhaps there was going to be a triangle with Morgan. Ava was involved with Steve and Kayla and then BOOM! Ava gets lumped in with J&M. Lucas and Chloe come out of nowhere. Sami is all over the place. That was not Higley and, when Ed left, she had to go with new plans because her old ones were trashed. Those plans were not all put into play either because of Tomlin and Whitesell.

Not saying Higley is blameless in terms of the writing but the stories and direction have taken a hit because of all the other BS. As for Kaman. she actually showed signs of going there during the strike last winter but that got dropped too. Just think back to her first run. Maybe she brought in alot of new characters like Vin, Maya, etc but she never did random pairings like this and the show never lacked direction like this. Not at all.

I couldn't disagree more on that point. Higley rapidly and completely drained the show of all momentum built up during B&C's tenure. The loss of direction was apparent from virtually the first episode she replaced them in the credits. And the same excuses were made for her then: "NBC are interfering", "Corday has vetoed her long-term stories", "She has to keep the show in a holding pattern for JER", blah blah blah. I was inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt then but not this time. When a writer displays the same trait under no less than four executive producers (and is called on it by a 6-time Emmy winner), it's hard to swallow that the producers are the main problem.



Edited by Ponz, Dec 15 2008, 03:29 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mikegoldy
Member Avatar


Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 03:28 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 02:02 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 01:58 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:00 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 12:46 PM
Well, no matter who the writer, that's often how new characters start. After all, wasn't Marlena brought in for Mickey?
Can't remember but you made a good point.

If fans acted like this, we wouldn't have Marlena. We wouldn't have Roman and, therefore, the Brady's. Marlena was a just a mere psychiatrist then. Roman was just a cop protecting Marlena (hmm...sound familiar...hello Rafe). Characters have to start somewhere and new blood is needed because some of the characters are beyond tired story-wise and that isn't just because of the writing either. New characters are needed to mix things up. Higley has actually brought in some good ones but they have left, some because of her and on their own volition or because of backstage BS. It's not like most of them are still left. We only have Daniel, Rafe, and Melanie left really. Brady is an established character. Any other new characters like Charlotte and Dr. Baker aren't really character that seem to have legs yet but they may at some point so I don't lump them in just yet.
I wouldn't assume Higley wants these characters to catch on. Look at how she's screwed over/ignored the two pairings (Lumi/Kaman) she created in '03. The woman doesn't invest in any story, character or couple on a long-term basis. She's addicted to short-term gimmicks, "events" and general randomness.
That isn't her fault.

Alot of the randomness was because of the Ed Scott debacle. Look at the direction the show was going in around May. We had Sami caught between Lucas and EJ. Philip and Chloe were an item and perhaps there was going to be a triangle with Morgan. Ava was involved with Steve and Kayla and then BOOM! Ava gets lumped in with J&M. Lucas and Chloe come out of nowhere. Sami is all over the place. That was not Higley and, when Ed left, she had to go with new plans because her old ones were trashed. Those plans were not all put into play either because of Tomlin and Whitesell.

Not saying Higley is blameless in terms of the writing but the stories and direction have taken a hit because of all the other BS. As for Kaman. she actually showed signs of going there during the strike last winter but that got dropped too. Just think back to her first run. Maybe she brought in alot of new characters like Vin, Maya, etc but she never did random pairings like this and the show never lacked direction like this. Not at all.

I couldn't disagree more on that point. Higley rapidly and completely drained the show of all momentum built up during B&C's tenure. The loss of direction was apparent from virtually the first episode she replaced them in the credits. And the same excuses were made for her then: "NBC are interfering", "Corday has vetoed her long-term stories", "She has to keep the show in a holding pattern for JER", blah blah blah. I was inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt then but not this time. When a writer displays the same trait under no less than four executive producers (and is called on it by a 6-time Emmy winner), it's hard to swallow that the producers are the main problem.



Well, I love Slezak, but if she had her own story at the time, she would have kept her mouth shut. She just LOVED the tenure of JFP, because she had a story. The show was a plot ridden mess at the time. She loved the era of Paul Rauch, because she was being used. History says that if Slezak has story, the show is great. If not, than it's horrible. She's a classier Kim Zimmer lol
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ladyofthelake
Member Avatar
Professor-in-training

PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:00 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 12:46 PM
Well, no matter who the writer, that's often how new characters start. After all, wasn't Marlena brought in for Mickey?
Can't remember but you made a good point.

If fans acted like this, we wouldn't have Marlena. We wouldn't have Roman and, therefore, the Brady's. Marlena was a just a mere psychiatrist then. Roman was just a cop protecting Marlena (hmm...sound familiar...hello Rafe). Characters have to start somewhere and new blood is needed because some of the characters are beyond tired story-wise and that isn't just because of the writing either. New characters are needed to mix things up. Higley has actually brought in some good ones but they have left, some because of her and on their own volition or because of backstage BS. It's not like most of them are still left. We only have Daniel, Rafe, and Melanie left really. Brady is an established character. Any other new characters like Charlotte and Dr. Baker aren't really character that seem to have legs yet but they may at some point so I don't lump them in just yet.
Marlena did come in for Mickey.
Roman came in to protect Marlena. Steve was brought in as a thug hired by Victor to check up on the Bradys. Mimi was brought in as a friend of Belle's, and she lasted about 7 years.
So, yeah,Tim, you're getting my point. Thanks. :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ladyofthelake
Member Avatar
Professor-in-training

PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:28 PM
Ellie
Dec 15 2008, 01:12 PM
^ I am not disagreeing that new blood is needed, and I'm sorry if I'm not explaining myself correctly. What I'm saying is that Higley's approach seems to be to flood the canvas with new characters and ignore the current ones. New characters should be introduced slowly and only one or two at a time. If the characters catch on with viewers (as Marlena did right away!), then that's a plus for the show. Tim, I disagree that Higley's new characters have caught on. I understand you might like them, but it seems that most don't. The only new (returnee) character of Higleys who I feel has made a positive impact on the show is Nicole. Other than that, I think Higley's approach to new characters is part of what's killing the show. Sandra Robinson and John Callahan are symptoms of this problem, and that's what many of us are trying to explain in these threads.
I disagree. Alot of people liked Ava. Alot of people like Melanie. As I said, Dr, Taylor is actually liked, maybe because of the actress. Daniel actually has his fans. Just look around on the net. Hell, I've even asked people in my life who I know watched the show. I think many are prohecting their anger about the cuts on to the new characters. This happened in 2007 too. Days was doing this same thing with characters like Duck and Gabby after cutting Lexie, Austin, Carrie, etc and people did the same thing. I feel bad for these actors because they have to put up with it and they probably won't even be sticking around so they are getting blasted for nothing.

It's just that I like them either. I don't like them all. Could care less about Daniel or Dr. Baker but, you know what, I also couldn't have cared less about Bo, Hope, etc when they first came on too. The show eventually made me care about them. Then again, that was in an era where people gave things a chance.

I also want to say, too, that it is not Dena's choice to focus away from the current characters. She's just as livid about J&M leaving as the fans. Hell, just look on the surface, when did we stop getting vets onscreen consistently? October. Whose work began around that time? Gary Tomlin.

Higley is not absolved but the shift in direction all came when he joined. I wish some would realize that. Even if you hate Higley, it can't be denied she used the vets in her first run and for most of this run, even through all the backstage shit, until Tomlin started.
Tim, I'm with you on this one, too. I honestly think people are just pissed off about the cuts and these actors had the audacity of taking a job.
And, again, although I might not agree with THEM, there are people who like Melanie and Dr. Dan. This actress from AW probably still has her fans, possibly those former DAys viewers who also watched AW. (I did, but i just can't recall her name. I quit watching AW in the early 80's). Same with the John Callahan thing. Same with Tamera Braun. Same with the Passions guys.
And, after all, Bo, the new psychic, is a vet. :D And, what is a vet, anyway? Wouldn't the actors of these new characters (sans the Passion brothers) be considered vets?
When you look at it, here are the characters introduced in 1994, or before, which would be almost 15 years ago: (gotta love Jason47!)
Rank. Actor (Character) Tenure
1. Frances Reid (Alice Horton) 43 Years
3. Suzanne Rogers (Maggie Horton) 34 Years, 1 Month (contract)
5. Deidre Hall (Marlena Evans) 28 Years, 1 Month (contract)
6. Susan Seaforth Hayes (Julie Williams) 26 Years, 9 Months
7. James Reynolds (Abe Carver) 25 Years, 10 Months (contract)
8. Bill Hayes (Doug Williams) 23 Years, 5 Months
9. Drake Hogestyn (John Black) 22 Years, 10 Months (contract)
10. Peggy McCay (Caroline Brady) 22 Years, 9 Months (contract)
13. John Aniston (Victor Kiriakis) 21 Years, 10 Months
14. Peter Reckell (Bo Brady) 19 Years (contract)
15. Kristian Alfonso (Hope Brady) 18 Years, 9 Months (contract)
16. Ron Leath (Henderson) 18 Years, 1 Month
20. Alison Sweeney (Sami Brady) 15 Years, 10 Months (contract)
21. Renee Jones (Lexie Carver) 15 Years, 4 Months (contract)
22. Bryan Dattilo (Lucas Roberts) 14 Years, 9 Months (contract)

Look at all these names who STILL show up on the show. Of these, look at the ones who have a contract currently. (Yes, I included the DH's in this)

The ones who have been on between 10-14 years:

25. Lauren Koslow (Kate Roberts) 12 Years, 10 Months

29. Josh Taylor (Roman Brady) 11 Years, 1 Month

31. Thaao Penghlis (Tony/Andre DiMera) 10 Years, 4 Months

33. Joseph Mascolo (Stefano DiMera) 9 Years, 7 Months
34. Josh Taylor (Chris Kositchek) 9 Years, 1 Month

Of all these, the latest rankings for November show that Kristian Alfonso and Peter Reckell were in the Top 10. For 2008:
1. Peter Reckell (Bo Brady) 150


4. Kristian Alfonso (Hope Brady) 140
*. Drake Hogestyn (John Black) 140
6. Deidre Hall (Marlena Evans Black-127/Samantha Evans-2) 127

*. Alison Sweeney (Sami Brady-119/Young Colleen Brady-1) 119

It might not be everyone's dream, but it's not like NO vets have been to the forefront this year.
Edited by ladyofthelake, Dec 15 2008, 04:48 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ladyofthelake
Member Avatar
Professor-in-training

PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:48 PM
Ellie
Dec 15 2008, 01:35 PM
^ We're just going to have to agree to disagree about whether the new characters are liked. I have hardly seen any positive sentiment towards the characters you mention, but apparently you have, so we'll just have to leave it at that. I think some new characters do catch on right away (Nicole), and I think those can be compared to today's vets when they started. But I don't see the comparison at all with the other 'newbies'.

About Higley - I have no idea if she's upset J&M were fired, but she's currently head writer of the story that Sandra Robinson is talking about here, where Dr. Taylor "moves things along" for J&M. To me, that seems like a slap in the face to the characters (and the fans). Why not let J&M reunite without someone else in the middle? Why hire a new blond psychiatrist to move along the J&M story? I hold Higley responsible for the storylines, and right now, they're terrible.
She's not the only HW, Ellie. Whitesell is there too and Tomlin is very active in story. I keep seeing Higley being the only one targeted and that is unfair. Very little of what is going on right now is Higley and I will leave it at that.

And you keep citing Nicole as a new character? How? Yes, she just returned but she was on from 1998-2006 and wasn't even gone that long. She's hardly a new face.
Whitesell gets the credit for the good things, and Higley is the target for the bad things, only because she came IN with people cringing about her. As long as she's in, she'll be the target, even if Whitesell ends up writing 95% of the show.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ladyofthelake
Member Avatar
Professor-in-training

PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 02:02 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 01:58 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:00 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 12:46 PM
Well, no matter who the writer, that's often how new characters start. After all, wasn't Marlena brought in for Mickey?
Can't remember but you made a good point.

If fans acted like this, we wouldn't have Marlena. We wouldn't have Roman and, therefore, the Brady's. Marlena was a just a mere psychiatrist then. Roman was just a cop protecting Marlena (hmm...sound familiar...hello Rafe). Characters have to start somewhere and new blood is needed because some of the characters are beyond tired story-wise and that isn't just because of the writing either. New characters are needed to mix things up. Higley has actually brought in some good ones but they have left, some because of her and on their own volition or because of backstage BS. It's not like most of them are still left. We only have Daniel, Rafe, and Melanie left really. Brady is an established character. Any other new characters like Charlotte and Dr. Baker aren't really character that seem to have legs yet but they may at some point so I don't lump them in just yet.
I wouldn't assume Higley wants these characters to catch on. Look at how she's screwed over/ignored the two pairings (Lumi/Kaman) she created in '03. The woman doesn't invest in any story, character or couple on a long-term basis. She's addicted to short-term gimmicks, "events" and general randomness.
That isn't her fault.

Alot of the randomness was because of the Ed Scott debacle. Look at the direction the show was going in around May. We had Sami caught between Lucas and EJ. Philip and Chloe were an item and perhaps there was going to be a triangle with Morgan. Ava was involved with Steve and Kayla and then BOOM! Ava gets lumped in with J&M. Lucas and Chloe come out of nowhere. Sami is all over the place. That was not Higley and, when Ed left, she had to go with new plans because her old ones were trashed. Those plans were not all put into play either because of Tomlin and Whitesell.

Not saying Higley is blameless in terms of the writing but the stories and direction have taken a hit because of all the other BS. As for Kaman. she actually showed signs of going there during the strike last winter but that got dropped too. Just think back to her first run. Maybe she brought in alot of new characters like Vin, Maya, etc but she never did random pairings like this and the show never lacked direction like this. Not at all.

The thing is, Tim, people seem to have a hard time grasping the WHOLE picture of what probably went on. It's like the president getting blamed for a lot of stuff, when people forget that the president can't do much without the backing of Congress and the Supreme Court. It's a team effort. And the Ed Scott/Higley power struggle was something really nasty. It's easier to blame one entity, or blame the replacements.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 03:28 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 02:02 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 01:58 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:00 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 12:46 PM
Well, no matter who the writer, that's often how new characters start. After all, wasn't Marlena brought in for Mickey?
Can't remember but you made a good point.

If fans acted like this, we wouldn't have Marlena. We wouldn't have Roman and, therefore, the Brady's. Marlena was a just a mere psychiatrist then. Roman was just a cop protecting Marlena (hmm...sound familiar...hello Rafe). Characters have to start somewhere and new blood is needed because some of the characters are beyond tired story-wise and that isn't just because of the writing either. New characters are needed to mix things up. Higley has actually brought in some good ones but they have left, some because of her and on their own volition or because of backstage BS. It's not like most of them are still left. We only have Daniel, Rafe, and Melanie left really. Brady is an established character. Any other new characters like Charlotte and Dr. Baker aren't really character that seem to have legs yet but they may at some point so I don't lump them in just yet.
I wouldn't assume Higley wants these characters to catch on. Look at how she's screwed over/ignored the two pairings (Lumi/Kaman) she created in '03. The woman doesn't invest in any story, character or couple on a long-term basis. She's addicted to short-term gimmicks, "events" and general randomness.
That isn't her fault.

Alot of the randomness was because of the Ed Scott debacle. Look at the direction the show was going in around May. We had Sami caught between Lucas and EJ. Philip and Chloe were an item and perhaps there was going to be a triangle with Morgan. Ava was involved with Steve and Kayla and then BOOM! Ava gets lumped in with J&M. Lucas and Chloe come out of nowhere. Sami is all over the place. That was not Higley and, when Ed left, she had to go with new plans because her old ones were trashed. Those plans were not all put into play either because of Tomlin and Whitesell.

Not saying Higley is blameless in terms of the writing but the stories and direction have taken a hit because of all the other BS. As for Kaman. she actually showed signs of going there during the strike last winter but that got dropped too. Just think back to her first run. Maybe she brought in alot of new characters like Vin, Maya, etc but she never did random pairings like this and the show never lacked direction like this. Not at all.

I couldn't disagree more on that point. Higley rapidly and completely drained the show of all momentum built up during B&C's tenure. The loss of direction was apparent from virtually the first episode she replaced them in the credits. And the same excuses were made for her then: "NBC are interfering", "Corday has vetoed her long-term stories", "She has to keep the show in a holding pattern for JER", blah blah blah. I was inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt then but not this time. When a writer displays the same trait under no less than four executive producers (and is called on it by a 6-time Emmy winner), it's hard to swallow that the producers are the main problem.



Oh, I'm not saying her first run was good. I'm just saying it had direction and there was no random, out of the blue pairings. You could tell there was a consistent vision. Not necessarily a good one but there was one. I still think they had an idea that JER was coming back when she got going in her stories and that is why so much seemed to be like "threading water." There was alot of stuff being tossed around about ideas she had that never come to fruition. I think she became merely a placeholder.

And I agree with Goldy. Erika Slezak didn't bitch until she was backburnered so her comments don't hold water with me. Also, Frons was all over Higley at OLTL like he is so many others. She couldn't write what she wanted if she tried and she still managed to do some decent stuff, especially early on, over there.

The main problem is Corday. He gets most of the blame. The rest of them fall into place well below him accordingly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
andromeda


ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 04:34 PM
Tim, I'm with you on this one, too. I honestly think people are just pissed off about the cuts and these actors had the audacity of taking a job.
And what, people don't have a right to be pissed off about the cuts? As for the last part of that sentence, I honestly think people are just revelling in Deidre being fired. How is that for a sweeping generalization?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 04:52 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 02:02 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 01:58 PM
PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 01:00 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 12:46 PM
Well, no matter who the writer, that's often how new characters start. After all, wasn't Marlena brought in for Mickey?
Can't remember but you made a good point.

If fans acted like this, we wouldn't have Marlena. We wouldn't have Roman and, therefore, the Brady's. Marlena was a just a mere psychiatrist then. Roman was just a cop protecting Marlena (hmm...sound familiar...hello Rafe). Characters have to start somewhere and new blood is needed because some of the characters are beyond tired story-wise and that isn't just because of the writing either. New characters are needed to mix things up. Higley has actually brought in some good ones but they have left, some because of her and on their own volition or because of backstage BS. It's not like most of them are still left. We only have Daniel, Rafe, and Melanie left really. Brady is an established character. Any other new characters like Charlotte and Dr. Baker aren't really character that seem to have legs yet but they may at some point so I don't lump them in just yet.
I wouldn't assume Higley wants these characters to catch on. Look at how she's screwed over/ignored the two pairings (Lumi/Kaman) she created in '03. The woman doesn't invest in any story, character or couple on a long-term basis. She's addicted to short-term gimmicks, "events" and general randomness.
That isn't her fault.

Alot of the randomness was because of the Ed Scott debacle. Look at the direction the show was going in around May. We had Sami caught between Lucas and EJ. Philip and Chloe were an item and perhaps there was going to be a triangle with Morgan. Ava was involved with Steve and Kayla and then BOOM! Ava gets lumped in with J&M. Lucas and Chloe come out of nowhere. Sami is all over the place. That was not Higley and, when Ed left, she had to go with new plans because her old ones were trashed. Those plans were not all put into play either because of Tomlin and Whitesell.

Not saying Higley is blameless in terms of the writing but the stories and direction have taken a hit because of all the other BS. As for Kaman. she actually showed signs of going there during the strike last winter but that got dropped too. Just think back to her first run. Maybe she brought in alot of new characters like Vin, Maya, etc but she never did random pairings like this and the show never lacked direction like this. Not at all.

The thing is, Tim, people seem to have a hard time grasping the WHOLE picture of what probably went on. It's like the president getting blamed for a lot of stuff, when people forget that the president can't do much without the backing of Congress and the Supreme Court. It's a team effort. And the Ed Scott/Higley power struggle was something really nasty. It's easier to blame one entity, or blame the replacements.
I agree with all yours posts, including this one.

People get blinded because their faces are involved but those that just watch the show as general fans are better able to see the whole picture. They can recognize the things we are talking about.

I'm not saying not to bash Higley but bash the others too. It's a team effort and, while Higley is not responsible for everything that has gone wrong, she does take some of the blame. I just want people to place the blame accordingly and to acknowledge the situation as a whole. It's not as easy as Higley being the anti-christ. She's had to put up with alot of unnecessary BS this year. Does that mean the show still wouldn't have been great? No. It's just acknowledging the fact that she isn't the only one to place the blame on and it's pointing out the fact that there were other circumstances involved then Higley merely destroying the show left and right. I just feel like just because people hated her already when she returned that it's not a reason to justify blaming her for everything. She's not the sole reason the show is not pleasing more fans. There is alot more to it then that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tammy
Member Avatar


I understand that new characters have to come on a show to make it interesting and to produce sl. All that bugs me, is, if they can't afford the actors that they ALREADY have, how can they afford to keep bringing NEW people on? Granted yes, newbies are cheaper. But why not just work with what you already HAVE???

When you have characters that people are already invested in... why not just work with that and develop that character. Instead of bringing on all the new people and trying to interest people.

As far as Sandra and her character, I have no problem with her. Salemites needs ALL the therapy they can get lmao ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jiggs
Member Avatar


I remember Robinson when she played Amanda on AW. I hated her with Sam - could not stand RKK. I find her rather boring. She doesn't have much charisma, and her looks have faded.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jiggs
Member Avatar


Ellie
Dec 15 2008, 01:12 PM
^ I am not disagreeing that new blood is needed, and I'm sorry if I'm not explaining myself correctly. What I'm saying is that Higley's approach seems to be to flood the canvas with new characters and ignore the current ones. New characters should be introduced slowly and only one or two at a time. If the characters catch on with viewers (as Marlena did right away!), then that's a plus for the show. Tim, I disagree that Higley's new characters have caught on. I understand you might like them, but it seems that most don't. The only new (returnee) character of Higleys who I feel has made a positive impact on the show is Nicole. Other than that, I think Higley's approach to new characters is part of what's killing the show. Sandra Robinson and John Callahan are symptoms of this problem, and that's what many of us are trying to explain in these threads.
When they first introduced this new character I was pissed. They had her in scenes with Marlena and it was very obvious that she was going to be Deidre's replacement. I was highly annoyed watching Deidre have to be in scenes with her replacement. It was sickening. :flipoff:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jiggs
Member Avatar


andromeda
Dec 15 2008, 05:26 PM
ladyofthelake
Dec 15 2008, 04:34 PM
Tim, I'm with you on this one, too. I honestly think people are just pissed off about the cuts and these actors had the audacity of taking a job.
And what, people don't have a right to be pissed off about the cuts? As for the last part of that sentence, I honestly think people are just revelling in Deidre being fired. How is that for a sweeping generalization?
:hail: :hail: :hail:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
thereyougo


An intelligent business person and hw would bring on new characters when the show is a hit and you're preparing for a future. Days fail in both, it's at the bottom of the ratings and the future or lack there of has already been stamped. I do find it funny that some here actually give Higley credit in being creative enough to write any character interesting enough to watch. That's like saying Blagojevich is qualified to be a governor and to make decision.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Tammy
Dec 15 2008, 06:00 PM
I understand that new characters have to come on a show to make it interesting and to produce sl. All that bugs me, is, if they can't afford the actors that they ALREADY have, how can they afford to keep bringing NEW people on? Granted yes, newbies are cheaper. But why not just work with what you already HAVE???

When you have characters that people are already invested in... why not just work with that and develop that character. Instead of bringing on all the new people and trying to interest people.

As far as Sandra and her character, I have no problem with her. Salemites needs ALL the therapy they can get lmao ;)
Simple. It's cheaper to use a new character then a vet. Maybe that will change after they all take cuts but, as for right not, it's just cheaper.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kyrai


Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 03:28 PM
I couldn't disagree more on that point. Higley rapidly and completely drained the show of all momentum built up during B&C's tenure. The loss of direction was apparent from virtually the first episode she replaced them in the credits. And the same excuses were made for her then: "NBC are interfering", "Corday has vetoed her long-term stories", "She has to keep the show in a holding pattern for JER", blah blah blah. I was inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt then but not this time. When a writer displays the same trait under no less than four executive producers (and is called on it by a 6-time Emmy winner), it's hard to swallow that the producers are the main problem.



:hail: :hail: :hail:

Thank you. I'm so tired of hearing Higley is not the problem, she's just misunderstood. There's so much evidence to the contrary.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Kyrai
Dec 15 2008, 06:29 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 03:28 PM
I couldn't disagree more on that point. Higley rapidly and completely drained the show of all momentum built up during B&C's tenure. The loss of direction was apparent from virtually the first episode she replaced them in the credits. And the same excuses were made for her then: "NBC are interfering", "Corday has vetoed her long-term stories", "She has to keep the show in a holding pattern for JER", blah blah blah. I was inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt then but not this time. When a writer displays the same trait under no less than four executive producers (and is called on it by a 6-time Emmy winner), it's hard to swallow that the producers are the main problem.



:hail: :hail: :hail:

Thank you. I'm so tired of hearing Higley is not the problem, she's just misunderstood. There's so much evidence to the contrary.
Who said that?

She is PART of the problem but there is more to it then just her yet some can;t grasp that. It's just Higley, Higley, and, well, Higley. What about Corday? He can veto what she does. He can fire her. What about Tomlin and Whitesell> What about Ed Scott who trashed all the plans she did have for the show? We have no idea if they would be good or not but it plays a role. What about NBC? There is more to it then just Higley.

I swear some would blame Higley for global warming if they could. She is part of it but not the only part of it. I'm just saying some need to look at the whole picture and not just pin the blame on Higley because that isn't accurate at all.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jiggs
Member Avatar


Kyrai
Dec 15 2008, 06:29 PM
Ponz
Dec 15 2008, 03:28 PM
I couldn't disagree more on that point. Higley rapidly and completely drained the show of all momentum built up during B&C's tenure. The loss of direction was apparent from virtually the first episode she replaced them in the credits. And the same excuses were made for her then: "NBC are interfering", "Corday has vetoed her long-term stories", "She has to keep the show in a holding pattern for JER", blah blah blah. I was inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt then but not this time. When a writer displays the same trait under no less than four executive producers (and is called on it by a 6-time Emmy winner), it's hard to swallow that the producers are the main problem.



:hail: :hail: :hail:

Thank you. I'm so tired of hearing Higley is not the problem, she's just misunderstood. There's so much evidence to the contrary.
I can't think of one storyline or character that she has written that interested me. And she makes my favorite unlikable as well. She simply cannot write.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jules


PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 06:29 PM
Tammy
Dec 15 2008, 06:00 PM
I understand that new characters have to come on a show to make it interesting and to produce sl. All that bugs me, is, if they can't afford the actors that they ALREADY have, how can they afford to keep bringing NEW people on? Granted yes, newbies are cheaper. But why not just work with what you already HAVE???

When you have characters that people are already invested in... why not just work with that and develop that character. Instead of bringing on all the new people and trying to interest people.

As far as Sandra and her character, I have no problem with her. Salemites needs ALL the therapy they can get lmao ;)
Simple. It's cheaper to use a new character then a vet. Maybe that will change after they all take cuts but, as for right not, it's just cheaper.
Well if that's the case I guess we should get ready for the two new police cadets who will take over for Bope.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ladyofthelake
Member Avatar
Professor-in-training

PhoenixRising05
Dec 15 2008, 06:29 PM
Tammy
Dec 15 2008, 06:00 PM
I understand that new characters have to come on a show to make it interesting and to produce sl. All that bugs me, is, if they can't afford the actors that they ALREADY have, how can they afford to keep bringing NEW people on? Granted yes, newbies are cheaper. But why not just work with what you already HAVE???

When you have characters that people are already invested in... why not just work with that and develop that character. Instead of bringing on all the new people and trying to interest people.

As far as Sandra and her character, I have no problem with her. Salemites needs ALL the therapy they can get lmao ;)
Simple. It's cheaper to use a new character then a vet. Maybe that will change after they all take cuts but, as for right not, it's just cheaper.
It's simple economics. I'm going to use the example of school systems, with which I'm pretty familiar. There are many school districts who actually offer incentives to teachers who are at retirement age (pretty health benefit packages, etc), to entice them to retire, because hiring new teachers is so much cheaper. They're not getting rid of the positions.............they are filling them with people whose experience or need of a job often allow the districts to offer a lower contract. Ditto the pay cuts or salary freezes.

As for working with what they already have....seems to me they're starting to, except for maybe poor Leann Hunley. Doggone it. But, she's recurring. It just seems, according to spoilers, that those backburnered are making a comeback. I could be totally wrong. Who knows?
We still don't know who might be cut in the future. As far as we know, they might be wanting to take Days in another direction. That might be south, but at least it's a direction. And who's to say Whitesell or Tomlin aren't calling more of the shots?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply