Follow @DaytimeRoyalty
| 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 suffering succotash 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. |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| TV Guide's Worst in Soaps 2008; Includes Passages | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Dec 30 2008, 10:20 PM (2,460 Views) | |
| Rick | Dec 30 2008, 10:20 PM Post #1 |
|
Dreamlander
![]()
|
Please do not copy/paste, link only Via TV Guide print The Worst in Soaps 2008 Whole Lotta Shakin' Goin' On Trying to be fresh and hip, Guiding Light switched from a classic, Studio-bound soap to one shot on location in the drab, charmless Peapack, NJ, with jumpy, nausea inducing mini cams, tiny sound and harsh, unflattering lighting. (Kim Zimmer call your lawyer!) CBS defended the makeover as a "work in progress" and since then much of this artsy-fartsy, indie-flick stuiff has been dropped, but why should we be patient while a show gets it's act together? The message--that viewers are that unimportant--just seemed so rude. Foolish, too. Ratings have dropped 21 percent since the "progress" began. Suicide Is Painful Watching Days of our Lives owner Ken Corday systematically destroy his soap, by sticking with his dreadful head writer Dena Higley, axing his dynamic showrunner Ed Scott and dumping his two most popular stars, Deidre Hall, and Drake Hogestyn has been unbearably sad. And, clearly, NBC is too mired in it's own problems to care. Mad Men Head Writer Ron Carlivati and executive producer Frank Valentini beautifully resurrected the flailing One Life to Live, then trashed it by sending Bo and Rex time traveling to 1968 and rehashing a 20-year-old storyline about the crown jewels of Mendorra. The latter, with criminally bad acting by Andrea Evans (Tina) and Kevin Spirtas (Jonas) was the dumbest, most exhaustipating plot of the year. Flack Attack Proctor & Gamble's PR department publicaly blasted SOAPnet.com for posting a Perez Hilton item that outed a top As The World Turns star. Then P&G took out ads promoting ATWT on Perez's Web site. And The Winner Is... Apparently nobody. CBS and ABC have declined to broadcast the Daytime Emmy's in 2009, and, at press time, there was no other takers. Not even SOAPnet wants the damn thing. Now how pathetic is that? Passages It was a year of staggering loss for the soap community. The death of Beverlee McKinsey (Another World's Iris, Guiding Light's Alexandria) was keenly felt, as she was regarded widely as the best actress ever to work in daytime. We also bid adiue to Larry Haines who spent 35 years and won three Emmy's as Search for Tomorrow's Stu. Irene Dailey wo starred for 18 years as Another World's bodaciously nosy Aunt Liz. Eileen Herlie, who had a 32 year run as All My Children's Myrtle, a surrogate mom to so many in Pine Valley. These stars were the bedrock on the genre, and reminders of a time when serials focused on family and relationships and, by doing so, were able to rivet the nation. The biggest shock was the sudden death of Passions creator James E. Reilly, who never met an envelope he couldn't push. And Passions itself bit the dust. Not everyone's cup o' tea, it nevertheless dazzled a large young audience for nine years and left those of us who dug Reilly's special brand of crazy brilliance with many a wonderful, and wonderfully demented memories. Long live Harmony! |
![]() |
|
| Ellie | Dec 30 2008, 10:31 PM Post #2 |
![]()
|
Couldn't have said it any better. It is incredibly sad. The JER mention was also a nice touch. Thanks for posting, Rick! |
![]() |
|
| OneBadKitty | Dec 30 2008, 10:31 PM Post #3 |
![]() ![]()
|
I rest my case. :hail: |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 30 2008, 10:33 PM Post #4 |
![]()
|
I still don't get how firing Ed Scott is a bad move with what he did. I loved Scott's work but the shit he pulled really messed the show up for awhile and was downright wrong, regardless of Higley. There is no justification for that. The rest I won't argue with. I think he hit on some good points but that one in particular burns me. |
![]() |
|
| Ellie | Dec 30 2008, 10:42 PM Post #5 |
![]()
|
^^ We have no idea how much rewriting typically goes on at soaps, and we also don't have any idea how much (if any) Ed did. Also, Ed seemed to have revitalized the show in many ways, and virtually every cast member 'gushed' about him in interviews. And he may not have been the only one involved in any rewriting. So to me, the punishment (singling out and firing Ed) didn't fit the "crime" at all, and the cast morale and production value were huge casualties of Corday's rash decision. I think it's very telling that many in the industry take issue with the fact that Ed was fired. |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 30 2008, 10:50 PM Post #6 |
![]()
|
Sorry but just because the cast gushed and some industry insiders still take issue with it doesn't mean anything. The cast has hardly gushed about him since then and they have spoken highly of Tomlin too. I think they were just shocked Scott got axed. Certainly, they knew enough but they aren't going to say it publicly. Corday wanted this kept in house and I think he told the mags to keep it hush hush too. The mags have been wary of him for years since he boycotted giving them previews in the late 90's. That is part of the problem with the mags. Enough word got out there and the Griffith story came out with it and he got axed too from Y&R. Corday efen hinted in the interview he gave when Scott was fired that he had to do it for the show. It was wrong and what makes it worse is there are better ways to do it. He didn't have to do that and, your right, he doesn't get all the blame. The actors who assisted are to blame too and so is Corday got letting BS like that happen. Yes, Ed did alot of good for the show but this takes away from that for me. His BS caused the show to lose all sense of direction (and, yes, it had direction). I don't care how bad Higley was or is...this doesn't make it ok and I hate that the media makes it sound like it is. I shouldn't be surprised though with Logan. He's just as bad as the mags. Morale was already down to begin with and probably still is until things stabilize so Scott's firing makes no difference. Edited by PhoenixRising05, Dec 30 2008, 10:50 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Ellie | Dec 30 2008, 10:50 PM Post #7 |
![]()
|
On another note - rereading this, I'm not sure I agree that "NBC is too mired in its own problems to care." Didn't Corday thank NBC in his SOD interview? I'm sure whatever renewal meetings there were weren't just "40% budget cut, enjoy your show". |
![]() |
|
| OneBadKitty | Dec 30 2008, 10:52 PM Post #8 |
![]() ![]()
|
Tim you make some good points but Ellie does too. I still think everyone involved in that mess should've been canned, not just Ed Scott. But there is no denying that he also did good things for the show too. |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 30 2008, 10:52 PM Post #9 |
![]()
|
NBC is the ones who forced the cuts and led to Drake and Dee getting cut so, yeah, that part made no sense to me either. |
![]() |
|
| OneBadKitty | Dec 30 2008, 10:53 PM Post #10 |
![]() ![]()
|
OMG, you're kidding! |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 30 2008, 10:54 PM Post #11 |
![]()
|
Oh, without a doubt. He did alot of good but Higley and him brought out the worst in each other IMO. I know some view Higley as bad already but they both came off looking bad and, yes, everyone should be gone. Couldn't agree more. It just bothers me to see Ed's firing coming off like some kind of mistake. Griffith did the same thing and was fired and I would bet Sony pushed for the firing too because it was a PR nightmare. |
![]() |
|
| Ellie | Dec 30 2008, 11:06 PM Post #12 |
![]()
|
Tim, we're going to have to disagree on most of this, but I'd like to make one point in response to what you wrote. I hardly expect the cast, who is now working under Tomlin, to protest in public about Ed's being fired. But I've read and listened to so many interviews with various cast members, and it seems to me (and of course this is not a scientific measurement) that when Ed was hired, the cast had this renewed enthusiasm that I hadn't heard in any interviews from them in years. But now, with Tomlin, I've seen responses like, "Well, we're getting to know him and getting used to his style." The cast as a whole just seems very down about the whole thing. I saw this particularly in the "Day of Days" interviews. When I remember reading things like Stephen Nichols' blog when Ed was hired, the difference to me seems very striking. |
![]() |
|
| Sindacco | Dec 30 2008, 11:08 PM Post #13 |
![]()
|
I don't know Phoenix, had Ed Scott still been on the show I think you would defend him. The same with Hogan Sheffer. But when they're gone it feels like you criticize them more. If Higley and Tomlin would be replaced I think you would criticize those too and defened the new headwriter and EP. Am I right? |
![]() |
|
| NavJLee8785 | Dec 30 2008, 11:17 PM Post #14 |
|
Always the Panic Spreader
![]()
|
'scuse me? no wonder Nelson doesn't like PGP anymore! |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 31 2008, 12:00 AM Post #15 |
![]()
|
Oh, we can agree on that. I think it's because he improved the look and feel of the show. Not only that but he was the first EP in awhile to be so hands on and in tune with the actors. I think that is the difference. I think Tomlin is like that but it's more of a been there, done that attitude and they were used to it being superior with Scott. Scott is a superior EP. Tomlin is good but not on the same level IMO. |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 31 2008, 12:04 AM Post #16 |
![]()
|
No. There is no way I would. I took writing classes in college in hopes of someday being a writer and I would never support what he did, even if he was still with the show. I don't care how bad the writer is viewed. To me, it feels like a persona violation. It's one thing to tweak things but another thing to totally gut material. I would be very upset if he were to stay. I would still praise his work but I wouldn't be happy with the decision of his staying. Ed did wonderful work. It's a shame what happened tarnished that. I still don't bash Hogan Sheffer. I bashed JER during her second run and still do. I have mentioned numerous times when I felt I didn't like something of Higley's. I criticize what I feel like criticizing. I'm different and rare. I've accepted that. I'm used to looking at things differently but I don't have any pattern like you are suggesting. One thing I will point out...it can be natural to criticize them more after they are gone because their reign is over. You can't take a wait and see approach. You can judge their reign as a whole. Not only that but usually after a regime is over, you hear rumors and info about what went on during that regime so that factors in too. Edited by PhoenixRising05, Dec 31 2008, 12:06 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| DrewHamilton | Dec 31 2008, 12:56 AM Post #17 |
![]() ![]()
|
I don't agree with what Scott did behind the scenes, but I have to say that Corday definitely made a poor choice in firing Scott. Higley has proved time and time again that she can't pen a soap as the sole head writer. She should've been the one to go, not Scott. Scott brought production quality back to DAYS. He did more good for the show than Higley ever could. And who in the hell is Higley to call foul when she, herself, is being accused of penning the show during the strike through her husband? If that's not the teapot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is. What Scott did was wrong. It was not in his power to rewrite scripts. He should've gone to Corday, Sony, NBC, whoever, and expressed his concerns about the Higley'st stories and how he feels that she should be replaced because they're not working. Perhaps he did do that and that's why he resorted to what he did. That still doesn't make it right. All I know is that while Scott was working with Hogan Sheffer for the last four months of 2007, the show was simply amazing. It was must-see television again. The writing, the production and directing flowed so nicely. And then when Scott was forced to work with Higley, who has proven she sucks as a writer on two different shows, the show falls apart and all hell breaks loose. And where are we now? The writing is still mediocre. And the talented Ed Scott is unemployed. I just feel that all of this could've been avoided if Corday would have just left Hogan and his team as the writers. I still don't know why in the hell that decision was made. Could someone please explain that decision? |
![]() |
|
| bellcurve | Dec 31 2008, 01:02 AM Post #18 |
![]()
|
I am a writer also, having studied the art and gone to many a classes. And I am purely speculating, but one thing a writer should ALWAYS be open to is having his/her work evaluated. I am pretty damn sure Ed Scott told her, "This is too campy" or "We should probably do this." Instead of Dena being more OPEN to Ed's ideas or anyone else's ideas, she pushes herself and her EGO onto others, at the expense of her art. Any writer worth their weight in gold will at least LISTEN to what their peers are telling them. No man is an island. Even the greats, like Henry Slesar, Harding Lemay, Bill Bell, Agnes Nixon, and Doug Marland, had to take criticism and heat from their producers. They didn't cry about it to the press or write in their diaries about "how no one listens to me." They took a much more proactive approach and used some of the producers and viewers criticisms. And I don't care about whether or not we know its true that Dena wasn't receptive to Scott's ideas or suggestions. I KNOW it's true. You can see it on every bit of material she writes that she and she alone goes unchecked by other members of the writing team or the executive producer. Yes, Ed Scott interfering was wrong. Maybe it was right to fire him. But do not give Dena Higley, of all people, a pass on her crappy ass material because her work going unchecked is "persona violation." You can tell Dena was the girl in workshop who tuned out every bit of criticism she ever heard and continued to turn in crap material she thought was brilliant. And how do you give Dena a free pass on her very open scabbing, only declaring financial core after her name was released to the press by cast members? What about those ethics? And how do you defend Dena firing ALL of Hogan's staff writers, to bring on her friends? Staff writers that couuld have contributed plot consistency, story ideas, and beautiful dialogue for a show, considered by many in the press, to be a trashy, classless sinkhole? I don't think that's very ethical either. |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 31 2008, 01:04 AM Post #19 |
![]()
|
I totally agree. Please, everyone. Don't think for a minute I'm justifying what Higley did or her staying, even if I do enjoy her stuff. She should be gone too. Hell, she should've never been brought back. My issue is with some people acting like firing Ed was a mistake. As OBK said, all involved parties should''ve been gone. I don't think firing Scott was all on Corday. Sony probably pushed it too. Griffith was axed as well and I think Sony was fed up. They had to be so Corday was probably hearing from them too as they played a role in bringing Scott in. I so agree that keeping Hogan and his team would've avoided all this. It may not have avoided these cast cuts but the behind the scenes and misdirection would've never been anything like this. |
![]() |
|
| PhoenixRising05 | Dec 31 2008, 01:06 AM Post #20 |
![]()
|
I'm not defending any of that and I do agree that she wasn't receptive to his ideas but that still doesn't make what he did right. He deserved to be fired. I totally agree Higley should be gone too based on all her shady dealings. She should've never been brought back. That would've avoided most of this. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Daytime News · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2












3:56 AM Jul 11