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 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.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Matt Ashford's Diva of DOOL Interview
Topic Started: Jul 19 2012, 09:17 AM (8,913 Views)
DesignatedShelley
Member Avatar


As far as I'm concerned Missy Reeves can choose whatever profession she wants to be in. Who the hell cares, it's her choice. My dad loves science but he hates industry, yet he works in it because he weighed the pros and cons and decided it was the best choice in an imperfect world and he deals with it the consequences as suits him, just as Missy did (she withdrew into her own space and didn't go out seeking to fling poo at people).

But maybe I'm just a poor Midwestern shmuck like Matt and think that people have a personal responsibility to act like adults and that celebrity isn't an excuse on either side.

Matt goes out and defends Missy because the signal to noise ratio on Missy hate, and who it comes from, is very clear. There is no huge Missy fanbase that regularly and consistently sends Matt hate and has done so since 1993, so it's weird IMO to imply that Missy owes any similar reciprocation. Matt doesn't have to defend Missy, it's not his obligation, she's a big girl, etc. But he chose to because he wanted to, that's his choice. If people are now thinking that Missy demanded he go out there and protect her and be her white knight ... I don't even know what to say. Matt chose to do it because he wanted to.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bomber
Member Avatar


I loved the interview. I could have listened to him forever. (I certainly couldn't listen to my husband talk for 2 hours straight -lol.) The one thing I didn't like was the sense of resignation that we won't be seeing jack aggain. I really want Jack back. He has a bigger fan base than a lot of other characters on the show so I really don't get TPTB. But I do agree with MA that you're better not to be on the show than just stuck in the background with no story.
I laso found his comments about PR interesting. I'm not sure how much insider info he has actually got, but he basically said that the show had fired PR because they wanted Hope to have a new love interest!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spencer Hastings
Member Avatar


DesignatedShelley
Jul 19 2012, 02:07 PM
As far as I'm concerned Missy Reeves can choose whatever profession she wants to be in. Who the hell cares, it's her choice. My dad loves science but he hates industry, yet he works in it because he weighed the pros and cons and decided it was the best choice in an imperfect world and he deals with it the consequences as suits him, just as Missy did (she withdrew into her own space and didn't go out seeking to fling poo at people).

But maybe I'm just a poor Midwestern shmuck like Matt and think that people have a personal responsibility to act like adults and that celebrity isn't an excuse on either side.

Matt goes out and defends Missy because the signal to noise ratio on Missy hate, and who it comes from, is very clear. There is no huge Missy fanbase that regularly and consistently sends Matt hate and has done so since 1993, so it's weird IMO to imply that Missy owes any similar reciprocation. Matt doesn't have to defend Missy, it's not his obligation, she's a big girl, etc. But he chose to because he wanted to, that's his choice. If people are now thinking that Missy demanded he go out there and protect her and be her white knight ... I don't even know what to say. Matt chose to do it because he wanted to.
If I could marry any poster on this board in a crazy Vegas type deal, it would definitely be you for this post.


I've always been appalled by how people have treated Missy because of the storyline she was trying to sell. She didn't write the story. She didn't choose it. The only thing she has control over is how she sells it, and how she chooses to sell it may or may not cost her her entire livelihood. I always equate it to my job of substitute teaching--I show up, look at the lesson plans, present the lesson, and get the flack from the students who don't like that the teacher chose to leave. My only decision is how to sell the material and deal with the whiny kids/backlash. Missy is in the same boat, so I've always tried to sympathize with her over that. It must be tough for her, knowing that she'll be the scapegoat every time she's put in romantic scenes with anyone other than MA. Soap fans are so passionate, but can be brutal at the same time. I'm glad he set the record straight. But I could also be a poor Midwestern schmuck who expects too much. :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AHM


Yes, it's great that MA defends MR. Did I imply otherwise? Not sure if those posts were directed my way. Anyway, I don't think MR demanded he defend her either. Why would anyone think that? It's cool he did, and it's exactly what I expect from him. I just think it's interesting that he doesn't seem to be concerned with any of the negativity directed at him. And, in fact, I have read interviews in the past in which MR has defended and said very kind things about MA (particularly concerning JER), which I also thought was cool.

Yeah, Bomber, the "enough is enough" stuff about writers who don't want to write for Jack did not sound hopeful. I have thought other recent interviews sounded more open to coming back and more like he thought it possible, so that was disheartening.

I was fond of the jade plant myself, but I was amused by what he said about the jade plant.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
denise13
Member Avatar


DrewHamilton
Jul 19 2012, 12:52 PM
LOL at everyone taking back what they said about Reeves just because Ashford finally set the record straight. Can't believe Reeves was ever accused of such things in the first place. Nothing she ever said made me think she was anti-Jack and Jennifer. She had a story to sell, and that's what she was doing.
Not everyone! :wink:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DesignatedShelley
Member Avatar


One thing the interview suggested to me -- going off of what esp13 posted -- is that fan feedback has to become a lot more precise otherwise it's going to be poorly interpreted by TPTB. Matt said that there simply was never a plan B for J/J/D, it was either going to be That Story or nothing at all, and that's not ideal and it doesn't speak well of the writers that that was a reality, but what is a fan to actually do about it? Perhaps, since supposedly NBC/Sony/whatever other TPTB are listening now more than they have been before, there needs to be more dialog about what to do when a story tanks. It's not really good soap writing to have no plan B, but I can't think of a way to compel the writers to remember that.

I don't blame Matt for being a realist about it all though. It's got to be tough taking the principled stance for decades and getting nothing in return for it but a shaky financial future. It's easier for fans to take on that fight than actors, so I have no problem doing it if I could think of a way to do it effectively.
Edited by DesignatedShelley, Jul 19 2012, 03:54 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
esp13
Member Avatar


denise13
Jul 19 2012, 03:37 PM
DrewHamilton
Jul 19 2012, 12:52 PM
LOL at everyone taking back what they said about Reeves just because Ashford finally set the record straight. Can't believe Reeves was ever accused of such things in the first place. Nothing she ever said made me think she was anti-Jack and Jennifer. She had a story to sell, and that's what she was doing.
Not everyone! :wink:
Yeah, that was the gist I was getting at. If you are going to complain about a storyline that is messing with your supercouple, you have to be careful of how your message comes across these days. Because I think being so negative as to get the show to just drop a story can actually make things worse - which is what Matt was saying.

Now, if you would rather see them gone or backburned than in a story you don't like, that's fair enough. But there is a big element of "be careful what you wish for" in all of this anymore.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romancer66


AHM
Jul 19 2012, 02:54 PM
Yes, it's great that MA defends MR. Did I imply otherwise? Not sure if those posts were directed my way. Anyway, I don't think MR demanded he defend her either. Why would anyone think that? It's cool he did, and it's exactly what I expect from him. I just think it's interesting that he doesn't seem to be concerned with any of the negativity directed at him. And, in fact, I have read interviews in the past in which MR has defended and said very kind things about MA (particularly concerning JER), which I also thought was cool.

Yeah, Bomber, the "enough is enough" stuff about writers who don't want to write for Jack did not sound hopeful. I have thought other recent interviews sounded more open to coming back and more like he thought it possible, so that was disheartening.

I was fond of the jade plant myself, but I was amused by what he said about the jade plant.
I suspect that MA's position on coming back to the show is subject to change on any given day. But he may also be watching the developments behind the scenes and drawing the not unfounded conclusion that DAYS isn't exactly vet-friendly right now. In which case, he may feel he's better off out of the mix. I'm still stunned TPTB were so willing to let PR walk. Both he and MA could come back at some point, but I'd be shocked if that happened under T&W 2. In the end, the ratings will probably tell the tale, just as they have before.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
granolagirl
Member Avatar
#SorryNotSorry

DesignatedShelley
Jul 19 2012, 03:52 PM
One thing the interview suggested to me -- going off of what esp13 posted -- is that fan feedback has to become a lot more precise otherwise it's going to be poorly interpreted by TPTB. Matt said that there simply was never a plan B for J/J/D, it was either going to be That Story or nothing at all, and that's not ideal and it doesn't speak well of the writers that that was a reality, but what is a fan to actually do about it? Perhaps, since supposedly NBC/Sony/whatever other TPTB are listening now more than they have been before, there needs to be more dialog about what to do when a story tanks. It's not really good soap writing to have no plan B, but I can't think of a way to compel the writers to remember that.
I've had the same dilemma since 2008 or so. I have no clue what the answer is, but their response to fan feedback is definitely one of the things that's broken about the show. I'm not sure there's really anything to do about it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romancer66


granolagirl
Jul 19 2012, 04:18 PM
DesignatedShelley
Jul 19 2012, 03:52 PM
One thing the interview suggested to me -- going off of what esp13 posted -- is that fan feedback has to become a lot more precise otherwise it's going to be poorly interpreted by TPTB. Matt said that there simply was never a plan B for J/J/D, it was either going to be That Story or nothing at all, and that's not ideal and it doesn't speak well of the writers that that was a reality, but what is a fan to actually do about it? Perhaps, since supposedly NBC/Sony/whatever other TPTB are listening now more than they have been before, there needs to be more dialog about what to do when a story tanks. It's not really good soap writing to have no plan B, but I can't think of a way to compel the writers to remember that.
I've had the same dilemma since 2008 or so. I have no clue what the answer is, but their response to fan feedback is definitely one of the things that's broken about the show. I'm not sure there's really anything to do about it.
Especially when it seems that TIIC hear only what they want to hear. In my most pessimistic moments, I think the most thoughtful, articulate fans could submit a detailed and comprehensive treatise about what they think works and doesn't work, and what they would like to see happen and why--and the suits would still find some way to completely misinterpret/misunderstand the message, resulting in more crapola that nobody wants to see.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romancer66


DesignatedShelley
Jul 19 2012, 02:07 PM
As far as I'm concerned Missy Reeves can choose whatever profession she wants to be in. Who the hell cares, it's her choice. My dad loves science but he hates industry, yet he works in it because he weighed the pros and cons and decided it was the best choice in an imperfect world and he deals with it the consequences as suits him, just as Missy did (she withdrew into her own space and didn't go out seeking to fling poo at people).

But maybe I'm just a poor Midwestern shmuck like Matt and think that people have a personal responsibility to act like adults and that celebrity isn't an excuse on either side.

Matt goes out and defends Missy because the signal to noise ratio on Missy hate, and who it comes from, is very clear. There is no huge Missy fanbase that regularly and consistently sends Matt hate and has done so since 1993, so it's weird IMO to imply that Missy owes any similar reciprocation. Matt doesn't have to defend Missy, it's not his obligation, she's a big girl, etc. But he chose to because he wanted to, that's his choice. If people are now thinking that Missy demanded he go out there and protect her and be her white knight ... I don't even know what to say. Matt chose to do it because he wanted to.
No one is disputing MR's right to choose a profession. I am simply wondering why, after all this time, she seems to be so intimidated by the scrutiny and criticism that accompanies any career that takes place in the public eye. Recognizing that not everybody will love you or your work is something pretty much all of us have to face at some point. And most people learn to suck it up, deal, and move on. MA clearly has. But it would be nice to think that MR is maybe a little tougher and less fragile than his interview suggests.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AHM


Romancer66
Jul 19 2012, 04:22 PM
granolagirl
Jul 19 2012, 04:18 PM
DesignatedShelley
Jul 19 2012, 03:52 PM
One thing the interview suggested to me -- going off of what esp13 posted -- is that fan feedback has to become a lot more precise otherwise it's going to be poorly interpreted by TPTB. Matt said that there simply was never a plan B for J/J/D, it was either going to be That Story or nothing at all, and that's not ideal and it doesn't speak well of the writers that that was a reality, but what is a fan to actually do about it? Perhaps, since supposedly NBC/Sony/whatever other TPTB are listening now more than they have been before, there needs to be more dialog about what to do when a story tanks. It's not really good soap writing to have no plan B, but I can't think of a way to compel the writers to remember that.
I've had the same dilemma since 2008 or so. I have no clue what the answer is, but their response to fan feedback is definitely one of the things that's broken about the show. I'm not sure there's really anything to do about it.
Especially when it seems that TIIC hear only what they want to hear. In my most pessimistic moments, I think the most thoughtful, articulate fans could submit a detailed and comprehensive treatise about what they think works and doesn't work, and what they would like to see happen and why--and the suits would still find some way to completely misinterpret/misunderstand the message, resulting in more crapola that nobody wants to see.
Well, I have seen many thoughtful, articulate fans do just that on this very board to no avail.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AHM


DesignatedShelley
Jul 19 2012, 03:52 PM
One thing the interview suggested to me -- going off of what esp13 posted -- is that fan feedback has to become a lot more precise otherwise it's going to be poorly interpreted by TPTB. Matt said that there simply was never a plan B for J/J/D, it was either going to be That Story or nothing at all, and that's not ideal and it doesn't speak well of the writers that that was a reality, but what is a fan to actually do about it? Perhaps, since supposedly NBC/Sony/whatever other TPTB are listening now more than they have been before, there needs to be more dialog about what to do when a story tanks. It's not really good soap writing to have no plan B, but I can't think of a way to compel the writers to remember that.

I don't blame Matt for being a realist about it all though. It's got to be tough taking the principled stance for decades and getting nothing in return for it but a shaky financial future. It's easier for fans to take on that fight than actors, so I have no problem doing it if I could think of a way to do it effectively.
What I find so baffling with this latest debacle is that excellent story was obvious for Jack and Jennifer, with many routes that could have been very good, yet it seems that not only was there no plan B amongst all of the options that I think could have been taken for JnJ, but also plan A was the very route that shouldn't have been taken in the first place (with regard to Jennifer's bachelorette thing; Jack's PTSD was a good move, but it was somewhat nullified by going unused).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
esp13
Member Avatar


Now that I got all the way through the interview, I can add some more comments. First off, I just love Matt's general attitude. It is what it is and he'll take it for what he can while it's happening. Very healthy. Second, I loved everything he had to say about the Bay. His insight into his character, Sara's character, and their relationship was fascinating. I'm even more excited for Season 3 and finding out what Matt and Mary Beth do with the material.

Lastly, I loved his comments on the supercouple thing. Mostly, I think he's right. Intellectually, I agree with him, even if it is harder to deal with on an emotional level because of my attachment to them. But, either way, it was really interesting to hear him talk about it. It was an excellent interview all the way around.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
granolagirl
Member Avatar
#SorryNotSorry

I actually think the PTSD wasn't a bulletproof move -- it was an issue storyline, which Days hasn't done well in a long time, and it upset the balance between the characters in the triangle. The walkabout, as silly as it was, gave both characters a chance to be right and be wrong, and I actually appreciated the potential levity of it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AHM


^I just couldn't get past the whole Jack is no lover of the great outdoors thing. The PTSD should have opened up a lot of good story, but I think the way it played with Jennifer and her "choice" was a problem. I wouldn't have eliminated the PTSD, but I wouldn't have combined it with the dating game.

What he said about The Bay has me very interested too. Question: not that it's likely, but if TV were to pick up the show, would they start from the beginning on TV?

As to supercouples, the "supercouples are limiting" argument holds no water this time for Jack and Jennifer. There was plenty of story there.
Edited by AHM, Jul 19 2012, 05:26 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DesignatedShelley
Member Avatar


Romancer66
Jul 19 2012, 04:32 PM
But it would be nice to think that MR is maybe a little tougher and less fragile than his interview suggests.
I couldn't care less myself. She deals with it the way she wants to deal with it, and doesn't expect anyone else to take on the burden of her feelings, she just does what she has to do to cope (withdraw).

There's probably someone out there who wishes a dude like my dad could've gotten used to the travails of capitalism more than he has by his age, but he hasn't. Oh well. Guess they will have to get used to not understanding how *gasp* people are all different. That's life.
Edited by DesignatedShelley, Jul 19 2012, 05:32 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AHM


I haven't gotten used to the travails of capitalism either. :)

My main beef with MR is her take on her character/JnJ's story this time as exhibited by her interviews and acting choices. It's not personal. It's my feeling about how she handled a character and a story that I have long loved, and I didn't like it. Still, the blame falls more on other heads than hers. I'm sure she's a lovely person, and she can be as sensitive as she so desires.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
esp13
Member Avatar


AHM
Jul 19 2012, 05:24 PM
^I just couldn't get past the whole Jack is no lover of the great outdoors thing. The PTSD should have opened up a lot of good story, but I think the way it played with Jennifer and her "choice" was a problem. I wouldn't have eliminated the PTSD, but I wouldn't have combined it with the dating game.

What he said about The Bay has me very interested too. Question: not that it's likely, but if TV were to pick up the show, would they start from the beginning on TV?

As to supercouples, the "supercouples are limiting" argument holds no water this time for Jack and Jennifer. There was plenty of story there.
From what I understand/believe/imply/flat make up from thin air, I think that if the Bay ends up on TV, they'd start with Season 2 and use stuff from Season 1 more in flashback type segments. Season 1 had a lot of technical and pacing issues, so I think they'd use it only when absolutely necessary. But, I could be totally wrong on that.

Yes, there was story for Jack and Jennifer when Jack first came back, but Matt's point still holds true. Eventually, Jack and Jennifer would have reunited and the limitations kick in again. See, e.g., Bope. I loved his comments about how there is so much drama in actually keeping people apart but always in each other's orbits. But, I disagree that nobody has done it. Other shows have done it quite well, I think. Days just hasn't.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AHM


^Thanks for the answer regarding The Bay, and that seems like it would be a good way to handle it.

Sure, eventually Jack and Jennifer would reunite and limitations would kick in. That's true of any good story that really takes characters somewhere definitive, so we only get crappy bed hopping stories in which characters never really become very solid and thus avoid limitations. I think it's a bad trade. But there was a lot of good story that just plain went untapped for JnJ while the show came up with a bunch of stupid junk (Alamania, Safe house, Carrie/Rafe) to air instead. I think there was enough story to move Jack and Jennifer all the way to Sep. 2013 (I mean, even being featured a couple of times a week). And when the story does become limiting, I don't have a problem with characters being sunsetted or moved to supporting roles. In fact, I think that's really the way to do it; it's better than all of this nothingness we get now. I just hate being deprived of the story I really thought I'd get for JnJ. Mind you, I was sure it would be somewhat disappointing, but the show outdid my expectations in the disappointment department.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply