"One Life To Live" characters moving to "General Hospital"

[David]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/one-life-to-live-general-hospital-280505

Four 'One Life to Live' Actors Reprise Roles for 'General Hospital'
Arc
by Philiana Ng

Four actors from canceled soap One Life to Live are set to reprise
their roles and join ABC's General Hospital for a unique arc.

Kassie DePaiva, Roger Howarth, Michael Easton and Kristen Alderson
will return as their One Life to Live alter-egos when production
begins later this month in January.

“We have a very exciting story planned for the citizens of Port
Charles, with Sonny Corinthos at the center of it! I am confident
viewers and fans alike will be excited for the arrival of John
(Easton), Starr (Alderson), Blair (DePaiva) and Todd (Howarth),” said
Frank Valentini, executive producer of General Hospital.
“Incorporating characters from ‘One Life to Live’ continue the legacy
of the show as we weave them into General Hospital.”

DePaiva has played Blair since December 1993. Horwath returned to play
Todd last year, the role he oriigated from a day-player to a long-term
character. Easton joined the cast of OLTL as John in 2003. Since March
1998, Alderson has played Starr.

General Hospital, which airs at 2 p.m. PT/3 p.m. ET on ABC, was
nominated for eight Daytime Emmys last year. Valentini serves as
executive producer, with Mary O'Leary, Mercer Barrows and Michelle
Henry as producers. Ron Carlivati serves as head writer.

OLTL was nearly brought back in online form after being canceled by
ABC, but has been halted indefinitely.

[Mr. Hole the Magnificent]

On Jan 11, 12:49 pm, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/one-life-to-live-general-hospit...

YaY!!!!!!!!

[Nyssa]

Of all the characters they could have brought over from OLTL, John has
got to be one of the worst. UGH! Not too thrilled about Starr either.

And linking them all into yet another Sonny story...double UGH! John and
Sonny both mumbling and skulking around is not appealing at all. No thanks!

Nyssa, who will be finding other things to do

[Ian J. Ball]

On Jan 11, 11:24 am, "Mr. Hole the Magnificent"

No - these characters don't fit in *at all* on GH; they'd barely fit
in on AMC!

Maybe, like Cutter, Kim and Aubrey could work on GH. But few other
OLTL characters would work on GH (which is total dreck these days,
anyway...).

[He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole]

Says you.

> Maybe, like Cutter, Kim and Aubrey could work on GH. But few other
> OLTL characters would work on GH (which is total dreck these days,
> anyway...).

The show will have a new feel in March when Valentini and Carlivati's
material starts to air in March.

[Ian J. Ball]

On Jan 11, 5:09 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The

Yes. And I'm right.

> > Maybe, like Cutter, Kim and Aubrey could work on GH. But few other
> > OLTL characters would work on GH (which is total dreck these days,
> > anyway...).
>
> The show will have a new feel in March when Valentini and Carlivati's
> material starts to air in March.

We'll see.

[Hunter]

In article <sqirg79150b3pt0o6...@4ax.com>, diml...@yahoo.com
says...

>
> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/one-life-to-live-general-hospital-280505
>
> Four 'One Life to Live' Actors Reprise Roles for 'General Hospital'
> Arc
> by Philiana Ng
>
> Four actors from canceled soap One Life to Live are set to reprise
> their roles and join ABC's General Hospital for a unique arc.
>
> Kassie DePaiva, Roger Howarth, Michael Easton and Kristen Alderson
> will return as their One Life to Live alter-egos when production
> begins later this month in January.
>

> ?We have a very exciting story planned for the citizens of Port

> Charles, with Sonny Corinthos at the center of it! I am confident
> viewers and fans alike will be excited for the arrival of John

> (Easton), Starr (Alderson), Blair (DePaiva) and Todd (Howarth),? said

> Frank Valentini, executive producer of General Hospital.

> ?Incorporating characters from ?One Life to Live? continue the legacy
> of the show as we weave them into General Hospital.?

>
> DePaiva has played Blair since December 1993. Horwath returned to play
> Todd last year, the role he oriigated from a day-player to a long-term
> character. Easton joined the cast of OLTL as John in 2003. Since March
> 1998, Alderson has played Starr.
>
> General Hospital, which airs at 2 p.m. PT/3 p.m. ET on ABC, was
> nominated for eight Daytime Emmys last year. Valentini serves as
> executive producer, with Mary O'Leary, Mercer Barrows and Michelle
> Henry as producers. Ron Carlivati serves as head writer.
>
> OLTL was nearly brought back in online form after being canceled by
> ABC, but has been halted indefinitely.

---
This may indicate that General Hospital is going to be around for a few more
years-or maybe just a year at least. Why go though all this trouble if these
crossover characters aren't going to have significant storylines? Of course I
would say the network has the final say regardless of any plans by the
producers and writers.

Oh well like I said in another post I have watched the show on a regular basis
since the late '80s but I will tune in for the last couple of episodes when the
end comes. Auld Lang Syne.
--
----->Hunter

"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."

-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907

[He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole]

No. No, you're not.

>
> > > Maybe, like Cutter, Kim and Aubrey could work on GH. But few other
> > > OLTL characters would work on GH (which is total dreck these days,
> > > anyway...).
>
> > The show will have a new feel in March when Valentini and Carlivati's
> > material starts to air in March.
>
> We'll see.

I've already seen it, I see all.

[David]

Painting yourself blue and refusing to wear clothing doesn't make you
omniscient.

[He is the Resurrection and the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole]

On Jan 11, 10:18 pm, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:55:22 -0800 (PST), "He is the Resurrection and

> the Light: The Rapacious Mr. Hole" <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Jan 11, 8:35 pm, "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 11, 5:09 pm, "He is the Resurrection and the Light: The
> >> Rapacious Mr. Hole" <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Jan 11, 7:32 pm, "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote:
> >> > > Maybe, like Cutter, Kim and Aubrey could work on GH. But few other
> >> > > OLTL characters would work on GH (which is total dreck these days,
> >> > > anyway...).
>
> >> > The show will have a new feel in March when Valentini and Carlivati's
> >> > material starts to air in March.
>
> >> We'll see.
>
> >I've already seen it, I see all.
>
> Painting yourself blue and refusing to wear clothing doesn't make you
> omniscient.

The new season of Lost starting soon is gonna be great!

[David]

<removing my head from the oven>

This changes everything!

[chicagofan]

Susan wrote:

> Maybe John is returning as a vampire or as the only person who can take down
> Sonny
>

I'm sorry to see that Howarth, instead of Ted King will be appearing on
GH. :(
bj

[Seth J. Bookey]

I am very much of two minds on this. First of all, if you like OLTL so much... why not just cancel the depressing
abyss that GH has become. OLTL had better ratings and continuous creativity!

But, if I was a GH fan, I wouldn't want a Manning invasion!

I think this is one of two things: Bring some ratings up for GH by getting mourning OLTL fans to cross over, if
they are not watching GH. It also means that people vowing to never watch ABC again after OLTL goes off might
reconsider, since the die-hards want to see the Mannings. Also, just because they worked well at OLTL doesn't mean
Valentini and Carlavati will do as well at GH. I recall that Lorraine Broderick, who was so great as HW at AMC,
was reviled by many OLTL fans when she was HW there. I recall vividly, before Malone came back, a ratsa fan
shrieking, "FUCK YOU LORRAINE BRODERICK!" due to some storylines involving Natalie and Mitch right before Malone
returned.

However, this move it will have to piss off GH fans who didn't watch OLTL.

PERSONALLY, if I was running things, I would have cut OLTL and GH down to a half hour each, and put Frank V in
charge of both shows, and gotten a much better writer for GH and kept Carlavati on as HW at OLTL. I don't think
one HW could do double duty, even if the shows were cut down to 30 minutes.

Idiot Brian Frons was quoted as saying he wanted to "merge" AMC and OLTL. I don't think that would work. Cutting
them into 30 minutes couldhave, but no one seemed to want that.

I think ABC is actually a bit concerned about losing audience. I mean, how to you lose Oprah, Regis, and TWO soap
institutions in one 12-month period, and expect the ratings to stay the same or better? The Chew is not doing as
well as AMC did a year ago at this time. It's having better ratings than any of us expected, though. Meanwhile,
the Revolution is an unknown quantity... who knows how well that will do.

RIght now in NYC, the Oprah slot is filed by YET another hour of news. They could easily reverse that.

Sigh.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seth J. Bookey
seth...@panix.com

[Rthrquiet]

On Jan 12, 3:41 pm, Seth J. Bookey <sethb...@panix.com> wrote:

> Also, just because they worked well at OLTL doesn't mean
> Valentini and Carlavati will do as well at GH.

This is an excellent point, and it would be rather definitive if the
creative team at GH that they were replacing were working well. But
from all reports (I've only been able to watch two episodes, plus
snippets of others), JFP plus Garin Wolf was even worse than JFP plus
Guza, which was awful enough. So what's there to lose, really, by
giving Valentini and Carlivati--coming off of an extremely successful
year at OLTL--a try?

> I recall that Lorraine Broderick, who was so great as HW at AMC,
> was reviled by many OLTL fans when she was HW there. I recall vividly, before Malone came back, a ratsa fan
> shrieking, "FUCK YOU LORRAINE BRODERICK!" due to some storylines involving Natalie and Mitch right before Malone
> returned.

That's because LB's work on OLTL was pretty awful (and her work on
ATWT was even worse). She really seems to have been able to work magic
only at AMC. I can think of other instances of HWs whose work seemed
to mesh extremely well on one show in particular and to be unable to
translate that success into work on another show (as well as a bunch
who never really seemed to be successful anywhere but kept getting
hired anyway). What I think is particularly of concern in this case is
that Valentini has spent the majority of his career at OLTL, and if
I'm remembering correctly, Carlivati's entire soap writing career has
been at OLTL. How much of their success was because of their strong
history with OLTL? But as I said, it's not as though they're replacing
a successful team at GH. There's certainly a risk, but was it any
greater than the risk of sticking with a team that clearly was not
working, or with hiring, as replacements, any other combination of the
usual suspects who are on the market?

> However, this move it will have to piss off GH fans who didn't watch OLTL.

Which I can see. I think they should wait to see whose screen time
gets taken, though. If ABC is smart, they'll dump some of the
incipient storylines and characters that haven't taken off and give
the Mannings their screen time.

What I think is a bigger concern is how V and C are going to mesh
these characters so strongly identified with OLTL, which has a very
different style and feel, with the dark, misogynistic, dysfunction-
riddled, depressing, bleak, grim world that GH has been for a decade
or so (and especially in the last five years). I'd argue that GH can
use some serious lightening up, which V and C could give it, but I'm
not sure loyal GH fans--especially those who've loved the last decade
or so, and they definitely exist--would agree with me. I'm guessing
that's what V and C have planned--more humor, less relentless
grimness--as it's been their trademark at OLTL, and I'm guessing that
if I'm right about that, that may end up being a bigger hurdle for
(some) GH fans than the screen time the Mannings get.

But then, there's another audience out there: the ones who have
stopped watching over the last decade or so. They may actually welcome
such a change in tone and focus--if they can be lured back.

> PERSONALLY, if I was running things, I would have cut OLTL and GH down to a half hour each, and put Frank V in
> charge of both shows, and gotten a much better writer for GH and kept Carlavati on as HW at OLTL. I don't think
> one HW could do double duty, even if the shows were cut down to 30 minutes.

It might have been interesting, under your scenario, to see what
Valentini and Guza could have done with GH. I remember Guza doing good
work in the 90s when Wendy Riche was the EP.

> Idiot Brian Frons was quoted as saying he wanted to "merge" AMC and OLTL. I don't think that would work. Cutting
> them into 30 minutes couldhave, but no one seemed to want that.

And I so wonder why not. It seems to me that should have been a
logical step that was considered/tried in the case of many cancelled
hour-long soaps, before cancelling them.

Michael

[Seth J. Bookey]

In <2820574a-c67c-41f5...@k10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> Rthrquiet <rthr...@aol.com> writes:

>On Jan 12, 3:41=A0pm, Seth J. Bookey <sethb...@panix.com> wrote:

>> Also, just because they worked well at OLTL doesn't mean
>> Valentini and Carlavati will do as well at GH.

>This is an excellent point, and it would be rather definitive if the
>creative team at GH that they were replacing were working well. But
>from all reports (I've only been able to watch two episodes, plus
>snippets of others), JFP plus Garin Wolf was even worse than JFP plus
>Guza, which was awful enough. So what's there to lose, really, by
>giving Valentini and Carlivati--coming off of an extremely successful
>year at OLTL--a try?

>> I recall that Lorraine Broderick, who was so great as HW at AMC,

>> was reviled by many OLTL fans when she was HW there. I recall vividly, be=

>fore Malone came back, a ratsa fan

>> shrieking, "FUCK YOU LORRAINE BRODERICK!" due to some storylines involvin=

>g Natalie and Mitch right before Malone
>> returned.

>That's because LB's work on OLTL was pretty awful (and her work on
>ATWT was even worse). She really seems to have been able to work magic
>only at AMC. I can think of other instances of HWs whose work seemed
>to mesh extremely well on one show in particular and to be unable to
>translate that success into work on another show (as well as a bunch
>who never really seemed to be successful anywhere but kept getting
>hired anyway). What I think is particularly of concern in this case is
>that Valentini has spent the majority of his career at OLTL, and if
>I'm remembering correctly, Carlivati's entire soap writing career has
>been at OLTL. How much of their success was because of their strong
>history with OLTL? But as I said, it's not as though they're replacing
>a successful team at GH. There's certainly a risk, but was it any
>greater than the risk of sticking with a team that clearly was not
>working, or with hiring, as replacements, any other combination of the
>usual suspects who are on the market?

>> However, this move it will have to piss off GH fans who didn't watch OLTL=

>.

>Which I can see. I think they should wait to see whose screen time
>gets taken, though. If ABC is smart, they'll dump some of the
>incipient storylines and characters that haven't taken off and give
>the Mannings their screen time.

>What I think is a bigger concern is how V and C are going to mesh
>these characters so strongly identified with OLTL, which has a very
>different style and feel, with the dark, misogynistic, dysfunction-
>riddled, depressing, bleak, grim world that GH has been for a decade
>or so (and especially in the last five years). I'd argue that GH can
>use some serious lightening up, which V and C could give it, but I'm
>not sure loyal GH fans--especially those who've loved the last decade
>or so, and they definitely exist--would agree with me. I'm guessing
>that's what V and C have planned--more humor, less relentless
>grimness--as it's been their trademark at OLTL, and I'm guessing that
>if I'm right about that, that may end up being a bigger hurdle for
>(some) GH fans than the screen time the Mannings get.

>But then, there's another audience out there: the ones who have
>stopped watching over the last decade or so. They may actually welcome
>such a change in tone and focus--if they can be lured back.

>> PERSONALLY, if I was running things, I would have cut OLTL and GH down to=

> a half hour each, and put Frank V in

>> charge of both shows, and gotten a much better writer for GH and kept Car=

>lavati on as HW at OLTL. I don't think

>> one HW could do double duty, even if the shows were cut down to 30 minute=

>s.

>It might have been interesting, under your scenario, to see what
>Valentini and Guza could have done with GH. I remember Guza doing good
>work in the 90s when Wendy Riche was the EP.

>> Idiot Brian Frons was quoted as saying he wanted to "merge" AMC and OLTL.=

> I don't think that would work. Cutting
>> them into 30 minutes couldhave, but no one seemed to want that.

>And I so wonder why not. It seems to me that should have been a
>logical step that was considered/tried in the case of many cancelled
>hour-long soaps, before cancelling them.

>Michael

I have been thinking about this for a while. It's been a foregone conclusion for many of us that GH is doomed to
be off the air a year from now. So why would ABC even bother to try to do anything to save it when Anne Sweeney
(Frons' boss) was more than happy to axe two shows at once?

Well, once a company like ABC makes a decision, even if they rue that decision, they never overturn that decision.
Despite the obvious fan outrage and good demos and ratings for OLTL, they went ahead and got rid of it anyway.

But now, I am wondering if someone at ABC actually DOES rue that decision, and maybe they actually want GH in
better shape, in case The Chew or the Revolution fail, etc. It's certainly not a bad idea to try to keep the soap
that's beenthe network's favorite for decades, and putting a good team in place to help it (Frank and Ron) might
not be a horrible idea. And since OLTL has better ratings, pandering to the OLTL audience by having McBain and the
Mannings go to Port Charles makes sense since there's obviously a loyal audience, and MORE PEOPLE WATCHING OLTL at
this point than GH!

I dunno. Is it possible someone at ABC learned something from all that negative publicity?

--Seth

[Remysun]

On Jan 13, 12:13 pm, Seth J. Bookey <sethb...@panix.com> wrote:

> I dunno. Is it possible someone at ABC learned something from all that negative publicity?

Network and learning are oxymoronic terms.

[Alane Sue]

Seth J. Bookey wrote:>
>
> I have been thinking about this for a while. It's been a foregone conclusion for many of us that GH is doomed to
> be off the air a year from now. So why would ABC even bother to try to do anything to save it when Anne Sweeney
> (Frons' boss) was more than happy to axe two shows at once?
>
> Well, once a company like ABC makes a decision, even if they rue that decision, they never overturn that decision.
> Despite the obvious fan outrage and good demos and ratings for OLTL, they went ahead and got rid of it anyway.
>
> But now, I am wondering if someone at ABC actually DOES rue that decision, and maybe they actually want GH in
> better shape, in case The Chew or the Revolution fail, etc. It's certainly not a bad idea to try to keep the soap
> that's beenthe network's favorite for decades, and putting a good team in place to help it (Frank and Ron) might
> not be a horrible idea. And since OLTL has better ratings, pandering to the OLTL audience by having McBain and the
> Mannings go to Port Charles makes sense since there's obviously a loyal audience, and MORE PEOPLE WATCHING OLTL at
> this point than GH!
>
> I dunno. Is it possible someone at ABC learned something from all that negative publicity?
>
> --Seth

I swear I read something at the time of the Katie Couric announcement
that if The Chew or The Revolution failed, ABC was prepared to move GH
into that timeslot. So maybe - just maybe - they are trying to give GH a
fighting chance.

If I had been given the choice to save only one of the three ABC soaps,
I would have chosen OLTL. But I don't want to lose all three of my
"stories" within a year. So, I'm hoping against hope for a GH miracle.

Alane

[Ian J. Ball]

On Jan 11, 9:49 am, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/one-life-to-live-general-hospit...
>

> Four 'One Life to Live' Actors Reprise Roles for 'General Hospital'
> Arc
> by Philiana Ng
>
> Four actors from canceled soap One Life to Live are set to reprise
> their roles and join ABC's General Hospital for a unique arc.
>
> Kassie DePaiva, Roger Howarth, Michael Easton and Kristen Alderson
> will return as their One Life to Live alter-egos when production
> begins later this month in January.

The more I think about this, the more pissed I get:

- So they're going to move Easton over, but *NOT* Melissa Archer as
well?! *Fuck* them.

- So does this mean that Todd is just going to skate on murder, and
"disappearing" Tomas?! That's a heck of a way to end OLTL if true (I
haven't viewed the last two episodes of OLTL yet...).

About the only good thing I can say about this is that they at least
aren't bringing Alderson's brother, playing the odious Jack Manning,
over too.


Ian (P.S. The thing I find really weird about this?! Neither Howarth
nor Alderson signed up with Prospect Park, yet both are ending up
moving over to GH - so why didn't these two just sign up with Prospect
Park along with the rest?! Weird...)

[Rthrquiet]

On Jan 13, 9:30 pm, "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote:

> So they're going to move Easton over, but *NOT* Melissa Archer as
> well?! *Fuck* them.

I don't know/haven't read anything, but it's entirely possible MA did
not want to move to the West Coast.

> About the only good thing I can say about this is that they at least
> aren't bringing Alderson's brother, playing the odious Jack Manning,
> over too.

He didn't play the odious Jack Manning; that was Andrew Trischitta
(sp?). Eddie Alderson played Matthew Buchanan.

> Ian  (P.S. The thing I find really weird about this?! Neither Howarth
> nor Alderson signed up with Prospect Park, yet both are ending up
> moving over to GH - so why didn't these two just sign up with Prospect
> Park along with the rest?! Weird...)

I understand (though I can't apply this specifically to Howarth or
Alderson because I don't have any specific knowledge there) that a
number of performers had qualms about the online idea per se; it was
uncharted territory, and they weren't sufficiently clear on how it
would work or what they would have been getting themselves into to
feel comfortable. It's entirely possible more of them would have
signed on as things progressed and clarified. (And as it turned out,
those who were skeptical were right to be.) The West Coast/East Coast
thing may have been at play here, as well; I wonder if Howarth and
Alderson didn't want to go the Prospect Park route because they
actually did want to be in Hollywood rather than New York. (I vaguely
remember reading something like that in Alderson's case, but I could
be misremembering, or hallucinating, or whatever.)

Michael

[Ian J. Ball]

On Jan 13, 7:31 pm, Rthrquiet <rthrqu...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 13, 9:30 pm, "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > So they're going to move Easton over, but *NOT* Melissa Archer as
> > well?! *Fuck* them.
>
> I don't know/haven't read anything, but it's entirely possible MA did
> not want to move to the West Coast.

It's possible, though I have a hard time believing that Archer would
turn down a "free" ticket to Hollywood - this reads more as ABC
"cheaping out" here.

Either way, bringing John, but not Natalie, over pretty much destroys
an important aspect of OLTL's ending... >:/

> > About the only good thing I can say about this is that they at least
> > aren't bringing Alderson's brother, playing the odious Jack Manning,
> > over too.
>
> He didn't play the odious Jack Manning; that was Andrew Trischitta
> (sp?). Eddie Alderson played Matthew Buchanan.

Thanks for correcting that for me.

> > Ian  (P.S. The thing I find really weird about this?! Neither Howarth
> > nor Alderson signed up with Prospect Park, yet both are ending up
> > moving over to GH - so why didn't these two just sign up with Prospect
> > Park along with the rest?! Weird...)
>
> I understand (though I can't apply this specifically to Howarth or
> Alderson because I don't have any specific knowledge there) that a
> number of performers had qualms about the online idea per se; it was
> uncharted territory, and they weren't sufficiently clear on how it
> would work or what they would have been getting themselves into to
> feel comfortable. It's entirely possible more of them would have
> signed on as things progressed and clarified. (And as it turned out,
> those who were skeptical were right to be.) The West Coast/East Coast
> thing may have been at play here, as well; I wonder if Howarth and
> Alderson didn't want to go the Prospect Park route because they
> actually did want to be in Hollywood rather than New York. (I vaguely
> remember reading something like that in Alderson's case, but I could
> be misremembering, or hallucinating, or whatever.)

Ah, that's an interesting angle that I hadn't considered - that
Alderson wanted to move West. I had assumed that's why J.P. Lavosier
and Farah Fath never signed on - because they wanted to move back to
L.A. (which was also the impression I got from the couple of episodes
of "Dirty Soap" I sat through...).

(Meanwhile, I just assumed in Bree Williamson' case, she just wanted
to settle down and raise her kids, which is why she never signed on
with Prospect Park...)

[Seth J. Bookey]

In <63f29b20-c7c2-46c9...@k28g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> writes:

>On Jan 13, 7:31=A0pm, Rthrquiet <rthrqu...@aol.com> wrote:

>> On Jan 13, 9:30=A0pm, "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> > So they're going to move Easton over, but *NOT* Melissa Archer as
>> > well?! *Fuck* them.
>>
>> I don't know/haven't read anything, but it's entirely possible MA did
>> not want to move to the West Coast.

>It's possible, though I have a hard time believing that Archer would
>turn down a "free" ticket to Hollywood - this reads more as ABC
>"cheaping out" here.

>Either way, bringing John, but not Natalie, over pretty much destroys
>an important aspect of OLTL's ending... >:/

>> > About the only good thing I can say about this is that they at least
>> > aren't bringing Alderson's brother, playing the odious Jack Manning,
>> > over too.
>>
>> He didn't play the odious Jack Manning; that was Andrew Trischitta
>> (sp?). Eddie Alderson played Matthew Buchanan.

>Thanks for correcting that for me.

>> > Ian =A0(P.S. The thing I find really weird about this?! Neither Howarth

>> > nor Alderson signed up with Prospect Park, yet both are ending up
>> > moving over to GH - so why didn't these two just sign up with Prospect
>> > Park along with the rest?! Weird...)
>>
>> I understand (though I can't apply this specifically to Howarth or
>> Alderson because I don't have any specific knowledge there) that a
>> number of performers had qualms about the online idea per se; it was
>> uncharted territory, and they weren't sufficiently clear on how it
>> would work or what they would have been getting themselves into to
>> feel comfortable. It's entirely possible more of them would have
>> signed on as things progressed and clarified. (And as it turned out,
>> those who were skeptical were right to be.) The West Coast/East Coast
>> thing may have been at play here, as well; I wonder if Howarth and
>> Alderson didn't want to go the Prospect Park route because they
>> actually did want to be in Hollywood rather than New York. (I vaguely
>> remember reading something like that in Alderson's case, but I could
>> be misremembering, or hallucinating, or whatever.)

I don't really thing the Mannings in Port Charles will be a long-term story. It's being referred to as an "arc"
and I think that maybe Frank convinced someone to let them finish telling the story of the Two Todds on GH since
the PP deal fell through. It doesn't really cost ABC all that much to do this, and it creates "some" good will for
the disenfranchised OLTL fans and also potentially brings GH new viewers (which it needs). I think it is fairly
short term, and GH has bent over backwards in the past to accommodate tight filming schedules (like, they did
weeks of Franco's scenes in just a few days, IIRC.

Also, Agnes Nixon, honored at Harvard, revealed that Prospect Park was considering moving production to CANADA,
and when she balked, citing problems getting actors to go, they said, "Oh. We can just recast them." Her
observation was, "They really didn't understand soap operas." It's very possible that the younger actors were very
leary of PP, and opted to move on, while the older actors had nothing to lose by signing on and giving the fans
some hope. From what Ilene Kristen said in a recent interview, PP seemed to be very positive at first and they all
thought it was a go, and over time, it became very clear they had no money. Ack.

[Remysun]

On Jan 13, 7:52 pm, Alane Sue <alane...@aol.com> wrote:

> I swear I read something at the time of the Katie Couric announcement
> that if The Chew or The Revolution failed, ABC was prepared to move GH
> into that timeslot. So maybe - just maybe - they are trying to give GH a
> fighting chance.
>
> If I had been given the choice to save only one of the three ABC soaps,
> I would have chosen OLTL. But I don't want to lose all three of my
> "stories" within a year. So, I'm hoping against hope for a GH miracle.

I'd actually like the soaps to take over those talk shows. The shooter
from Pine Valley, evading police, takes the talk show hosts hostage,
executing them one by one. Erica Kane watches from her hospital bed,
and life returns to normal.

[Alane Sue]

Seth J. Bookey wrote:
> I don't really thing the Mannings in Port Charles will be a long-term story. It's being referred to as an "arc"
> and I think that maybe Frank convinced someone to let them finish telling the story of the Two Todds on GH since
> the PP deal fell through. It doesn't really cost ABC all that much to do this, and it creates "some" good will for
> the disenfranchised OLTL fans and also potentially brings GH new viewers (which it needs). I think it is fairly
> short term, and GH has bent over backwards in the past to accommodate tight filming schedules (like, they did
> weeks of Franco's scenes in just a few days, IIRC.

That's the way I take it. This is just a short-arc storyline. Probably
this year's sweeps stunt. These characters have too many ties -
especially children - to OLTL to pluck them out of that universe
permanently.

Alane

[Hallie Hearn]

"Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:fa3b0948-abae-433f...@l19g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

On Jan 11, 9:49 am, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/one-life-to-live-general-hospit...
>
> Four 'One Life to Live' Actors Reprise Roles for 'General Hospital'
> Arc
> by Philiana Ng
>
> Four actors from canceled soap One Life to Live are set to reprise
> their roles and join ABC's General Hospital for a unique arc.
>

- So they're going to move Easton over, but *NOT* Melissa Archer as
well?!

Since this is just a story arc, they could well say that Natalie came along
with John -- she just doesn't appear on air...

Hallie

[Pidge]

There's still rumours of Ted....and TSJ.....and Bree....

-------------
To send email, replace "anti.spam" with "yahoo"

[Seth J. Bookey]

In <31022200-16d5-4e0b...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> Rthrquiet <rthr...@aol.com> writes:

>On Jan 13, 9:30=A0pm, "Ian J. Ball" <ijb...@mac.com> wrote:

>> So they're going to move Easton over, but *NOT* Melissa Archer as
>> well?! *Fuck* them.

>I don't know/haven't read anything, but it's entirely possible MA did
>not want to move to the West Coast.

>> About the only good thing I can say about this is that they at least
>> aren't bringing Alderson's brother, playing the odious Jack Manning,
>> over too.

>He didn't play the odious Jack Manning; that was Andrew Trischitta
>(sp?). Eddie Alderson played Matthew Buchanan.

>> Ian =A0(P.S. The thing I find really weird about this?! Neither Howarth

>> nor Alderson signed up with Prospect Park, yet both are ending up
>> moving over to GH - so why didn't these two just sign up with Prospect
>> Park along with the rest?! Weird...)

>I understand (though I can't apply this specifically to Howarth or
>Alderson because I don't have any specific knowledge there) that a
>number of performers had qualms about the online idea per se; it was
>uncharted territory, and they weren't sufficiently clear on how it
>would work or what they would have been getting themselves into to
>feel comfortable. It's entirely possible more of them would have
>signed on as things progressed and clarified. (And as it turned out,
>those who were skeptical were right to be.) The West Coast/East Coast
>thing may have been at play here, as well; I wonder if Howarth and
>Alderson didn't want to go the Prospect Park route because they
>actually did want to be in Hollywood rather than New York. (I vaguely
>remember reading something like that in Alderson's case, but I could
>be misremembering, or hallucinating, or whatever.)

>Michael

And as I mentioned in another post, Agnes Nixon revealed that PP was thinking of moving production to CANADA. When
she said that the actors would have problems with that, PP replied, "Oh, we can recast." Her response to that at
Harvard (where she was being honored) was that PP just "didn't understand soap operas."

[Rthrquiet]

On Jan 15, 8:55 pm, Seth J. Bookey <sethb...@panix.com> wrote:

> And as I mentioned in another post, Agnes Nixon revealed that PP was thinking of moving production to CANADA. When
> she said that the actors would have problems with that, PP replied, "Oh, we can recast." Her response to that at
> Harvard (where she was being honored) was that PP just "didn't understand soap operas."

Clearly.

I mean, that just speaks volumes, doesn't it?

Yikes-squared.

Michael

[chicagofan]

Be still my heart! ;)
bj