ATWT: In Defense of Susan Batten
SandyWeeks
OK, enough is enough! Now before you read any further, I state up-front
that I don't watch ATWT; indeed, I am an OLTL fan. If that's enough for
you to deem my opinion irrelevant, then so be it.
Still reading? Good. *Please*, to those to whom this post would apply,
I beg of you to stop bashing Susan Batten!
Many of the posts have gone from expressing constructive criticism to
outright assassination of a wonderful, talented individual. So Susan is
not right for this role. I agree. I tuned in a few months ago to catch
Susan (one of my all-time faves) in her new role and knew from the first moment
that she was simply miscast. Fine. So criticize TPTB. So criticize the
writers for trashing the character. But *please* stop bashing Susan - I
can't imagine the stress and humiliation you are putting her through.
People, she is a human being - a wonderful human being, may I add, who
*can*
act, as she proved tenfold during her OLTL days (playing a *very*
different character than Connor).
She is a miscast actress. She is not the devil incarnate, she is not some
arrogant woman who is out to ruin your show, she is not the cause of ATWT's
ratings problem, she is not a horrible person ... yet many treat her
as if she is all of the above and more. And when she finally speaks out and
tries to defend herself (and why shouldn't she? She's been taking this
cr-p far too long), people pick apart every single word she says and turn
it around to paint her as a bubbleheaded imbecile who is deliberately out
to ruin your lives. It's gone too far. I say that not just as a
soap viewer, but as one caring human being speaking of another. Too
often we fail to understand the type of impact such horrible personal attacks
have on their targets. And that's what it comes down to: we see the character,
we see the actress, we see the writing, we see the direction, but what very
few people bother to realize is that, beneath it all, there is a woman, a
person, named Susan Batten, who is just like any of us, who must absorb
personal attacks the equivalent of a politician running for president.
So, this is all I ask: please, stop the personal attacks. If you think TPTB
have made a serious casting mistake, fine. Blame TPTB. If you think the
writers have trashed your beloved character, fine. Blame the writers. If
you think Susan Batten can't act, that's fine too. Say so. But when you
resort to attacks that can have serious psychological impacts on
an individual ... well, it just shouldn't happen. And this time, it's
gone well beyond 'too far.'
Sandy
Leslie McRoberts
The fault is not that of Susan Batten but of the writers who
decided that "Connor" should have a character transplant. Susan
is playing the role that has been written for her part. We
are offended because this new "Connor" is not the character
that we have known and loved for many years. If this had
happened on another show the "Alien Alert" alarm would have
gone off! As it is, it's like watching Janet Reno talking
like a Valley Girl.
Leslie
---
+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+
Leslie C. McRoberts Prin IR Mgr, Enterprise System Test
Sun Microsystems Computer Corp Telephone: (408) 276-3285
2550 Garcia Avenue Mailstop: UMIL06-140
Mountain View, CA 94043-1100 Email: leslie.m...@ebay.sun.com
+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+
Elizabeth R Cornwell
On 8 May 1997, it was written:
> She is a miscast actress. She is not the devil incarnate, she is not some
> arrogant woman who is out to ruin your show, she is not the cause of ATWT's
> ratings problem, she is not a horrible person ... yet many treat her
> as if she is all of the above and more. And when she finally speaks out and
> tries to defend herself (and why shouldn't she? She's been taking this
> cr-p far too long), people pick apart every single word she says and turn
> it around to paint her as a bubbleheaded imbecile who is deliberately out
> to ruin your lives.
I appreciate your comments Sandy: I believe much of what you say - that
the gross mistakes made here were made by the writers, producers, and
production people that decided to fire one, quite popular and competent
actress, and to replace her with someone wholly unfit to play that role.
Ms. Batten is not at fault for those decisions, and shouldn't be blamed
for them. The frustration at her utter wrongness for this part has caused
a backlash that has included hurtful personal comments as well as pointed
criticisms.
However, *most* of what has come her way has been in the way of disussing
how terrible she is for this part, how awful the writing for her has been,
and how genuinely dreadful her performance in that part has been. If, as
you claim, she is a good actress, it would appear that her talents are not
great enough to handle this role. And it is not all that hard a part,
really - it would be immensely difficult to play it as well as it had been
played by the previous actress - but it really would not be that hard (for
a genuinely competent actress) to play it mediocrely - neither
outstandingly poorly or outstandingly well. Ms. Batten plays it
outstandingly poorly. She is not just not-as-good as the old actress: all
on her own, she is doing an infamously awful hack job with this part.
And, per even your own posting guidelines, we have a right to point this
out.
More to the point: your post accused ATWT fans of (mis)reading her
published comments and using them against her. I suggest you re-read
those comments - they are genuinely incendiary, if read by someone who
was a fan of the old Connor Walsh. I am reminded of the film _Bull
Durham_, in which the old, experienced ballplayer (played by Kevin
Costner) counsels the teams' raw, new talent (played by Tim Robbins) on
how to handle the press: the new kid is told to memorize a set of banal,
inoffensive cliches and to never say anything else. These cliches involve
constantly asserting loyalty to the team and asserting a humbleness toward
the player's own talents.
Ms. Batten should memorize a few of these remarks: she needs to realize
that trashing the character and actress that the fans loved and now deeply
miss ("cold, emotionless, one-horse pony" ring any bells?) *must* produce
a reaction of outrage and hostility. If she genuinely wants to connect
with those fans and get them on her side, she needs to acknowlege the
contribution of the previous actress and the value of the character. Her
unwillingness/incapacity to recognize this character's strengths and
attributes (indeed, her insistance on disparaging them) is most likely the
cause of her truly rotten performances here. If she knew and respected
this character, she might be able to play her. As it is, I sense that she
doesn't like Connor Walsh much at all, and that she is taking deep
pleasure in dismantling the complex character I valued so much.
Elizabeth
Amy Roper
In article <5ksmef$p...@drn.zippo.com>, SandyWeeks says...
>
>OK, enough is enough! Now before you read any further, I state up-front
>that I don't watch ATWT; indeed, I am an OLTL fan. If that's enough for
>you to deem my opinion irrelevant, then so be it.
>
>
TPTB
>have made a serious casting mistake, fine. Blame TPTB. If you think
the
>writers have trashed your beloved character, fine. Blame the writers.
If
>you think Susan Batten can't act, that's fine too. Say so. But when
you
>resort to attacks that can have serious psychological impacts on
>an individual ... well, it just shouldn't happen. And this time, it's
>gone well beyond 'too far.'
>
>Sandy
Sandy,
We HAVE griped about the horrible "direction" the writers and TPTB have
taken the character of Connor in. We HAVE griped about Susan Batten's
lack of acting skills (or simply not being able to adapt to a new role as
she is still doing a pale Luna imitation). Some attacks on Susan
Batten's looks, etc. may be a bit rough, but when you are in the public
eye you are subject to both positive and negative comments about your
talent, your looks, and your statements. Maybe not being an ATWT fan,
you are not aware of the history of our show, but we liked the strong
character of Connor, and this labatomy Connor has undergone feels like a
betrayal. And yes, Susan Batten may take the brunt of our feelings
simply because she is the one playing the part to better fit her "own"
personality (which is also TPTB's fault as well). And if an actress is
going to become "psychologically impacted" by critisism, maybe she's in
the wrong business. I think if Susan Batten is obviously this hurt by
the negative reaction she's received as the Connor replacement, as
opposed to her much beloved status as Luna, she needs to take a hard look
at what she wants to do with her future, instead of pleading with the
fans to like what she does & offending us all by her, "He (God) is bigger
than the Internet" statement. We are not going to suddenly like her
portrayal of a six and 1/2 year established character, because her
feelings are hurt. What about AR-T's feelings? And if her friends who
put her in this situation had researched this at all, they would never
have placed her in this role or put her in this situation. They should
have admitted the mistake long ago, instead of forcing the issue to
the point of OVERWHELMING fan negativity. I do not have anything
personally against SB, if I was an out of work actress who had
acquaintances in the business, I may have done the same thing, but the
fact remains she is a miscast actress who shows a lot of arrogance in
her statements in "putting her own stamp on the character" instead of
preserving the integrity & history of Connor. Yes, this is other's
faults as well, but if SB wants love and adoration, she needs to head
back to ABC. How would you feel if say, Dorian was suddenly fired and
replaced under convenient circumstances, and suddenly the character is
played as weak-willed, has a new accent, and is all gushy when she used
to be tough?
Amy
Daniella Angel Gibbs
Well said, Amy. I was watching yesterday's (5/8) episode when
SB had a scene with Ben. The way she was talking, walking,
gushing over Mark, I was like "what the hell is this?
RealConner would NEVER be acting like this."
It's not that I have anything personally against SB, but
damnit, they (and yes that must include her because she is
doing the acting, not TPTB) have BUTCHERED this character. And
other than a recast, I don't see how they can bring back the
Conner we once knew.
Could you imagine SB in a scene with Edwina? Oh my god, she
would eat SB alive. OR lucinda, Evan, the list could go on. I
can't believe they've turned Conner into this sniveling idiot
(can't take credit for that one :-), my friend gave her that
name) that we see before us.
*ugh* kill her off already. 2-3pm is quickly becoming nap-time.
-jmho, damnit
-me :*
alice
I for one will gladly and openly state my honest opinion that SB is, on
top of whatever else, doing a terrible acting job as Connor.
I never watched OLTL- I dont know or care if she could act then; I am
talking about what I see with my own two eyes on ATWT-- i.e. flubbed
lines, missed cues, flubbing timing, word emphasis, total lack of
interaction with co-stars.. (she does not ever look like she is
listening to them, and is totally inable to read lines like she is
reacting spontaneously...) Listen, this is like watching Sara and
Zoey- bad bad bad acting. IMO, of course. Why was it okay to think
they were doing a bad job at acting-- my same judgement is that SB, no
matter what her past track record, is doing a lousy job playing this
character, who on top of that is badly written. (John, Lucinda, Barbara
were all badly written for over a year; they never struck me as bad
actors. SB is bad.)
More evidence: my mom called after first seeing SB and asked who is the
awful woman on your show with that new tall guy-- my mom did not have a
chance to resent her for replacing ART; she thought she was awful just as
an unfamiliar new actress doing a random scene of dialogue...
-Alice, still quite secure in belief I am entitled to opinion whether
actresses on my show can act or not
Barbara Wilkie
l...@odyssey.ebay.sun.com (Leslie McRoberts) wrote:
<snip>
>We are offended because this new "Connor" is not the character
>that we have known and loved for many years. If this had
>happened on another show the "Alien Alert" alarm would have
>gone off!
>
>As it is, it's like watching Janet Reno talking
>like a Valley Girl.
>
>Leslie
ROTFL!!! I can't think of a better description than
yours above Leslie. ;-)
With every passing day TPTB confirm that they did not have
a "clue" what the character of Connor was like, when they
decided to recast her and chose SB.
LOL...."Janet Reno talking like a Valley Girl"! That's
really good. :)
BWilkie
ck...@erinet.com
On 5/8/97 10:02AM, in message <5ksmef$p...@drn.zippo.com>, SandyWeeks wrote:
> OK, enough is enough! Now before you read any further, I state up-front
> that I don't watch ATWT; indeed, I am an OLTL fan. If that's enough for
> you to deem my opinion irrelevant, then so be it.
If you haven't watched ATWT how can you even have an opinion about SB and her
performance on the show/?? Perhaps you were a Luna Moody fan on OLTL??
>
> Still reading? Good. *Please*, to those to whom this post would apply,
> I beg of you to stop bashing Susan Batten!
>
> ssnniipp
> So Susan is
> not right for this role. I agree. I tuned in a few months ago to catch
> Susan (one of my all-time faves) in her new role and knew from the first
> moment
> that she was simply miscast. Fine. So criticize TPTB. So criticize the
> writers for trashing the character.
SB stated in an SOD interview when she began on ATWT that she stopped by the
ATWT offices to see her friend MADD, and mentioned she was looking for a job.
So AR=T was out and SB was in. Yes, she is miscast. But her portrayal of
Connor is not pleasing the fans who complain here. Plus, SB periodically gives
an interview somewhere or is mentioned in SOD (who caters to please all PTB on
soaps) and the gist of this is that she is bringing new dimensions to a
character whose previous portrayer was lacking. SB needs to concentrate on
improving her portrayal, not increasing her publicity.
> But *please* stop bashing Susan - I
> can't imagine the stress and humiliation you are putting her through.
> People, she is a human being - a wonderful human being,
How do you know this? Is she a friend? Do you know her personally? If so,
maybe you're too subjective on the topic. Of course you can defend your
friends, but you need to realize that those of us who only see her in her poor
portrayal of Connor judge only on what we see. We can't overlook this poor
portrayal because in your opinion she's a 'wonderful human being'.
> may I add, who
> *can*
> act, as she proved tenfold during her OLTL days (playing a *very*
> different character than Connor).
I'm sure she IS a wonderful human being,as are all of US posters here. But I
for one couldn't STAND her work on OLTL (talk about a 'one-horse pony'), and
although Connor is a very different character, SB is portraying her as a carbon
copy of Luna Moody. If she can't stand the heat, well, does she know where the
kitchen door is?? She should (as I stated in another post) ignore or not read
the criticisms here (this isn't a fan gathering, it's a forum for public
opinion), and just do her job. IF she's buds with MADD, then her job isn't in
jeopardy, is it????????
>
> She is a miscast actress. She is not the devil incarnate, she is not some
> arrogant woman who is out to ruin your show,
But gee, we can see the horns---come on now. She IS ruining a character whom,
for over 6 years, showed certain qualities and characteristics that, in one
day, were tossed out the window. Try thinking of Luna Moody coming back to
OLTL as a Harvard graduate with degrees in Law and Business, ready to do battle
with Asa Buchanan over his financial empire.
> she is not the cause of ATWT's
> ratings problem, she is not a horrible person ... yet many treat her
> as if she is all of the above and more. And when she finally speaks out and
> tries to defend herself (and why shouldn't she? She's been taking this
> cr-p far too long), people pick apart every single word she says and turn
> it around to paint her as a bubbleheaded imbecile
We didn't turn things around, we quoted here word for word. I'm starting to
think you protest too much.
> who is deliberately out
> to ruin your lives. It's gone too far. I say that not just as a
> soap viewer, but as one caring human being speaking of another. Too
> often we fail to understand the type of impact such horrible personal attacks
> have on their targets. And that's what it comes down to: we see the
> character,
> we see the actress, we see the writing, we see the direction, but what very
> few people bother to realize is that, beneath it all, there is a woman, a
> person, named Susan Batten, who is just like any of us, who must absorb
> personal attacks the equivalent of a politician running for president.
> Sorry, although I haven't made any of what I'd call 'personal attacks" I
> think that is SB is going to be a working actor, then she should realize that
> this comes with the territory.
> So, this is all I ask: please, stop the personal attacks. If you think TPTB
> have made a serious casting mistake, fine.
Oh, yeah!
> Blame TPTB. If you think the
> writers have trashed your beloved character, fine. Blame the writers.
yes again
> If
> you think Susan Batten can't act, that's fine too. Say so.
three for three
> But when you
> resort to attacks that can have serious psychological impacts on
> an individual ... well, it just shouldn't happen. And this time, it's
> gone well beyond 'too far.'
Like I said, SB should quit reading the board and concentrate on her job. She
could avoid any 'psychological impacts' that way.
>
> Sandy
>
>
> Actually, I don't even care about SB's portrayal anymore. I ff through her
> appearances. It's not worth my time.
Cheryl 8-)
>
--
CKais 8-)
"We wear the mask that grins and lies,
It shades our cheeks and hides our eyes..."
P.L. Dunbar
Laura Wedner
The bottom line is, this woman is getting paid the big bucks to play this
character.
Any time she feels like the enmity of the fans whose fave. character she
daily butchers has become too much for her, she is welcome to offer me
the job, and I promise not only can I manage to mask my own personal
regional accent, but I can endure quite large amounts of frustrated words
on the internet if it means I'm a highly paid actress on national tv.
Her little appeals to God and etc. are just the most pathetic thing
ever. If there was any doubt the woman is an arrogant prima donna b-tch,
I think she managed to remove it.
Bob Binns
Amen !!!
Judie
Laura Wedner <lwe...@larry.cc.emory.edu> wrote in article
<5l2dja$t...@larry.cc.emory.edu>...
Michalle S Gould
Leslie McRoberts (l...@odyssey.ebay.sun.com) wrote:
: The fault is not that of Susan Batten but of the writers who
: decided that "Connor" should have a character transplant. Susan
: are offended because this new "Connor" is not the character
: that we have known and loved for many years. If this had
: happened on another show the "Alien Alert" alarm would have
: gone off! As it is, it's like watching Janet Reno talking
: like a Valley Girl.
But the writers decided Connor should have a character transplant long
ago.The character has been horribly written for for the last couple of
years, ever since this utterly ridiculous Mark relationship started. The
huge difference is that ART did as much as humanly possible to maintain
the integrity of the character within the crappy writing she was getting -
Connor still seemed intelligent and sympathetic and the silly relationship
with Mark was at least believable within the context of her troubled
history with relationships - sort of a new obsession after the bulemia. No
matter how irritating the writing was and how silly the storyline, with
ART, Connor was NEVER silly - she was always believable and
three-dimensional. I understood why the character was doing what she was
doing even though I wished she was doing other things. I think ART stands
as an example of how a good actress can transcend horrific writing.
There's not too many in soaps who can. Susan Batten, on the other hand, is
taking bad writing and making it much much much worse. Nothing Connor does
now is believable - she's annoying and unsympathetic and impossible to
relate to. She defines silly. Unbelievable. Mannered. Flaky. Icky.
Bad writing is bad enough but when you combine it with bad acting. Ugh.
Michalle
SandyWeeks
OK, I'm almost sorry I started this thread, as clearly I'm outnumbered,
but here's my one attempt a reply.
>If you haven't watched ATWT how can you even have an opinion about SB and her
>performance on the show/?? Perhaps you were a Luna Moody fan on OLTL??
Indeed I was. But I'm not speaking about OLTL here, I'm talking about
Susan Batten as an actress and, more impotantly, as a human being.
> Plus, SB periodically gives
>an interview somewhere or is mentioned in SOD (who caters to please all PTB on
>soaps) and the gist of this is that she is bringing new dimensions to a
>character whose previous portrayer was lacking. SB needs to concentrate on
>improving her portrayal, not increasing her publicity.
I'm sorry, but I believe it's all this negative reaction that's increasing
her publicity. Susan is simply trying to make an honest reply to her
critics. You all complain that no one hears you on the newsgroups. Well,
clearly, CBS and Susan have heard you. I would think that would be
encouraging rather than discouraging. Now if only people could stick to
criticizing her acting, rather than dragging her accent, her clothes, her
looks into it, maybe something useful would get done here. She is *not*
AR-T. She cannot (nor should she) have plastic surgery or voice alterations
to make her into an AR-T clone.
>How do you know this? Is she a friend? Do you know her personally? If so,
>maybe you're too subjective on the topic.
And how do you know she's not? Is she an enemy? Do you know her personally?
If so, maybe *you're* too subjective on the topic. Personally, I like to
assume that all actors and actress (regardless of their perceived lack of
acting ability) are good people, unless I've heard otherwise. I've no
personal contact with Susan, outside meeting her at some fan events and a
"Make A Wish Foundation" charity telathon she was helping coordinate while
she was at OLTL. Maybe I'm too goody-goody. Or maybe I'm just able to
distinguish between how a person appears on a soap and how they are in real
life.
>Of course you can defend your
>friends, but you need to realize that those of us who only see her in her poor
>portrayal of Connor judge only on what we see. We can't overlook this poor
>portrayal because in your opinion she's a 'wonderful human being'.
Nor should you. I said repeatedly, if you dislike her acting, that's fine.
But I just read a post from someone else saying that SB should try harder
to conceal her accent. I'm sorry, but that has nothing to do with acting
talent. Some people are able to do so, some are not. I know personally
that I could not alter my accent for any extended period of time. Her looks,
her voice have nothing to do with her acting.
>I'm sure she IS a wonderful human being,as are all of US posters here. But I
>for one couldn't STAND her work on OLTL (talk about a 'one-horse pony'), and
>although Connor is a very different character, SB is portraying her as a carbon
>copy of Luna Moody.
I've watched SB several times on ATWT and I find it hard to believe that 90%
of what you are seeing is not due solely to what the writers are putting in
her mouth. I knew enough about ATWT to know that Connor was supposed to be
a ruthless businesswoman. I tuned in and saw Connor batting blinds with a
fluff-duster. Clearly this is *stupid*. But I can't imagine that it was SB
doing it of her own accord. She's acting what she's given. She doesn't have
that much power at ATWT to adlib very much. I agree, she's playing the role
a lot like Luna. I agree, that's not good, considering the disparity of the
two characters. Notice, I don't have any complaints about her physical
appearance or how she is as a human being. Whether she's playing Connor good
or bad, it's just a role. There is a real person beneath it.
>If she can't stand the heat, well, does she know where the
>kitchen door is?? She should (as I stated in another post) ignore or not read
>the criticisms here (this isn't a fan gathering, it's a forum for public
>opinion), and just do her job. IF she's buds with MADD, then her job isn't in
>jeopardy, is it????????
Of course her job's in jeopardy. She will be gone within six months, mark my
words. Is this fair? Probably. She wasn't meant for this role, she'll find
other work. But again, I thought most people who had complaints and posted on
the newsgroups, hoped desperately that the actors and producers hear them.
Obviously they have. So why are you complaining about it? It's *darned* hard
to ignore negative criticism. Look at me - I've been practically flayed alive
here, yet for some masochistic reason I found the need to read each response
to this thread.
>But gee, we can see the horns---come on now. She IS ruining a character whom,
>for over 6 years, showed certain qualities and characteristics that, in one
>day, were tossed out the window. Try thinking of Luna Moody coming back to
>OLTL as a Harvard graduate with degrees in Law and Business, ready to do battle
>with Asa Buchanan over his financial empire.
Of course. Unthinkable. I agree. But if it *ain't* on the page, most of it
wouldn't be on the screen. Do this exercise: imagine Susan Batten *was*
AR-T ... looked like her, acted like her, the whole kit-and-caboodle. Now,
if the writing *didn't* change, would you be happy with the character? If
not, then a lot of what is the problem here is the writing.
>> people pick apart every single word she says and turn
>> it around to paint her as a bubbleheaded imbecile
>
>We didn't turn things around, we quoted here word for word. I'm starting to
>think you protest too much.
I find this incredibly hard to believe, having read her statement word for
word and finding remarkably honest and forthcoming (even humble - she's
begging you people to give her a chance, she's not saying 'I don't care
what you think.' Of course, maybe that's what you would prefer, since you
think SB shouldn't read the newsgroups at all)
Besides, how many politicians and tabloid papers have gotten a lot of
mileage out of quoting people "word for word." Look at my original post. It
was intended to be very non-confrontational and look what happened. You
quoted me word-for-word all-right, and painted *me* out to be some evil
SB supporter. I know this is a volatile subject. I just hope that its
volatility won't stand in the way of making clear delineations between
a soap opera character, how a person acts, and how a person *is*.
>
>> Sorry, although I haven't made any of what I'd call 'personal attacks" I
>> think that is SB is going to be a working actor, then she should realize that
>> this comes with the territory.
Criticism on how she does her job comes with the territory. Criticism on how
she looks and how she is as a human being, she should not expect. Or maybe
she should. Soap fans unfortunately have a dogged stereotype attached to them
implying they can't distinguish between fantasy and reality. Look at AMC's
Kelly Ripa. She went on Regis & Kathie Lee last week and was very upset that
fans have been harping ceaselessly on the roots of her hair. Come on! If we
want TPTB to take us seriously then we need to make thoughtful criticisms.
Personal attacks do not qualify here.
<snip>
>Like I said, SB should quit reading the board and concentrate on her job.
See above.
>
>Cheryl 8-)
>>
Sandy
SandyWeeks
OK, so I lied. One more response, that's it. :)
Thank you, Elizabeth, for a very thoughtful reply. I respectfully disagree,
but I'm happy to see some positive, well-thought-out responses. Just a few
comments...
>However, *most* of what has come her way has been in the way of disussing
>how terrible she is for this part, how awful the writing for her has been,
>and how genuinely dreadful her performance in that part has been. If, as
>you claim, she is a good actress, it would appear that her talents are not
>great enough to handle this role.
IMO, she's an extraordinarily talented woman, but she has her strong suits and
her weak suits. Apparently, playing a business executive falls into the latter
category.
>And it is not all that hard a part,
>really - it would be immensely difficult to play it as well as it had been
>played by the previous actress - but it really would not be that hard (for
>a genuinely competent actress) to play it mediocrely - neither
>outstandingly poorly or outstandingly well. Ms. Batten plays it
>outstandingly poorly. She is not just not-as-good as the old actress: all
>on her own, she is doing an infamously awful hack job with this part.
>And, per even your own posting guidelines, we have a right to point this
>out.
You certainly do. I don't object to comments on her acting ability.
Although, I can speak from personal experience (as we all can) when I say how
infinitely hard it is to get used to a recast of a beloved performer. I can't
count on two hands the number of times I've *hated* a recast actor or actress
at first and warmed to them over time. I just
wish SB was being given story and dialogue truthful to the character of
Connor. That way, it might be easier to determine where poor ability to play
the role and poor writing begin and end.
>
>More to the point: your post accused ATWT fans of (mis)reading her
>published comments and using them against her. I suggest you re-read
>those comments - they are genuinely incendiary, if read by someone who
>was a fan of the old Connor Walsh.
Well, I can certainly understand how they could be read as incendiary by
viewers who have a personal stake in what she's saying. Speaking as a
detached observer who knew little of AR-T but some brief scenes I've seen
over the years, I honestly don't believe that SB was being incendiary. She's
an actress, she doesn't want to be AR-T. How many times has a recast actor or
actress said in a magazine "I want to make this role my own." I don't recall
another violent reaction of this magnitude.
Of course, I don't mean to imply I *agree* with her interpretation of Connor.
In fact, it's honestly pretty pitiful. But I don't find fault with Susan for
wanting to be Susan and not Allyson. I just wish she was able to keep Connor,
*Connor*.
>If she genuinely wants to connect
>with those fans and get them on her side, she needs to acknowlege the
>contribution of the previous actress and the value of the character.
I agree. And she hasn't. Her interpretation of Connor is off-the-wall.
And I don't even know much *about* Connor.
>Her
>unwillingness/incapacity to recognize this character's strengths and
>attributes (indeed, her insistance on disparaging them)
>is most likely the
>cause of her truly rotten performances here. If she knew and respected
>this character, she might be able to play her. As it is, I sense that she
>doesn't like Connor Walsh much at all, and that she is taking deep
>pleasure in dismantling the complex character I valued so much.
But do you really think she's thinking all this time, "Heh, heh, heh, I
can't wait to trash this character some more. I want them all to hate me!"
Of course not. She's trying to make her mark. She's doing so, but not
very well. We should chalk it up to her weakness as an actress, and move on.
She's not the first miscast actress (ask any OLTL fan about the horrendous
"carousel of Kevins"), but she *has* received more nasty personal attacks
than any I've seen in a long time, if ever.
>Elizabeth
Again, thanks, Elizabeth, for a thoughtful reply.
Sandy
Bob Binns
I see your point on some issues regarding the appearance of SB; however
when it comes to accents and voice this is a chief complaint of myself and
many others in this n.g.
The Connor character was supposed to have been educated in the Northeast. I
believe there has been mention of her MBA from Harvard. I recognize that
from around the world students flock to Harvard - but business is one of
hundreds of majors that Harvard offers. In the shark - eat - shark business
world there is no way a credible woman of power ( that Connor was ) would
have the accent, demeanor or mannerisms of SB. I see this as a chief / on
the money complaint that many of us have with SB. I do not see how a few
speech communications classes would hurt either SB or her credibility in
the role of Connor.
Further ,Connor was supposed to have familial connections with the posh
area of Grosse Point ,MI. I believe that this is one of the most exclusive
communities in the world. I find too much of her presence inconsistent with
the type of character / setting that most of us recognize as " Connor ".
It would not be a stretch to say that seeing her ( SB ) as Connor , in my
eyes, is not very different from seeing her as a Fran Drescher
replacement in the "Nanny " .
I am sure that if you think about movies that you've seen over the years ,
there are probably quite a few you would feel could have been better if the
actors didn't drop their accents in places ,or have adopted a more
believable accent.
One that jumps to my mind was Kevin Costner doing "Robin Hood" . Honestly
his accent was all over the board and it detracted substantially from his
portrayal and indeed the movie itself.
But I digress, back to SB . For me the final straw was her interview with
the soap rag where she tore apart the originator of her role . This angered
and troubled me because of the business that she is in.
If she were a fast food worker making $5 an hour who would care about her
over inflated sense of self or talent ? But she is making at least a happy
six figures - if not seven.
In my opinion it is not asking too much for a little professionalism from
someone who is being WELL compensated to be a professional !!!
Judie
P.S. Cannot mail you directly, You email address isn't set up right in
your new group program.
SandyWeeks wrote in article <5ksmef$p...@drn.zippo.com>...
> OK, enough is enough! Now before you read any further, I state up-front
> that I don't watch ATWT; indeed, I am an OLTL fan. If that's enough for
> you to deem my opinion irrelevant, then so be it.
>
> Still reading? Good. *Please*, to those to whom this post would apply,
> I beg of you to stop bashing Susan Batten!
>
> Many of the posts have gone from expressing constructive criticism to
> outright assassination of a wonderful, talented individual. So Susan is
> not right for this role. I agree. I tuned in a few months ago to catch
> Susan (one of my all-time faves) in her new role and knew from the first
moment
> that she was simply miscast. Fine. So criticize TPTB. So criticize the
> writers for trashing the character. But *please* stop bashing Susan - I
> can't imagine the stress and humiliation you are putting her through.
> People, she is a human being - a wonderful human being, may I add, who
> *can*
> act, as she proved tenfold during her OLTL days (playing a *very*
> different character than Connor).
>
> She is a miscast actress. She is not the devil incarnate, she is not
some
> arrogant woman who is out to ruin your show, she is not the cause of
ATWT's
> ratings problem, she is not a horrible person ... yet many treat her
> as if she is all of the above and more. And when she finally speaks out
and
> tries to defend herself (and why shouldn't she? She's been taking this
> cr-p far too long), people pick apart every single word she says and turn
> it around to paint her as a bubbleheaded imbecile who is deliberately out
> to ruin your lives. It's gone too far. I say that not just as a
> soap viewer, but as one caring human being speaking of another. Too
> often we fail to understand the type of impact such horrible personal
attacks
> have on their targets. And that's what it comes down to: we see the
character,
> we see the actress, we see the writing, we see the direction, but what
very
> few people bother to realize is that, beneath it all, there is a woman, a
> person, named Susan Batten, who is just like any of us, who must absorb
> personal attacks the equivalent of a politician running for president.
>
> So, this is all I ask: please, stop the personal attacks. If you think
TPTB
> have made a serious casting mistake, fine. Blame TPTB. If you think the
> writers have trashed your beloved character, fine. Blame the writers.
If
> you think Susan Batten can't act, that's fine too. Say so. But when you
> resort to attacks that can have serious psychological impacts on
> an individual ... well, it just shouldn't happen. And this time, it's
> gone well beyond 'too far.'
>
> Sandy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Barbara Wilkie
SandyWeeks wrote:
>OK, I'm almost sorry I started this thread, as clearly I'm outnumbered,
>but here's my one attempt a reply.
>I said repeatedly, if you dislike her acting, that's fine.
>But I just read a post from someone else saying that SB should try harder
>to conceal her accent. I'm sorry, but that has nothing to do with acting
>talent. Some people are able to do so, some are not.
I wholeheartedly disagree with you about "accents" having nothing to do
with acting. However, the casting office and TPTB are responsible for
this, not Susan. They obviously thought it wasn't important in her role.
Only the fans who have watched the character from it's inception,think
it is important to have any continuity. :-/
>I've watched SB several times on ATWT and I find it hard to believe that 90%
>of what you are seeing is not due solely to what the writers are putting in
>her mouth. I knew enough about ATWT to know that Connor was supposed to be
>a ruthless businesswoman. I tuned in and saw Connor batting blinds with a
>fluff-duster. Clearly this is *stupid*.
I want to thank you for posting the above and stating in your other post
that the *first* time you saw SB as Connor... *you knew *she was miscast.
Considering you are a fan of the actress, and it was so blatantly obvious
to you so soon, just imagine how it looks to those of us who have known
this *character* for 6+ years. You are right that the writers with PTB's
new direction have destroyed the character we loved, but SB does not fit
the role either, and we can't understand who they are writing this show
for anymore. It seems like cruel and unusual punishment for everyone
to me..
>Of course her job's in jeopardy. She will be gone within six months, mark my
>words. Is this fair? Probably. She wasn't meant for this role, she'll find
>other work.
>Sandy
I don't mean to be ugly Sandy, but is there *really* any hope that they
WILL do something about this situation anytime soon.? She will never be
accepted in that role, and AW will never be a great soap "lover" in spite
of his looks and anything they can do... but I don't think TPTB believe
this is hurting the show as much as it is. Michael Malone is running off
cast members on his P&G show (AW) so he can create some new characters
of his own I understand. I think a wonderful solution for ATWT would be
for MADD to encourage Malone to write something for SB. :) :) :)
Any encouragement would be greatly appreciated.
BWilkie
Greg and Sarah Estell
>
> Further ,Connor was supposed to have familial connections with the posh
> area of Grosse Point ,MI. I believe that this is one of the most exclusive
> communities in the world. I find too much of her presence inconsistent with
> the type of character / setting that most of us recognize as " Connor ".
In actuality, the only connection Connor had to Grosse Point was her
mother, Edwina's marriage to Alexander Cabot. This took place when
Connor was a grown women, so to imply that she had moved about Grosse
Point society really isn't true.
>
>
For me the final straw was her interview with
> the soap rag where she tore apart the originator of her role .
I didn't read it this way. I read it as just another recast actor who
is looking forward to 'making this role my own.' How many times have we
all heard that?
This angered
> and troubled me because of the business that she is in.
>
> If she were a fast food worker making $5 an hour who would care about her
> over inflated sense of self or talent ? But she is making at least a happy
> six figures - if not seven.
I think you would find most of the 'inflated sense of self or talent'
would fall in the six to seven figure category. Minimum wage workers
typically don't have a big head about it.
JMO - Sarah
Jane Hudson
Bob Binns wrote:
>
>
> If she were a fast food worker making $5 an hour who would care about her
> over inflated sense of self or talent ? But she is making at least a happy
> six figures - if not seven.
>
> someone who is being WELL compensated to be a professional !!!
Where do you get the idea she's making six or seven figures?
Hane
Claudia Link
> >
> > Further ,Connor was supposed to have familial connections with the posh
> > area of Grosse Point ,MI. I believe that this is one of the most exclusive
> > communities in the world. I find too much of her presence inconsistent with
> > the type of character / setting that most of us recognize as " Connor ".
>
> In actuality, the only connection Connor had to Grosse Point was her
> mother, Edwina's marriage to Alexander Cabot. This took place when
> Connor was a grown women, so to imply that she had moved about Grosse
> Point society really isn't true.
>
>
Now that's an interesting point. But I don't believe you are correct.
That Edwina married Alexander Cabot when Connor was a grown woman
certainly does not prove that Edwina hadn't lived in Grosse Pointe for
several decades, that Connor didn't partially or completely grow up there,
or even that Edwina didn't grow up there herself. I personally don't know
where Laurence Walsh (Connor's grandfather) established his empire or
where he and his son and later his younger wife Lucinda lived once he
had. If you know please post because it might shed some further light on
the subject.
From what I've seen it's more than likely that Connor spent most of her
childhood in Michigan. Remember when Edwina was trying to break up Evan
and Roseanna? She claimed that Evan was the result of an affair when she
was still married to James and Alex was married to Sheila. For Roseanna
to even believe this (whether or not there had really been an affair)
doesn't it make sense that Edwina was around when Roseanna was a little
girl and that the Walshes and the Cabots knew each other socially, in
Grosse Pointe. (Imagine how painful that must have been for James
Walsh--always being compared to his great father, and to Alex Cabot, and
never
having any success of his own.) It doesn't prove anything, but it's easier to
believe than Alex's shuttling down to North Carolina to be with Edwina,
even with the way he got around. Again maybe there never was an affair,
but
for Roseanna to believe there had been one, I think she had either known
Edwina as a young girl, or known that she had also lived in Grosse Pointe.
the way he got around
Greg and Sarah Estell
Claudia Link wrote:
>
> In article <337656...@globaldialog.com>, est...@globaldialog.com wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Further ,Connor was supposed to have familial connections with the posh
> > > area of Grosse Point ,MI. I believe that this is one of the most exclusive
> > > communities in the world. I find too much of her presence inconsistent with
> > > the type of character / setting that most of us recognize as " Connor ".
> >
> > In actuality, the only connection Connor had to Grosse Point was her
> > mother, Edwina's marriage to Alexander Cabot. This took place when
> > Connor was a grown women, so to imply that she had moved about Grosse
> > Point society really isn't true.
> >
> >
>
> Now that's an interesting point. But I don't believe you are correct.
> That Edwina married Alexander Cabot when Connor was a grown woman
> certainly does not prove that Edwina hadn't lived in Grosse Pointe for
> several decades, that Connor didn't partially or completely grow up there,
> or even that Edwina didn't grow up there herself. I personally don't know
> where Laurence Walsh (Connor's grandfather) established his empire or
> where he and his son and later his younger wife Lucinda lived once he
> had. If you know please post because it might shed some further light on
> the subject.
>
> From what I've seen it's more than likely that Connor spent most of her
> childhood in Michigan.
I don't think so. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to
remember Connor and Evan being from upstate New York. Alice - if you
read this, you seem to be a virtual encyclopedia of ATWT history. Did I
dream the New York connection?
Sarah
R & A Whitaker
I think you and SB must have discussed what you have written here.
Sounds alot like what she would say. And I really hope she doesn't stay
on the show for 6 months, I even hate the thought of 6 more weeks of her
whining! I still say she is BAD BAD BAD!!!! There is just no getting
around it. The writers may could do better, but look what they have to
work with. Can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear!!!! And believe
me, it's not her accent that's so bad, she is just so damned
IRRITATING!!!!!!!!!!!!
Greg and Sarah Estell
And I really hope she doesn't stay
> on the show for 6 months, I even hate the thought of 6 more weeks of her
> whining! I still say she is BAD BAD BAD!!!! There is just no getting
> around it. The writers may could do better, but look what they have to
> work with. Can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear!!!! And believe
> me, it's not her accent that's so bad, she is just so damned
> IRRITATING!!!!!!!!!!!!
Look at the bright side - it's already been three months! It just seems
like 3 years!
Sarah
Wendy Wagner
Argh! I swore I wasn't going to do this (post again on this issue) but
you people are so frustrating! A few comments:
1. Another RATSC poster and I have discussed this issue offlist, and we
agreed on a great many issues, but one we did not agree on is whether SB
has "dissed" (for lack of a better word) ART. I just don't see it.
To relate this to recent posts, someone reposted a Newsday article that
many have taken as evidence that SB called ART "cold" and "emotionless."
SB did not; the writer of the article did. The "one-horse pony" thing
could very well have resulted from the info SB was given by the writers. I
don't know why anyone thinks SB has or should have seen ART's performance.
A lot of recasts choose not to, plus you have to keep in mind that soap
actors are not soap fans like we are! Most of them do not watch soaps, not
even their own performances.
2. Internet fans: I read some posts complaining that SB does not deserve
the fans' respect; respect must be earned. I'd like you all to consider
how that relates to you and your relationship with the PTB. A lot of the
behavior surrounding the SB/ART recast as well as some of the other 'net
controversies (i.e., re Kelly Ripa, Alison Sweeney, perhaps the Jeff
Trachta fans) is causing a backlash against Internet fans. While we are
all certainly entitled to express our opinions any way we like, we are not
entitled to be respected by the PTB/press. Right now, they don't respect
us. The argument that we are the consumers is somewhat persuasive, but not
entirely. For example, I wouldn't let one of my students call me a "stupid
bitch," and my students are consumers whose tuition pays my salary. One
could say that for $12,000 a year, they have every right to call me
whatever they want, but do you really believe that? Would _you_ put up
with that in your job?
3. This "SB's Connor would not be taken seriously as a Harvard
MBA/business woman" complaint drives me up a wall! I have to vent. This
kind of comment smacks of ignorance and elitism. There are plenty of
people with Southern accents who are taken seriously in the business
world. I don't notice anyone complaining that the Texan accent Patrick
Tovatt has as Cal (don't know if it's real or assumed) means that Cal is
not taken seriously in the business world. Oh, this complaint makes me
crazy, probably because I am an Ivy-educated person who lived in the South
for 6 years and who currently works at a university known for its business
school.
4. And once again: SB did not get the job by luck or chance. Anyone who
ever watched SB on OLTL knows that she was very well liked and respected
at OLTL by viewers and the PTB. After her character died, they built a
statue and gave it her face! Luna was in many ways the heart of the show.
While on OLTL, she did some Off-Broadway; I remember that she was in a
play with William Fichtner (ex-Josh, ATWT) and got good reviews (I always
read theater reviews to see how soap actors are received). She also did
primetime; don't forget that many of you take getting a primetime gig as
evidence that an actor is good (for example, ART's primetime gig).
This is not MADD's next door neighbor who needed a break into acting. This
is someone who had a history of well-received performances. Fine, maybe
she was good then and sucks now. Whatever. But the people you want to
listen to you are not going to pay attention to you if you post
misinformation and mean-spirited remarks! A lot of people think you guys
are nuts and pawns of ART (it's no secret that she is an online presence).
This may not be true, but you haven't done much to make them respect your
opinions.
Sorry, this has been building up for a while now, and I just exploded.
Wendy
**************************************************
"Not in my backyard, utensils! Go back to China!"
--RENT
**************************************************
Claudia Link
The honorable judge Wagner wrote,
>For example, I wouldn't let one of my students call me a "stupid
> bitch," and my students are consumers whose tuition pays my salary. One
> could say that for $12,000 a year, they have every right to call me
> whatever they want, but do you really believe that? Would _you_ put up
> with that in your job?
I know how you feel about not wanting to post on this topic anymore.
It's just too frustrating to argue about. But you are reasonable,
somewhat. However, the thing I don't like about your analogy is that it
ignores the question of context. If a student called you a stupid bitch
to your face or in class or in a letter, they would be wrong. For one
thing no one has the right to do that to any employee. For another, the
student - teacher relationship is not as simple as an employer/employee
relationship. I'm sure you well know this far better than I do.
There's a kind of contract between students and teachers in which the
teacher is automatically a superior by virtue of their expertise. Not
that calling someone names is right, but Miss Batten is not our
teacher. (She's not our employee either)
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. The real problem with your
comparison is that while the internet is a public forum, it is not a
personal or an in presence interaction. Nor are posters not television
producers or magazine publishers. They are private citizens. Until
Susan Batten posts "I object to your calling me a stupid bitch," she is
not here. She is not in this newsgroup. (Whether or not she lurks or has
someone lurk for her.) In that sense anything anyone says about her is
like the student calling you a stupid bitch in the privacy of her own
home, while talking to her parents, or in her car while talking to her
best friend, or while at the movies with her boyfriend. If you happen
to be at the movies and she doesn't see you while she's expressing her
viewpoint to him, there's nothing you can do. You may be ill disposed
to her from then on, but you can not censor her.
> Oh, this complaint makes me
> crazy, probably because I am an Ivy-educated person who lived in the South
> for 6 years and who currently works at a university known for its business
> school.
Connor shouldn't be a southerner, that's all. Nobody said southerners
don't go to Ivies. Or if they did they were wrong. Besides I don't think
Miss Batten is playing a southerner; she's playing Raggedy Ann.
>
> 4. And once again: SB did not get the job by luck or chance. Anyone who
> ever watched SB on OLTL knows that she was very well liked and respected
> at OLTL by viewers and the PTB. After her character died, they built a
> statue and gave it her face! Luna was in many ways the heart of the show.
Well, they should have kept her. I'm not impressed by the statue, at
all. Sounds pathetically corny and self-serving. I'm just glad I
wasn't watching that at least.
> don't forget that many of you take getting a primetime gig as
> evidence that an actor is good (for example, ART's primetime gig).
Again, I disagree. I'm happy for ART, but I think TimeCop has a very
uncertain future. I'm not looking for evidence that ART is good or
preferable to SB as Connor. I'm expressing an opinion.
> A lot of people think you guys
> are nuts and pawns of ART (it's no secret that she is an online presence).
> This may not be true, but you haven't done much to make them respect your
> opinions.
Name one person and then give me a reason why I should care. And what's
this paranoia? ART's less of an online presence than you are. She's
never posted to this newsgroup and she's only done a few interviews on
AOL, mostly while she was working on the show. And why do you
parenthetically insinuate that they're "secret?" Everybody knows about
them; they've been posted about 62 times. I'm not sure how having an
email address makes her a master manipulator, but if it does I suppose
that you and I are too. (So, am I your pawn or are you mine? ;>)
Margaret McClintock Snyder
Dear Wendy
Oh, into the fray! I haven't watched ATWT very long--started
last year because I was afraid GL was going off. Obviously
I did not have the great investment in ART that some of the
more vehement posters do.
I understand why they are upset. I cannot accept Rebecca Budig
as Michelle on GL because even tho she is the product of SORAS,
the character has changed so much as to become unrecognizable.
I remember reading an interview with RB in which she stated
that she did not want to study RM's interpretation of Michelle,
and also being angered that TPTB said realMichelle was a whiner
and downer, and that this new airhead interpretation was what
I presume focus groups had wanted. Of course, it destroyed
any realistic romance between Michelle and Bill.
I think that when a favorite is canned and replaced rather
than leaving voluntarily, the replacement has a very hard
task to be accepted. For me, Marj Dusay replacing Beverlee
as Alex was acceptable because the character remained
recognizable.
I am interested in having our opinions taken more seriously by
TPTB. I have called the 800 number several times but stopped
when I found out it cost 8 dollars or so a shot. I email,
but just get form replies sometimes.
It is frustrating to know what to do when you think that a
character has been altered beyond recognition. Personally I
think SB has some very annoying mannerisms, but the writing sure isn't
helping either.
Margaret Snyder
ck...@erinet.com
On 5/12/97 11:56AM, in message
>
>
Actually, and I have posted this before, SB stated in an interview in SOD that
she DID go visit her friend MADD and tell her that she was hoping to find soap
work again.
Cheryl 8-)
Barbara Wilkie
>> Oh, this complaint makes me
>> crazy, probably because I am an Ivy-educated person who lived in the South
>> for 6 years and who currently works at a university known for its business
>> school.
>
>Connor shouldn't be a southerner, that's all. Nobody said southerners
>don't go to Ivies. Or if they did they were wrong. Besides I don't think
>Miss Batten is playing a southerner; she's playing Raggedy Ann.
>
>> don't forget that many of you take getting a primetime gig as
>> evidence that an actor is good (for example, ART's primetime gig).
>
>Again, I disagree. I'm happy for ART, but I think TimeCop has a very
>uncertain future. I'm not looking for evidence that ART is good or
>preferable to SB as Connor. I'm expressing an opinion.
>
>> A lot of people think you guys
>> are nuts and pawns of ART (it's no secret that she is an online presence).
>> This may not be true, but you haven't done much to make them respect your
>> opinions.
>
>Name one person and then give me a reason why I should care. And what's
>this paranoia? ART's less of an online presence than you are.
Thank you so much Claudia, for essentially posting my exact thoughts
about any additional comments about how "nuts" we are, and what TPTB
think of us if we express negative opinions about their decisions. I think
it is an outright joke for anyone to think, that people who have to float
"conspiracy" stories to explain fan reactions on the internet, really care
what we say one way or another. As for lacking respect for our opinions,
the feeling is mutual so far.
BWilkie
ck...@erinet.com
> I tuned in and saw Connor batting blinds with a
> >fluff-duster. Clearly this is *stupid*.
>
> I want to thank you for posting the above and stating in your other post
> that the *first* time you saw SB as Connor... *you knew *she was miscast.
> Considering you are a fan of the actress, and it was so blatantly obvious
> to you so soon, just imagine how it looks to those of us who have known
> this *character* for 6+ years.
>
> BWilkie
> Bingo, Barbara! And it can't all be blamed on poor writing. I know some
> posters are criticizing her personally, but my complaints are that she can't
> act, and her interviews in mags and on TV are sounding both desperate and
> self-serving.
ck...@erinet.com
On 5/11/97 6:59PM, in message <33764F...@FTC-I.Net>, R & A Whitaker
<vin_d...@FTC-I.Net> wrote:
> SSandyWeeks wrote:
> >
> > OK, I'm almost sorry I started this thread, as clearly I'm outnumbered,
> > but here's my one attempt a reply.
> >
> > >If you haven't watched ATWT how can you even have an opinion about SB and
> her
> > >performance on the show/?? Perhaps you were a Luna Moody fan on OLTL??
> >
> > Indeed I was. But I'm not speaking about OLTL here, I'm talking about
> > Susan Batten as an actress and, more impotantly, as a human being.
> >
And in this post, as in all my other posts about this subject, I have NEVER
insulted her as a person, ONLY as an actress. As I said in this post, I'm sure
she's a wonderful human being, but as an actress playing this part, she is just
not doing it.
>
>
> > >How do you know this? Is she a friend? Do you know her personally? If
> so,
> > >maybe you're too subjective on the topic.
> >
> > And how do you know she's not? Is she an enemy? Do you know her
> personally?
> > If so, maybe *you're* too subjective on the topic.
<I> wasn't the one who claimed she was a wonderful person, as you did. How
could you know this for sure, (unless you were assuming) unless you know her
personally. THAT would make you too subjective, whichin this case means to let
your personal feelings color your analysis.
> I find it hard to believe that 90%
> > of what you are seeing is not due solely to what the writers are putting in
> > her mouth.
GOOD actors can make even the worst writing palatable--Lucinda Walsh has not
always been front burner, but E. Hubbard's portrayal has consistently risen
above any poor writing.
> Notice, I don't have any complaints about her physical
> > appearance or how she is as a human being.
And neither did I.
> Whether she's playing Connor good
> > or bad, it's just a role. There is a real person beneath it.
> >
There's a "real" person beneath every actor, even the ones who played Zoe,
Sarah, and Paul recently on ATWT. But they couldn't act well, either.
> She wasn't meant for this role, she'll find
> > other work.
Just as AR-T has. She is doing a syndicated night-time series.
But there are thousands of out-of-work actors out there, who can't claim
friendship with MADD, as SB does.
> So why are you complaining about it?
Excuse me, I and we ALL have a right to complain about what we perceive as bad
acting.
>
> > wouldn't be on the screen. Do this exercise: imagine Susan Batten *was*
> > AR-T ... looked like her, acted like her, the whole kit-and-caboodle. Now,
> > if the writing *didn't* change, would you be happy with the character?
Actually, yes. Yes, I would. IMO, AR-T can act rings around SB.
>
> > Criticism on how she does her job comes with the territory. Criticism on
> how
> > she looks and how she is as a human being, she should not expect.
Nor have I given it to her on the post you are responding to or on any other
post. So don't complain to me, complain to those posters who ARE criticizing
that.
I have had to snip out a bunch here, because my server kept refusing the post
due to not enough new stuff. But I also want to add that I never insulted SB
personally in any of my posts, however just stated MO as to her acting
abilities, and her portrayal of Connor.
>
CKais 8-) I've just fallen off the wagon, but I'm still president of the
"Connor--Who's That?" Club, where you've already paid your dues.
Greg and Sarah Estell
I know some
> > posters are criticizing her personally, but my complaints are that she can't
> > act, and her interviews in mags and on TV are sounding both desperate and
> > self-serving.
I think this is good news, Cheryl! She is sounding desperate. TPTB are
sounding desperate. Soap mags are sounding irritated. This is all
going quite well I think. We won't get AR-T back, but I am confident
that we will get rid of SB. I don't know why I think that, but I just
have a good feeling that she will be gone by the 4th of July.
Sarah (wondering if anyone wants to place a friendly wager!!!)
Bob Binns
I believe that the Edwina / Cabot affair had been smoldering for decades .
Which is why she was able to get away with lie of Evan's paternity. There
was a long term connection in that area. These soaps are very entranced
with Mid-America life. I believe that (CBS at least) is trying to satisfy
the whole country by having connections in and around the middle of the
country. I think all CBS soaps , except B & B , are set in the Mid-West. I
never heard anything about upstate New York with regards to Connor.
Judie
Greg and Sarah Estell <est...@globaldialog.com> wrote in article
<3376AC...@globaldialog.com>...
Marti Kaye Vigil
On 9 May 1997 18:28:27 GMT, l...@odyssey.ebay.sun.com (Leslie
McRoberts) wrote:
>The fault is not that of Susan Batten but of the writers who
>decided that "Connor" should have a character transplant. Susan
>is playing the role that has been written for her part. We
>are offended because this new "Connor" is not the character
>that we have known and loved for many years. If this had
>happened on another show the "Alien Alert" alarm would have
>gone off! As it is, it's like watching Janet Reno talking
>like a Valley Girl.
>
>Leslie
>
Thank you Leslie. This point needed to be made; if someone pointed
this out before, I overlooked it.
Marti
macl...@3lefties.com
In article <Pine.SUN.3.94.97051...@panix.com>,
Wendy Wagner <we...@panix.com> wrote:
> (snipped to point 2)
>
> 2. Internet fans: I read some posts complaining that SB does not deserve
> the fans' respect; respect must be earned. I'd like you all to consider
> how that relates to you and your relationship with the PTB. A lot of the
> behavior surrounding the SB/ART recast as well as some of the other 'net
> controversies (i.e., re Kelly Ripa, Alison Sweeney, perhaps the Jeff
> Trachta fans) is causing a backlash against Internet fans. While we are
> all certainly entitled to express our opinions any way we like, we are not
> entitled to be respected by the PTB/press.
Wendy, this is very well stated. Many of the posters tend to address
their posting comments to PTB, FMB, MADD, etc., but I think we're kidding
ourselves if we think they read comments that have become downright rude.
>Right now, they don't respect us. The argument that we are the consumers is
>somewhat persuasive, but not entirely. For example, I wouldn't let one of my
>students call me a "stupid bitch," and my students are consumers whose tuition
>pays my salary. One could say that for $12,000 a year, they have every right to
>call me whatever they want, but do you really believe that? Would you put up
>with that in your job?
>
There's another way to look at this, though. While students don't call
me a bitch to my face or in the classroom, they freely express their
personal opinions of me at the end of the semester with the course
evaluations. My gut reaction (especially with the freshmen classes) is to
ignore the negative evaluations claiming that the students aren't mature
and don't know what's best for them. However, I force myself to read
every comment, good and bad. If I ignore the tone and directness of
comments, I find this feedback useful. Some of the posters are saying
that SB needs to take the criticism or ignore the boards--I think they
may also have a good point.
> 3. This "SB's Connor would not be taken seriously as a Harvard
> MBA/business woman" complaint drives me up a wall! I have to vent. This
> kind of comment smacks of ignorance and elitism. There are plenty of
> people with Southern accents who are taken seriously in the business
> world.
This was exactly what crossed my mind when I read complaints about SB's
accent. However, I think she is exaggerating it somewhat, and is
demonstrating ignorance in other ways such as her facial expressions.
>
>Laura
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
alice
On Mon, 12 May 1997, Wendy Wagner wrote:
(in snips)
> 3. This "SB's Connor would not be taken seriously as a Harvard
> MBA/business woman" complaint drives me up a wall! I have to vent. This
> kind of comment smacks of ignorance and elitism. There are plenty of
> people with Southern accents who are taken seriously in the business
> Tovatt has as Cal (don't know if it's real or assumed) means that Cal is
The whole accent thing, IMO, has been misunderstood. I think the problem
is that its wrong for the character as the character has been
established. We learned to associate Connor`s N.East dialect with
her b.ground as savvy businesswoman, but you`re right that this should
not mean one cant exist without the other. Its just that in the
case of the character of Connor, they were both there.
BTW- it doesn`t help, IMO, that the actor who played Evan was from the
South and had a southern accent in real life, yet when ACTING as
Evan, he talked like he was from the East.
And also, Cal does not have an accent in real life. He, too, is
acting. (and his accent never bugged me or made me think him less
intelligent, just like Tess` (real) accent was fine, too, because the
character was from the south.)
> she was good then and sucks now. Whatever. But the people you want to
> listen to you are not going to pay attention to you if you post
> misinformation and mean-spirited remarks! A lot of people think you guys
I just have to comment- that I fully believe it was all our furious and
angry complaints that got the show overhauled so dramatically last yr.--
and I used to get replies to my posts telling me to stop criticizing
Valente and newPaul and Sara b-c this negativity would never get listened
to....
-Alice, openly claiming credit for at least a half-dozen firings
behind the scenes at ATWT
Claudia Link
Brad Williams wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, I do not have the exact date of the post, but ART did
> indeed post to this newsgroup. Maybe someone can send you a copy.
> Rhonda
The closest thing I've seen is a posting of an email to someone else,
which she very well may have wanted to be posted to the newsgroup, but
so what? All she said was what a shock, good-bye and thanks.
Wendy Wagner
On Mon, 12 May 1997, Margaret McClintock Snyder wrote:
> Dear Wendy
> Oh, into the fray! I haven't watched ATWT very long--started
> last year because I was afraid GL was going off. Obviously
> I did not have the great investment in ART that some of the
> more vehement posters do.
> I understand why they are upset. I cannot accept Rebecca Budig
> as Michelle on GL because even tho she is the product of SORAS,
> the character has changed so much as to become unrecognizable.
Yes, but I think this happens even when the character isn't recast. A lot
of that has been happening on GL recently. Heck, look at Annie. (OK, let's
not. ;)
> I remember reading an interview with RB in which she stated
> that she did not want to study RM's interpretation of Michelle,
> and also being angered that TPTB said realMichelle was a whiner
> and downer, and that this new airhead interpretation was what
> I presume focus groups had wanted. Of course, it destroyed
> any realistic romance between Michelle and Bill.
I'm still trying to figure out how to get on these focus groups. ;)
> I think that when a favorite is canned and replaced rather
> than leaving voluntarily, the replacement has a very hard
> task to be accepted. For me, Marj Dusay replacing Beverlee
> as Alex was acceptable because the character remained
> recognizable.
I think recasts always have a hard time being accepted. I was a regular
RATS lurker when Kelly Menighan was cast as Emily, and the comments, while
not as nasty, where just as vehement against KM's interpretation of Emily.
And yet, quite inexplicably (IMO), KM is accepted as Emily now. It's just
a matter of time. No one likes a change, least of all soap fans.
I am very blase' about recasts, possibly because some of my favorite
all-time characters have been recast, and if I let every recast get to me,
I'd be in the padded cell next to Margo's. My all-time favorite soap
characters are Alex on GL (recast) and Margo on ATWT (recast 4 times).
Recasts are just a fact of life in the soap business. Hey, I still miss
Andrea Barber as Carrie Brady on DrOOL. (g)
> I am interested in having our opinions taken more seriously by
> TPTB. I have called the 800 number several times but stopped
> when I found out it cost 8 dollars or so a shot. I email,
> but just get form replies sometimes.
> It is frustrating to know what to do when you think that a
> character has been altered beyond recognition. Personally I
> think SB has some very annoying mannerisms, but the writing sure isn't
> helping either.
I think the only thing you can do is just let it go, personally. Write
letters, but on the whole let it go. Sometimes you just can't get back the
old days. Believe me, if I thought it would work, I'd scream for GL to get
Sherry back as Blake, Kim Simms back as Mindy, Rachel Miner back as
Michelle, and I'd personally negotiate between Beth Ehlers and Mark Derwin
to get them to work together again. But even if all these people came
back, well, that was 4-5 years ago. The show's different, the actors are
different, I'm different. I just don't believe the past is much good for
anything but trivia games and half-hour Daytime to Remembers.
Kimberly Dull
Claudia Link (clo...@cloudia.seanet.com) wrote:
<snip>
: Name one person and then give me a reason why I should care. And what's
: this paranoia? ART's less of an online presence than you are. She's
: never posted to this newsgroup and she's only done a few interviews on
: AOL, mostly while she was working on the show. And why do you
Actually, AR-T *has* posted to this newsgroup. Several times.
KimD
Sinister Sprite
br...@ix.netcom.com (Brad Williams) wrote:
>On Mon, 12 May 1997 12:11:41 -0800, Claudia Link
><clo...@cloudia.seanet.com> wrote:
>
>snip
>
>> ART's less of an online presence than you are. She's
>>never posted to this newsgroup and she's only done a few interviews on
>>AOL,
>snip
> Unfortunately, I do not have the exact date of the post, but ART did
>indeed post to this newsgroup. Maybe someone can send you a copy.
>Rhonda
Here's the post:
Hey everyone! Just thought I'd pop in to say hello and to tell
you that the shoot for "Time Cop" (the first episode) went REALLY
well. I think TW King (who plays the TimeCop role) is going to be
great! The other 3 guys who are also regulars are really great
too. I hope you guys will tune in (even if you're not sci-fi
fans!). Most of the first episode will be with TW and his WWII
adventure, but the rest of us you'll "meet" and I also end
up briefly in the altered future. It should be fun! (I HOPE!)
Once again, I'm totally overwhelmerd by the support on the
boards! You guys are the absolute greatest. I'm lucky indeed...
As for Jon Hensley's comment -- let me clarify a little. I wasn't
unhappy working on the show. I was unhappy with the way Connor
had been written over the past year, but I thought we were on the
way toward fixing that. But I loved my job there. And I loved my
friends there! Am I happy that I was fired? Well, considering
that I got this prime-time show that I wouldn't have gotten
otherwise...of course I am!! Now, at least. I wasn't happy at the
time that it happened!. And as for that "blind item" in SOD that
Wendy posted, I would be VERY surprised if it was me that they
were talking about. I'm NOT going around telling everyone I'm
glad to be gone. Like I just said, I loved my job, and I loved
my friends over there, and I was always very professional in my
work and I worked hard and cared about my work which I think
people appreciated. I always had FUN with the people I worked
with, and I'll keep in touch with them when I move to LA (which
will be in a couple of weeks!).
Take care everyone! Back to packing!...
Allyson Rice-Taylor
'''```''''````'''''`````''''''``````'''''''```````''
@>--->-- "Illegitimi non carborundum est" --<---<@
```'''````''''````'''''`````''''''``````''''''``````
Greg and Sarah Estell
Weber, Carrie wrote:
>
> I don't understand why they chose this actress to play Connor.
> Everything about the way she portrays the character is awful.
> Looks do matter in soaps, that is very apparent to any of you.
> This new Connor does NOT, definitely does not have the looks,
> attitude or demeanor of a good soap character.
>
> To be blunt, this actress sucks!!!!
I agree that the way she is playing this 'sucks' but it is unfair to say
that she does not have the looks, attitude of demeanor of a good soap
character. If I misinterpreted your remarks, please correct me, but I
think you are talking about the looks, demeanor, etc. of a good soap
actress. If that is your point, you are mistaken. SB (amazingly
enought to those of us who have only seen her horrendous work on ATWT)
was a highly thought of actress when she played Luna on OLTL.
Unfortunately, I think she is still playing Luna and just calling her
Connor.
Sarah
Skatko
Couldn't Agree with you MORE!!! Watch out for all the flames coming your
way,
though!!! We have some "thought" police lurking around here!!
Jeanette
ckai
> > > >If you haven't watched ATWT how can you even have an opinion about SB and
> > her
> > > >performance on the show/?? Perhaps you were a Luna Moody fan on OLTL??
> > >
> > > Indeed I was. But I'm not speaking about OLTL here, I'm talking about
> > > Susan Batten as an actress and, more impotantly, as a human being.
> > >
> GOOD actors can make even the worst writing palatable--Lucinda Walsh has not
> always been front burner, but E. Hubbard's portrayal has consistently risen
> above any poor writing.
> There's a "real" person beneath every actor, even the ones who played Zoe,
>
> > > Criticism on how she does her job comes with the territory. Criticism on
> > how
> > > she looks and how she is as a human being, she should not expect.
>
Well, SB might be a very nice person, but a good actress, I think not.
We are all commenting on her as an actress and if it hurts her feelings,
I'm sorry, but when you're an actor you have to be able to take
criticism, you know if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Jeanette T. Krokus
jean...@krokus.com
Glenn L. Williams
Barbara Wilkie wrote:
> >As it is, it's like watching Janet Reno talking
> >like a Valley Girl.
> >
> >Leslie
>
> yours above Leslie. ;-)
>
> With every passing day TPTB confirm that they did not have
> a "clue" what the character of Connor was like, when they
> decided to recast her and chose SB.
>
> LOL...."Janet Reno talking like a Valley Girl"! That's
> really good. :)
>
> BWilkie
Hmmm. This gives me some ideas for my Janet Reno as Connor humor
episodes. :-)
David Boulton
> I think recasts always have a hard time being accepted. I was a regular
> RATS lurker when Kelly Menighan was cast as Emily, and the comments, while
> not as nasty, where just as vehement against KM's interpretation of Emily.
> And yet, quite inexplicably (IMO), KM is accepted as Emily now. It's just
> a matter of time. No one likes a change, least of all soap fans.
I disagree. It all depends on how it is handled. Whether or not a recast
works is at least as much up to the producers as it is to the actor.
I grant you that KM is far more tolerated than she once was. I would say
it's a combination of A) KM eventually finding a workable character (after
a lot of stumbling), B) Somewhat better writing, eliminating some of the
Emily's whiny neediness and C) Audience familiarity with the 'new' (faux)
Emily. Eventually people got tired of wasting the energy to hate her. I
would not call it "acceptance" -- the work I would use is "resignation".
But a counterexample is the new Samantha. While I still prefer Brooke
Alexander, the new actress (Sherri Alexander I think her name is) is
perfectly acceptable (at least to me). Because: A) They cast someone with
enough physical similarity to the original character (Sam is still tall,
blonde and gorgeous -- just slightly less so), B) they cast somebody with
good acting talent who can pull off the character without major changes to
who the character is, and C) there wasn't a bruising, instant transition
from one actress to the next.
For a lesson in how *not* to recast, the ultimate example is what has
happened to Connor.
I do think some of the comments about Susan Batten have been unnecessarily
personal. Even though she may be less than sensitive to the fans, she is
not the enemy. The fact is that it is the producers who are solely
responsible for this disaster. If SB had been hired as a new character
introduced into Oakdale I'm pretty sure that she would have been well
accepted.
The combination of the producer's shabby treatment of ART, their poor
concept of abruptly turning Connor into a brainless lovesick dimwit, as
well as SB's limited acting range have all combined to completely blunt
what had started out as a nice comeback for the show. If they wanted to
introduce a 'Luna' character to ATWT, they should have done so, rather than
lobotomizing a well-liked current character.
> I think the only thing you can do is just let it go, personally. Write
> letters, but on the whole let it go. Sometimes you just can't get back the
> old days. Believe me, if I thought it would work, I'd scream for GL to get
> Sherry back as Blake, Kim Simms back as Mindy, Rachel Miner back as
> Michelle, and I'd personally negotiate between Beth Ehlers and Mark Derwin
> to get them to work together again. But even if all these people came
> back, well, that was 4-5 years ago. The show's different, the actors are
> different, I'm different. I just don't believe the past is much good for
> anything but trivia games and half-hour Daytime to Remembers.
Yes. Doug Marland is gone, and he ain't coming back. Producers will always
meddle because they need to be seen as doing something. If they kept the
status quo, then their job would be unnecessary in the eyes of their
bosses. And with ATWT's ratings, the status quo isn't an option. "Do
*something* even if it's wrong" becomes the motto.
The actors will always be changing. On average, ATWT does well in that
department. They generally have pound-for-pound more acting talent on
screen each week than most other soaps. There have been some embarassing
lapses recently, but they still do pretty well. The problem is that the
talent is not very well used.
The one thing that turns shows around is good writing. And that has been
sadly lacking on ATWT for many years now. There have been small snippets
here and there (I liked Psycho-Diego quite a lot), but they are never able
to sustain it. I know that writing 250 pages of dialog every week must be
difficult, but other shows do it with quality, why never ATWT?
Fed up,
Dave Boulton
--
David Boulton
(remove "wuzza" in the From: line to reply)
NO UNSOLICITED COMMERICAL EMAIL
Cindy Diaz
Sinister Sprite wrote:
>
> br...@ix.netcom.com (Brad Williams) wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 12 May 1997 12:11:41 -0800, Claudia Link
> ><clo...@cloudia.seanet.com> wrote:
> >
> >snip
> >
> >> ART's less of an online presence than you are. She's
> >>never posted to this newsgroup and she's only done a few interviews on
> >>AOL,
> >snip
> > Unfortunately, I do not have the exact date of the post, but ART did
> >indeed post to this newsgroup. Maybe someone can send you a copy.
> >Rhonda
>
>
ART posted several times to this newgroup and respond to many of us
directly. She was "put out" with many of the negative post especially
about cue cards and had several post on that subject. She has contacted
me directly too. She is the one who "officially" let us, the fans, know
ON THIS NEWSGROUP that she had been told not to return after her scenes
for that day.
I am an ART fan but I did FF through most of her scenes at the end. Was
this a reflection that I no longer cared for her as an actress...NO!!!
THE STORY AND THE SHOW WERE/ARE AWFUL. I continue to ff through the new
actress but NOT BECAUSE of the way it was handled I simply just don't
care about the storyline EVEN IF ART was still the actress. I has
nothing to do with her looks, her accent or that they let ART go. The
show has lost it in more areas that just Connor.
I think ART is a class act. She took the time for her fans. Before the
very end she had a great triangle with Cal/Mark...
JMHO
Cin
DonnaB
| I disagree. It all depends on how it is handled. Whether or not a recast
| works is at least as much up to the producers as it is to the actor.
If not more, ...
| I grant you that KM is far more tolerated than she once was. I would say
| it's a combination of A) KM eventually finding a workable character (after
| a lot of stumbling), B) Somewhat better writing, eliminating some of the
| Emily's whiny neediness and C) Audience familiarity with the 'new' (faux)
| Emily. Eventually people got tired of wasting the energy to hate her. I
| would not call it "acceptance" -- the work I would use is "resignation".
I know people who still call her FauxEmily & other more insulting
terms, who swoon at the very thought of Melanie Smith.
| But a counterexample is the new Samantha. While I still prefer Brooke
| Alexander, the new actress (Sherri Alexander I think her name is) is
| perfectly acceptable (at least to me). Because: A) They cast someone with
| enough physical similarity to the original character (Sam is still tall,
| blonde and gorgeous -- just slightly less so), B) they cast somebody with
| good acting talent who can pull off the character without major changes to
| who the character is, and C) there wasn't a bruising, instant transition
| from one actress to the next.
And, D) you had SB to be your current worse case scenario, so almost
any way was up.
"Writing is a string you send out to connect yourself with other
consciousnesses." - Peter Elbow, Writing Without Teachers
'One of the RATS Donnas & Mouse Pushing Wacko, DonnaB
'Vote For YOUR Emmy Winners at http://www.delphi.com/soapopera/emmys.html
Paul Jenkins
Paul Jenkins
Wendy Wagner <we...@panix.com> wrote in article
<Pine.SUN.3.94.97051...@panix.com>...
> Argh! I swore I wasn't going to do this (post again on this issue) but
> you people are so frustrating! A few comments:
>
> 1. Another RATSC poster and I have discussed this issue offlist, and we
> agreed on a great many issues, but one we did not agree on is whether SB
> has "dissed" (for lack of a better word) ART. I just don't see it.
>
> To relate this to recent posts, someone reposted a Newsday article that
> many have taken as evidence that SB called ART "cold" and "emotionless."
> SB did not; the writer of the article did. The "one-horse pony" thing
> could very well have resulted from the info SB was given by the writers.
> don't know why anyone thinks SB has or should have seen ART's
performance.
> A lot of recasts choose not to, plus you have to keep in mind that soap
> actors are not soap fans like we are! Most of them do not watch soaps,
not
> even their own performances.
WW: I don't disagree with the bulk of your remarks, certainly not with
your desire to see a more reasonable discussion of this whole issue (and I
don't think anyone takes issue with the very heart of the matter, that
casting SB in this role was a mistake). However, I do believe that when SB
took on the role she did a very careful study of ART's performance and in
the first few weeks after taking over the role made a deliberate attempt to
mimick some of ART's mannerisms. ART's Connor had a habit of clutching at
her stomach in times of panic/anxiety/stress, a deliberate choice on ART's
part that she thought would be a natural instinct for a bulimia sufferer
(can't remember the source, but ART discussed it in an article in SOD years
ago). I noticed the first time I saw SB do this as it struck me as a
little artificial, a bit forced, like it was a way of moving that was
foreign to her.
Richard
Cumulus Nimbus
Cindy Diaz wrote:
> >
> ART posted several times to this newgroup and respond to many of us
> directly. She was "put out" with many of the negative post especially
> about cue cards and had several post on that subject. She has contacted
> me directly too. She is the one who "officially" let us, the fans, know
> ON THIS NEWSGROUP that she had been told not to return after her scenes
> for that day.
So what's ART's email address. I'd love to let her know that she did a
great job as Connor and I wish her well for the future.
I wasn't aware of some of ARTs posts. I thought some of them had been
forwarded by people at AOL. Anyway, my basic point was more that ART
doesn't spend all her time flaming out her detractors or encouraging
"personal attacks" against SB. Her fans think for for themselves and
the fact that she appears to as well may be a part of her appeal. It is
for me. Of Course I'm influence by her portrayal of Connor but I think
that's as it should be.
>
> I am an ART fan but I did FF through most of her scenes at the end. Was
> this a reflection that I no longer cared for her as an actress...NO!!!
> THE STORY AND THE SHOW WERE/ARE AWFUL. I continue to ff through the new
> actress but NOT BECAUSE of the way it was handled I simply just don't
> care about the storyline EVEN IF ART was still the actress. I has
> nothing to do with her looks, her accent or that they let ART go. The
> show has lost it in more areas that just Connor.
I'm glad you're an ART fan, and I agree the story and the show are
awful. Certainly they made alot of mistakes. ATWT always seemed on the
verge of providing great entertainment and with the exception of the
Orlena Grimaldi storyline they seem to have sabotaged everything they
worked on. I understand the new actress playing Sam is Ok, but why did
they need one. Brooke Alexander was excellent. I can't say I like SB
for a variety of reasons and even with lousy writing, lousy casting
certainly doesn't help.
>
> Before the
> very end she had a great triangle with Cal/Mark...
>
I was really happy to see her get more attention, but I was never happy
with the triangle. I could see Connor turning away from Cal, but I
thought the way they handled it was too demeaning to Cal and they lost
the chemistry between Patrick Tovat and ART because of it.
Alexander Walters ought to stick to Stetson cologne commercials. (Sorry
AW fans) He just doesn't have the presence for me. Or he and Connor
just didn't have the chemistry. As far as he was concerned they should
never have killed of Jones.
alice
You are right! For maybe her first 3 or 4 shows, SB was very
different, and now that I think back, I remember noticing that she was
very clearly patterning her performance on ART`s-- mannerisms, voice
pattern, expressions, etc. And she was doing a fairly good job. Now I
am remembering why she didnt start driving me nuts right away-- she
suddenly switched from doing this to doing a very different
interpretation-- the more jarring change came not when she first appeared,
but about a week later.
No major pt. here, other than to concur with what you remember.
-Alice
doing a very clear On 16 May 1997, Paul Jenkins
wrote:
JK
I don't know, SB irritated me from the very beginning and then just got
progressively worse. TPTB are just killing what used to be a great
character.
Jeanette
Pat Couillard
JK <jean...@krokus.com> wrote:
>I don't know, SB irritated me from the very beginning and then just got
>progressively worse. TPTB are just killing what used to be a great
>character.
>Jeanette
I couldn't agree more! The character of Connor has become a perversion
of what she once was, thanks to this obscene recast. As far as the
title of this thread is concerned, there is no defense for SB. She
simply has made Connor a silly, nightmarish bad, bad joke.
Alfredo
Come on, give the writers _some_ of the credit for that. SB didn't turn
Connor into a simpering wallflower all by herself.
Alfredo
alice
On Sun, 18 May 1997, JK wrote:
> I don't know, SB irritated me from the very beginning and then just got
> progressively worse. TPTB are just killing what used to be a great
> character.
Ahh! Dont get me wrong-- I was never a fan. In fact, I remember I
n.named her CONmyNERves during her first or second episode when I
did the update for it. Although I do think it was her looks and
her lack of bones in her fingers and wrists that first got my
attention, not her inability to act.
I may have been affected by my expectations-- I was assuming
this OLTL star could act, so I was paying more attention at first
to whether I liked her personally.
Frankly, I was and still am shocked at how terrible her acting is-- she is
the *worst* line-reader, constantly flubbing lines, and she is
totally incapable of reacting to her co-stars- she is incredibly like
the actors we`ve had who never acted before-- i.e. Paul, Zooey, Bark.
And I`m pretty sure she is actually getting progressively worse.
But I digress-- I think what made her a little bit more tolerable her
first few days was that she also had not yet started this new
hyperactive interp. of the character. The scary squealing and
breaking into song stuff- which apparently is her ``new direction``
for the Connor didnt debut in full force until after her first
few performances.
-Alice
Greg and Sarah Estell
>
> Come on, give the writers _some_ of the credit for that. SB didn't turn
> Connor into a simpering wallflower all by herself.
>
> Alfredo
And the directors - don't forget them. They are the ones who allow SB
to flail about and take everything over-the-top on a daily basis.
Yesterday's show was so nice because neither she nor Mark were anywhere
to be found. I actually watched an entire show without the fastforward
button!
Sarah
Amy Roper
In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.97052...@dilbert.ucdavis.edu>,
ez05...@mailbox.ucdavis.edu says...
>But I digress-- I think what made her a little bit more tolerable her
>first few days was that she also had not yet started this new
>hyperactive interp. of the character. The scary squealing and
>breaking into song stuff- which apparently is her ``new direction``
>for the Connor didnt debut in full force until after her first
>few performances.
>-Alice
>
I remember Susan's very first day on the show - her first scene was
her answering the phone in the Kasnoff house looking all over for Mark
after he skipped town after the wedding. I remember looking her over
at first and thinking how weird it was to see someone else playing
Connor, and just kind of assuming those first 2 or 3 days that I would
get used to her after the weirdness wore off. She was definitely not
doing her hyper, overacting, get on your nerves facial expressions that
first day. She did seem a little nervous, but I assumed that would go
away too. She didn't start doing her totally off acting style until she
found that gun in the toolbox and then hit the cabin floor 3 times in the
same show with Mark. I remember it was about that time I realized we
were moving in a very bad direction, not only in the characterization
of Connor, but in the talent of the show itself.
Amy
DebBlah
>
>Come on, give the writers _some_ of the credit for that. SB didn't turn
>Connor into a simpering wallflower all by herself.
>
>Alfredo
>
>
She recites her lines in a manic, simpering, hyper, adolescent,
ridiculous, out-of-breath tantrum. You can't blame the writers
for that.
Deb
R & A Whitaker
I kGreg and Sarah Estell wrote:
>
> >
> > Come on, give the writers _some_ of the credit for that. SB didn't turn
> > Connor into a simpering wallflower all by herself.
> >
> > Alfredo
>
> to flail about and take everything over-the-top on a daily basis.
> Yesterday's show was so nice because neither she nor Mark were anywhere
> to be found. I actually watched an entire show without the fastforward
> button!
>
> Sarah
I knew something was different (defintely better) about yesterdays show,
that was it! Just goes to show how much better it could be EVERY day!
Alfredo
> >Connor into a simpering wallflower all by herself.
> >
> >Alfredo
> >
> >
>
> ridiculous, out-of-breath tantrum. You can't blame the writers
> for that.
>
> Deb
Are you saying that the "Oh goody!" line was an ad-lib? I'm not letting
SB off the hook, just pointing out that such a monstrosity requires
teamwork. As Sarah pointed out in her reply, we must also bring in the
directors for special mention, and don't forget the casting directors
who in effect sired the beast.
On the bright side, the last couple of episodes have been mercifully
Connor-free. Oops, now I've jinxed us!
Alfredo
macl...@3lefties.com
In article <3381B1...@globaldialog.com>,
est...@globaldialog.com wrote:
>
>
> And the directors - don't forget them. They are the ones who allow SB
> to flail about and take everything over-the-top on a daily basis.
> Yesterday's show was so nice because neither she nor Mark were anywhere
> to be found. I actually watched an entire show without the fastforward
> button!
Sarah: I am so glad you brought up the directors! We've been airing our
displeasure for MADD/FMB and the writers, but I'm wondering if the
directors are doing their job. Although newConner seems to be beyond
fixing, some of the other new characters such as Molly and newSam might
have potential with stronger direction. Laura
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Skatko
alfredo posted:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Are you saying that the "Oh goody!" line was an ad-lib? I'm not letting
SB off the hook, just pointing out that such a monstrosity requires
teamwork. As Sarah pointed out in her reply, we must also bring in the
directors for special mention, and don't forget the casting directors
who in effect sired the beast.
On the bright side, the last couple of episodes have been mercifully
Connor-free. Oops, now I've jinxed us!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As one of the premier SB bashers in this group, I must respond.
Sure, the writers have turned the character around. Totally. But.
And this is a big BUT....SB was Luna apparently for several years
on another soap. What she is trying to do, in our opinions, is use
her Luna (wacky and southern) characteristics for Connor. Connor,
who HAS NO southern accent, and certainly wasn't "wacky". Connor
was from "the east" I believe, and SB herself in interviews said she
was trying to "breathe life into a cold and one-dimensional character".
Well!! Excuse me! Connor certainly wasn't cold or one dimensional!
I can't answer for why the writers decided to destroy the Connor
character,
or why TPTB didn't just create a new character for SB, since they seem(ed)
determined to keep her on. SB was maybe good as Luna, but as Connor?
Simply not believable. At least to those of us who have watched Connor
for the 6 years she was on. SB has habits, like, waving her arms around
in the air while she talks, (kind of like swatting at invisible flies) and
scrunching
up her face, like someone else mentioned, that kind of grate on ones
nerves
if one *knew* the character of Connor. Perhaps newcomers, or those
who weren't particularly attached to ART, don't notice or don't care.
Thats cool,
to each his own. I swear I'm not being contentious, or trying to start an
argument,
but a lot of us who despise SB have been "flamed" for expressing our
opinions.
Just wanted to set the record straight, or maybe try to get our point
across to
you.
Sheila
(Go ahead flame me, I have my asbestos gloves on!! ;-) )
Barbara Wilkie
macl...@3lefties.com wrote:
>In article <3381B1...@globaldialog.com>,
> est...@globaldialog.com wrote:
>> And the directors - don't forget them. They are the ones who allow SB
>> to flail about and take everything over-the-top on a daily basis.
>> Yesterday's show was so nice because neither she nor Mark were anywhere
>> to be found. I actually watched an entire show without the fastforward
>> button!
>
>Sarah: I am so glad you brought up the directors! We've been airing our
>displeasure for MADD/FMB and the writers, but I'm wondering if the
>directors are doing their job. Although newConner seems to be beyond
>fixing, some of the other new characters such as Molly and newSam might
>have potential with stronger direction. Laura
And how about Tom (Scott)yesterday? Someone should have told him he was
"over-doing" the *knitted* eyebrows routine yesterday. He *never* relaxed
them in those scenes with David Allen and it looked artificial to me. Did
anyone else notice? A little direction might have made Tom's anger more
convincing... at least to me.
BWilkie
Barbara Wilkie
Wendy Wagner <we...@panix.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 May 1997, David Boulton wrote:
>
>> But a counterexample is the new Samantha. While I still prefer Brooke
>> Alexander, the new actress (Sherri Alexander I think her name is) is
>> perfectly acceptable (at least to me).
>I am not impressed with SA so far. Of course, she may yet grow into the
>role, so I'm prepared to wait. But she is _no_ Brooke A.
That's essentially my opinion on SA too.... wait and see. :)
>> The one thing that turns shows around is good writing. And that has been
>> sadly lacking on ATWT for many years now. There have been small snippets
>> here and there (I liked Psycho-Diego quite a lot), but they are never able
>> to sustain it. I know that writing 250 pages of dialog every week must be
>> difficult, but other shows do it with quality, why never ATWT?
>
>What other shows? If you ask me, writing is down across the boards these
>days.
ITA with this comment Wendy! It seems everyone has "burned out" at once,
or they are all so "worried about losing their jobs"... they can't focus on
their work. I don't think ATWT is consistently any worse than the others
for sure. Maybe that's my prejudice showing though, because ATWT and GL
have always been my favorite shows. ;-)
BWilkie
Wendy Wagner
On Wed, 14 May 1997, David Boulton wrote:
> But a counterexample is the new Samantha. While I still prefer Brooke
> Alexander, the new actress (Sherri Alexander I think her name is) is
> perfectly acceptable (at least to me). Because: A) They cast someone with
> enough physical similarity to the original character (Sam is still tall,
> blonde and gorgeous -- just slightly less so), B) they cast somebody with
> good acting talent who can pull off the character without major changes to
> who the character is, and C) there wasn't a bruising, instant transition
> from one actress to the next.
I am not impressed with SA so far. Of course, she may yet grow into the
role, so I'm prepared to wait. But she is _no_ Brooke A.
> The one thing that turns shows around is good writing. And that has been
> sadly lacking on ATWT for many years now. There have been small snippets
> here and there (I liked Psycho-Diego quite a lot), but they are never able
> to sustain it. I know that writing 250 pages of dialog every week must be
> difficult, but other shows do it with quality, why never ATWT?
What other shows? If you ask me, writing is down across the boards these
days.
Wendy
******************************************
"In CyberLand we only drink Diet Coke."
--RENT
******************************************
Wendy Wagner
On 21 May 1997, Barbara Wilkie wrote:
> >> The one thing that turns shows around is good writing. And that has been
> >> sadly lacking on ATWT for many years now. There have been small snippets
> >> here and there (I liked Psycho-Diego quite a lot), but they are never able
> >> to sustain it. I know that writing 250 pages of dialog every week must be
> >> difficult, but other shows do it with quality, why never ATWT?
> >
> >What other shows? If you ask me, writing is down across the boards these
> >days.
>
> ITA with this comment Wendy! It seems everyone has "burned out" at once,
> or they are all so "worried about losing their jobs"... they can't focus on
> their work.
What gets me is that the Labines, upon whom one can usually rely for good
writing, seem to be recycling all their GH stories at OLTL, which is one
of the reasons why I haven't made the switch back to OLTL yet. Do you know
that we almost had the Labines at P&G? P&G had an offer on the table to
them. Waaah! When I think of what Claire could have done with ATWT or
GL.... (of course, with my luck, AW would've gotten her).
> I don't think ATWT is consistently any worse than the others
> for sure. Maybe that's my prejudice showing though, because ATWT and GL
> have always been my favorite shows. ;-)
ATWT, GL, and OLTL were so so ruined during the past year that whoever
takes over has a long long way to go before these shows are up to par.
But notice, too, how AMC is going down the toilet fast, GH is already
there, and the Bell soaps have been in a ratings stupor for months now.
Wendy
***************************************************************
"You're living in America; leave your conscience at the tone.
And when you're living in America at the end of the millenium,
you are what you own."
--RENT
***************************************************************
NEWELEY
Wendy Wagner writes:
<<ATWT, GL, and OLTL were so so ruined during the past year that whoever
takes over has a long long way to go before these shows are up to par.
But notice, too, how AMC is going down the toilet fast, GH is already
there, and the Bell soaps have been in a ratings stupor for months now.
>> It's been a rough two years for daytime, and it's not getting any
better. IMO GL's writing is much better then it was during the hack
McTavish, but the stories are so crazy, and the show centers around three
characters, to the point of making me wonder how long it will even
survive. AMC was bad for a while, and it's improving some, but still has
two or three TERRIBLE stories (even McTavish wouldn't have pulled a
babynapping story I don't think). ATWT's writing is very flat and dull,
and the show goes from goodish to OK to terrible on any given day(usually
the terrible is when FauxConnor\Luna is on). And those Bell soaps, when
you rewrite history countless times, fire people for no reason, and
recycle stories to the point of madness, there's going to be a fallout. I
know the Y&R I see now is nothing like the one about 6 or 7 years ago.
ck...@erinet.com
> >> It's been a rough two years for daytime, and it's not getting any
> better......TERRIBLE stories........ writing is very flat and dull,
> ..... rewrite history countless times, fire people for no reason, and
> recycle stories to the point of madness, there's going to be a fallout.
I snipped this to make it more generic, because most of the soaps have these
problems, but I want to add one other problem that I notice as a reason for
soaps declining, and that is when an actor chooses to leave as a career move.
I DO NOT begrudge any actor for leaving if that's what he/she wants to do, but
it does play havoc with the storyline and depresses the viewers. Then the
writers kill of the character, only to ressurect him/her when the actor comes
back to the show, it can get messy. Again, don't tell me the actors have a
right to do this, because I understand that, I'm just speaking of one of many
reasons that soaps have declined.
Cheryl 8-)
--
CKais 8-)
"We wear the mask that grins and lies,
It shades our cheeks and hides our eyes..."
P.L. Dunbar
Cumulus Nimbus
Sheila wrote,
> As one of the premier SB bashers in this group, I must respond.
>.... SB herself in interviews said she
> was trying to "breathe life into a cold and one-dimensional character".
> ... Connor certainly wasn't cold or one dimensional!
> I can't answer for why the writers decided to destroy the Connor
> character,
> or why TPTB didn't just create a new character for SB, since they seem(ed)
> determined to keep her on. SB was maybe good as Luna, but as Connor?
> Simply not believable. At least to those of us who have watched Connor
> for the 6 years she was on. .....
As usual you're right. I don't think there's really any contradiction
between not liking SB's performance or presence and thinking the writers
can't write well and the producers have made rotten decisions all
around. What miffs me is that, as you've pointed out, they did not have
to replace ART with SB but could have kept them both. I believe that
Luna was on OLTL the same time that Connor was played by ART on ATWT.
It would have been nice if TPTB had realized that if an ATWT fan did not
exercise the option of watching Luna then they wouldn't do it now.
Greg and Sarah Estell
It seems everyone has "burned out" at once,
> or they are all so "worried about losing their jobs"... they can't focus on
> for sure. Maybe that's my prejudice showing though, because ATWT and GL
> have always been my favorite shows. ;-)
>
But it appears to me that GL is on the upswing. While (IMO) ATWT has
stopped declining, I don't see a significant improvement. ATWT and GL
are the only two shows I watch, so I'm certainly no expert, but GL just
seems to have a lot of energy right now. ATWT seems to be coasting
while they wait for Damien to return. Perhaps this will be Paolo's
ultimate revenge - being begged to return to save the show! LOL!
Sarah
Greg and Sarah Estell
Barbara Wilkie wrote:
>
> macl...@3lefties.com wrote:
> >In article <3381B1...@globaldialog.com>,
> > est...@globaldialog.com wrote:
> >> And the directors - don't forget them. They are the ones who allow SB
> >> to flail about and take everything over-the-top on a daily basis.
> >> Yesterday's show was so nice because neither she nor Mark were anywhere
> >> to be found. I actually watched an entire show without the fastforward
> >> button!
> >
> "over-doing" the *knitted* eyebrows routine yesterday. He *never* relaxed
> them in those scenes with David Allen and it looked artificial to me. Did
> anyone else notice? A little direction might have made Tom's anger more
> convincing... at least to me.
>
> BWilkie
You're right. I typically have nothing but praise for Scott Holmes. He
is a wonderful actor in my opinion. But every so often, he has one of
those episodes where I just want to pop him. Maybe its the character
and not Scott, but sometimes he does over do it. I keep remembering the
wonderful scene when Margo had first gone to jail and Tom sat at her
desk in the station and looked at her wedding ring. He didn't need to
do anything. You could feel everything he was feeling just by looking
at him. That is truly acting!
Sarah
NEWELEY
BWilkie wrote:
<<
And how about Tom (Scott)yesterday? Someone should have told him he was
"over-doing" the *knitted* eyebrows routine yesterday. He *never* relaxed
them in those scenes with David Allen and it looked artificial to me. Did
anyone else notice? A little direction might have made Tom's anger more
convincing... at least to me.
BWilkie>> This also got on my nerves for some reason. I love Tom&Margo,
but I've about had it with their latest characterazations. What have TIIC
done to these characters? Ellen Dolan deserves a big pay increase for
having to play "Crazy Margo" month after month after month.
Skatko
I saw this post:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
BWilkie>> This also got on my nerves for some reason. I love Tom&Margo,
but I've about had it with their latest characterazations. What have TIIC
done to these characters? Ellen Dolan deserves a big pay increase for
having to play "Crazy Margo" month after month after month.>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LOL! Does "TIIC" stand for The Idiots In Charge? If so, thats FUNNY!!
If not, what does it mean!??
Sheila
Barbara Wilkie
Cumulus Nimbus <clo...@cloudia.seanet.com> wrote:
>Sheila wrote,
>> I can't answer for why the writers decided to destroy the Connor
>As usual you're right. I don't think there's really any contradiction
>between not liking SB's performance or presence and thinking the writers
>can't write well and the producers have made rotten decisions all
>around. What miffs me is that, as you've pointed out, they did not have
>to replace ART with SB but could have kept them both. I believe that
>Luna was on OLTL the same time that Connor was played by ART on ATWT.
>
>It would have been nice if TPTB had realized that if an ATWT fan
>did not exercise the option of watching Luna then they wouldn't do it now.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The common sense logic you have stated in the above sentence is what
most of us can't understand about TPTB. We had that choice before they
moved to CBS, and obviously preferred the cast and characters we were
watching over OLTL. Still can't believe they gave so little thought to
the differences in these shows and the changes they have made. :_(
BWilkie
NEWELEY
Sheila wrote:
<<
LOL! Does "TIIC" stand for The Idiots In Charge? If so, thats FUNNY!!
If not, what does it mean!??
>> Yes it does, and it PTB continue to go down the path they're
currently on, I think people will be using it more and more often.
K.S. Cornish
I have been avoiding posting about SB, but I feel like I have some
perspective now. First, I have to say that I was NEVER a big fan of
Connor or ART particularly. Connor stole Walsh Enterprises from La Walsh
which is simply not the done thing. ART was certainly a competent actress
though. I didn't realize how much I appreciated her low key performances
until I got a dose of SB's scenery chewing. I believed ART as Connor.
And when given meaty material (confrontation with Edwina, an attack of her
bulimia) she almost made me feel FOR Connor, in spite of what she did to
La Walsh.
When the porno writers decided that Connor should fall in lust with Mark
Kasnoff, I started to actively hate this character. (In fact, it was then
that I created FAC Hannah Lafferty.) Connor's sudden and all-consuming
sexual desire (which she insisted was love) for a monosyllabic Popeye was
unbelievable--no groundwork was laid; the plot twist did not make sense
given what I knew about the character (And I was watching well before she
made her debut, can remember Kirk and Lucinda observing how unusual it was
for a woman to be named Connor). ART almost made it believable though.
She (ART) clearly was in pain. No doubt it was quite an effort to make
sense of the personality transplant her character had undergone. TPTB
dropped the "d" from shrewd and turned Connor J. Walsh into a
shrew--attacking Lily and CaI, quitting her job. I might, and I say
MIGHT, have believed it IF Mark had shown the least bit of charisma.
There was absolutely nothing about this character or AW's characterization
that justified Connor throwing her life (family, job, integrity) away.
From the few reports I have read about the recast, SB was brought in to
make the Mark/Connor pairing more viable. Did TPTB bother to screentest
her with AW to see if they had chemistry together? It would appear not.
AW had more chemistry with ART, IMO, than he does with SB. It takes more
than calling Mark, "honey" and "darling" to make chemistry. The
NuConnor/Mark scenes now are frighteningly similar to early episodes of BB
in which Ridge and Thorne would call each other "little brother" and "big
brother" a million times a scene in order to remind the viewers that they
had a familial bond. All the pet names and love scenes in the world will
not make these CHARACTERS a hot couple. The actors are simply not
connecting, and the pairing did not make a whole lot of sense given the
history of Connor J. Walsh. TPTB have decided that AW is the beefcake
that must be saved at all costs. So I would suggest playing to his
strengths as an actor. It's summer so they should feature him without his
shirt at various construction sites to get their money's worth.
At this point I would be glad for SB to take Connor in a different
direction. Perhaps Paul and Sarah could use some help in Paris. Heck,
they can have a family reunion. I am sure that Sarah would love to see
her eldest brother.
Well, I'll stop here. I don't feel I have been very coherent, but I've
gotten some things off my chest.
FAC Kim
FAC Hannah Lafferty
--
Keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars,
Kim
NEWELEY
ks wrote:
<<When the porno writers decided that Connor should fall in lust with Mark
Kasnoff, I started to actively hate this character. (In fact, it was then
that I created FAC Hannah Lafferty.) Connor's sudden and all-consuming
sexual desire (which she insisted was love) for a monosyllabic Popeye was
unbelievable--no groundwork was laid; the plot twist did not make sense
given what I knew about the character (And I was watching well before she
made her debut, can remember Kirk and Lucinda observing how unusual it was
for a woman to be named Connor). ART almost made it believable though.
She (ART) clearly was in pain. No doubt it was quite an effort to make
sense of the personality transplant her character had undergone. TPTB
dropped the "d" from shrewd and turned Connor J. Walsh into a
shrew--attacking Lily and CaI, quitting her job. I might, and I say
MIGHT, have believed it IF Mark had shown the least bit of charisma.
There was absolutely nothing about this character or AW's characterization
that justified Connor throwing her life (family, job, integrity) away.>>
This is also a problem I had with what happened to Connor. The hack
writers just had her give up Walsh, her love for Cal, everything, in the
blink of an eye. IMO they really ruined Connor. Then, when the NPTB came
around, instead of seeing something good for ART, we see this awful
recast, played by a poor actress(in this role at least). Oh BTW can I have
a FAC list for ATWT?
Carolyn Tady
In article <ksc6-24059...@132.236.102.68>, ks...@cornell.edu (K.S.
Cornish) writes:
[snip, snip, snip]
|> From the few reports I have read about the recast, SB was brought in to
|> make the Mark/Connor pairing more viable. Did TPTB bother to screentest
|> her with AW to see if they had chemistry together? It would appear not.
|> Kim
What I think, (and this is a personal opinion) is TPTB hired SB to make Mark
look better. Think about it... Allyson was/is a very talented actress and
against Mark, Mark was nothing (the character, not the person). With this new
and dare I say improved, in a new direction Connor, Mark sure as hell
looks/acts better in comparison to SB.
I always loved Connor and Mark but as everyone else has said- I can't stand
watching their scenes. When they come on, I read the newspaper, a book or do
a puzzle.
carolyn
pickering ceil
I am so tired of seeing this header, will someone please change the header
the next time because I have never seen anything in her defense, I don't
know anything that anyone could say in her defense. Thank you.
MDJI
In article <3383A2...@globaldialog.com>, Greg and Sarah Estell
<est...@globaldialog.com> writes:
>
>But it appears to me that GL is on the upswing. While (IMO) ATWT has
>stopped declining, I don't see a significant improvement. ATWT and GL
>are the only two shows I watch, so I'm certainly no expert, but GL just
>seems to have a lot of energy right now. ATWT seems to be coasting
>while they wait for Damien to return. Perhaps this will be Paolo's
>ultimate revenge - being begged to return to save the show! LOL!
>
>
I agree with this. GL is pretty exciting right now. ATWT stagnated soon
after Diego was shot ... it got sloppy ... with body snatching and Molly
moping around jail and lurking around every corner.
Ah, Doug used to keep the pace perfect. Unlike yucky shows like Days ...
where the same stuff goes on for years but with lots of LITTLE suspenses
(for example, Carrie and Austin still not together. Marlana and John too
...) Doug and crew wrote it so that it was edge of your seat regularly and
steadily ... storylines took a nice amount of time - enough to get
rrrreally involved, but not so long as to get bored and annoyed ... and
when one ended another began.
ATWT used to make me jump up in my seat and freak out *regularly* . The
last times I had that reaction were: Royce on the stand with MPD ...
Courtney getting crushed under a building with her hand sticking out ....
and Shannon showing up at the airport all bedraggled ...
DJones3115
i agree, bring the original connor walsh back. sorry, and no offense to
susan batten, but she looks much older than mark. susan does not have what
it takes. with the older connor, when she cried, you cried with her, she
was that real. i still do not watch any lines where connor and mark are
together, i fast foward until their lines are complete. i have never
written nor thought of writing to a soap opera or magazine before, but
this change really makes me mad. put the old connor back, or you (the
show) will looose a lot of viewers...... thanks debbie jones, youngstown,
ohio