October 9, 2013 at 5:31 pm #425384
It’s a nice interview and then Geary gets real and honest.October 10, 2013 at 7:50 am #425386
Whoa, this is really interesting. One of the things that I’ve always found interesting/curious is, over the last 20 years, how much more emphasis GH has put on Luke/Geary than on Laura/Francis. I would LOVE to see an equally candid interview with Genie about the development of all this after the riding off into the sunset that Geary mentioned.October 11, 2013 at 4:30 pm #425387
I have always found his take on the Labaine era to be a bit pretentious and self-serving. He doesn’t seem able to find any good in that era, an era that earned GH nearly unanimous praise. There is a lot of great drama and quality and merit in writing a domestic story that isn’t all about action and flash. I think he couldn’t handle a writer who wanted to challenge him in a new way. So he acted like a grouch.October 12, 2013 at 6:09 pm #425388
Shame on Geary for not being excited about playing Ma and Pa Kettle. This is more evidence that the Labine era was not all it was cracked up be. Great moments but by the time Labine was shown the door she had reduced GH to a mopey mess that was lacking balance and fun.October 13, 2013 at 3:41 pm #425389
Shame on Geary for not being excited about playing Ma and Pa Kettle. This is more evidence that the Labine era was not all it was cracked up be. Great moments but by the time Labine was shown the door she had reduced GH to a mopey mess that was lacking balance and fun.
I disagree, GH during the Labaine era was richly balanced with drama and comedy. Yes, you had that high drama of Robin and Stone, the predominant storyline during this era, but you also had the highly hilarious light comedy of Ned/Lois and Lucy and Kevin (Mac and Kevin dressed up in drag! Madam Maya!, Sigmund the duck!). GH had a lot of fun during this era and I think it nicely balanced out the dark drama that was going on. If anything reduced GH to less than, it was all of the work that Robert Guza did post-Labaine, which was just not up to par.October 13, 2013 at 7:08 pm #425390
Tony Geary is telling his troof and I can’t get mad at him, even though I disagree with some of it.October 14, 2013 at 8:02 am #425391
I do think he sounds kind of like an ass at parts. I’m of the belief that characters can change with their circumstances and I don’t see it as inherently a bad thing that Labine wanted to write something more domestic with Luke and Laura. Not only would it be natural for the characters to change as they had started a family and maybe settled down, but soaps had changed, too. The high adventure that was a hallmark of Luke and Laura during the 70s and 80s really wasn’t a thing anymore.October 14, 2013 at 9:34 am #425392
EmmyLoser writes, “I do think [Anthony Geary] sounds kind of like an ass at parts.”
Anthony Geary is a fool for having said that Luke-and-Laura supporters should write them off.
Too many actors on soaps have been on so long that they turned their jobs into careers beyond 20 years. And for some, like Geary, they held on more than 30 years.
From a quality standpoint, Luke and Tracy are an experiment. The kind that says, “These are not two people who belong together. But our soap will run storytelling for them anyway.” It’s one of those examples of meaningless distractions. And some of our dearly departed daytime dramas, within the last five years, dabbled in that a lot prior to their permanent exits.
Luke and Laura are one of those couples that, when you get right down to it, could have married, departed Port Charles, not come back … and, in such case, it would have felt just as right as when they returned to General Hospital in 1993 and the show’s PTB gave them fascinating material. Now, it’s just watching actors and their characters become old; giving viewers the feeling of comfort with what seems familiar. “Oh, wow! Seems Tony Geary and Jane Elliot work well together. I’m so impressed, GH!”October 24, 2013 at 3:54 pm #425393
I just think as far as Tracy is concerned, the writing has been very lazy since she came back in the 2000’s. I don’t think anybody at GH was really invested enough in her as an actress or character to write something meaningful for her, and at this point with so few Q’s left on the show what is the point of having her around?October 25, 2013 at 9:23 am #425394
I realize GH bashing became popular around here when Carly stopped being the center of all things, but let’s give Jane Elliot a little more credit here. I love Tracy and Luke. Where GH went wrong was pairing a rapist with his victim in the late 1970s and turning them into a couple to root for. That wasn’t necessarily organic chemistry between Francis and Geary – – it was written. Luke and Tracy make much more sense together and I love that Tracy is a surrogate mother to Lulu. I find Jane Elliot’s work as Tracy to be some of the best work in the industry. If she submitted her name, she’d be nominated and could likely have won an additional Emmy over the last decade. Maybe you guys haven’t seen Tracy’s speeches to Luke about what she wants out of life or her commentary about Luke and Laura. I agree that Tracy isn’t shown enough, but I would hardly say that she has been wasted.October 25, 2013 at 9:05 pm #425395
^^ Agreed re Jane/Tracy. As for Carly, IMO it’s a symptom of the overall problem with the current regime. Carly written as being anything but the center of all things is out of character. It’s a similar situation as to what Eileen Davidson said about why she left Days rather than having Kristen back burned: the vixen is not believable as a reactionary/passive player in the plot. Cartini has shown repeatedly that they don’t understand soap concepts like that. Yes, under the previous regime the audience wanted more balanced writing and vets, but under this regime the Sonny-centric tone persists (or IMO is getting worse) and vets are paraded around for show in quantity but not quality.October 30, 2013 at 7:33 am #425396
My only wish for GH would be that it finds the heart and soul it once had. I really wish they’d get Wendy Riche back. She knew how to make a soap compelling, dramatic and richly infused with heart, soul and depth.October 30, 2013 at 7:38 am #425397
I for one never thought Luke and Tracey made sense together… I have no understanding of why Tracey would even give Luke the time of day. Tracey belongs with an entirely different kind of man. Not Luke.
i guess one of the big problems with GH is that characters are being put together that make no sense AT ALL. There is an age-gap present on the show that is hard not to notice. You have a lot of teens, you had a lot of 20-somethings, but you have very few in their 30’s and 40’s… Elizabeth has few people she can interact with… Her and AJ make no sense, she’s far too young for him. Liz and Nicholas, yuck, nobody wants to see that…. Patrick is dating/engaged to Sabrina who is far too young for him… and then there is the sad case of Alexis who hasn’t had a viable love interest in years and hasn’t had a real storyline of her own in even longer than that.October 31, 2013 at 3:53 pm #425398
I actually like the changes made by the new regime at GH. It seems more balanced, and maybe it’s good to let Carly take a break and breathe – i love Wright, but Carly was getting overbearing. And I hate hate hate Maurice Bernard as an actor, but he does seem energized by the direction of the show and his performances have improved.
I don’t think anyone but Anthony Geary can be blamed if you don’t like Luke and Tracy. He has made it clear time and time again in interviews that he dictates Luke’s storyline and scene partners. So I feel like the writers and producers’ hands are tied when it comes to his character. Not sure if it’s contractural or a fear that he’ll just bolt, but no one but Geary is responsible for his character’s direction.
And I LOVE what Maura West is doing over there!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.