January 22, 2017 at 10:56 am #1201992379
Jamey Giddens: “People watch soaps first and foremost because of the families that make up the fictional communities. This is true even for workplace soaps like Grey’s where the “family” is the core group of doctors. Before so much as one more plot is constructed, DAYS has to get their family units in better shape.” (source: Daytime Condidential).
I agree with this statement. Viewers like to invest in core characters and core families. Days could use some strengthening in this area, as they need to plan the next generation of Hortons and Bradys. However, what struck me when reading this comment is that it is even more applicable to GH, which is the absolute worst in terms of maintaining focus on long-term core families. They made a fatal shift in identifying the Corinthos family as a core family, a reality that is lamented by a significant number of viewers. The core families should be the Quartermaines, the Hardys, and the Webbers.January 22, 2017 at 11:56 am #1201992401
Well if we are being fair, the Webbers via Laura and her kids are part of the focus. We just have to drag out his Morgan death-Jerome nonsense until the end of time. Which do they not remember that the audience didn’t really like the Jeromes in the first place in the 80s?January 22, 2017 at 12:29 pm #1201992412
Tennisfreak: “Well if we are being fair, the Webbers via Laura and her kids are part of the focus.”
Yes, and Elizabeth is a Webber too. But I do not consider the Webbers a core family on GH at this point.
Y&R is very good with core families. They have the Abbott, Newman, and Winters families as central to the show. B&B has the Forresters, with some regard for the Avant, Logan, and Spencer families. Days has the Kiriakas, Hernandez, Brady, and Horton families. GH just does not have a strong sense of family. And the “family” scenes with the Corinthos clan are more repulsive than heartwarming given all that has transpired.
Tennisfreak: “Do they not remember that the audience didn’t really like the Jeromes in the first place in the 80s?”
This is an interesting question. I do not clearly recall the critical reception to the Jeromes because I strongly favored GL over GH during this era. I personally did not care much for the story, but it had its moments. It rans its course over a few years and then they moved on. That leads us to the problem I have with GH these days: they do not seem to recognize when a character’s shelf life has expired. They get big-league names to play temporary characters and then they want to keep them on the canvas. I keep waiting for someone at GH to have an epiphany, but I guess that will never happen.January 22, 2017 at 1:16 pm #1201992420
I think there are still major families on the show.
ValerieJanuary 22, 2017 at 8:11 pm #1201992649
Well, yes, GH does still have a lot of people that technically can be designated to families that have enough people to call them major. But these are different from core families, and the sense of family even among those on canvas is, I agree, not very strong. I guess eventually at some point one must concede that a family that’s been around long enough has become a pillar of the show, for better or worse, but I don’t think the Jeromes, Webbers, Falconeris, and Morgans should be on this list. Neither the Jeromes nor Falconeris have been an established family for any considerable length of time, and the Webbers don’t really exist as a family. The Morgans aren’t actually a family either, but the thought that they should be makes it fairly clear that even Jason’s inclusion as part of the Quartermaines is questionable at best, not to mention his wife and children. But that’s just my opinion. It’s an interesting debate.
For me, when I watch GH, the only families that really seem to exist as a unit are an anemic set of Quartermaines and Alexis’s clan. I know, because soaps are soaps, they’re mostly tied into other families and all affiliated with more major family names, with Alexis being a Cassadine, but they seem like an actual family, more than almost any of the other groupings mentioned.January 23, 2017 at 9:18 am #1201992958
I think one of the biggest problems with soaps – and particularly GH – is that TPTB care more about their stars than their stories. Core families have to have rooting interest. I have been watching late 1980’s ATWT episodes and the core families had rootability. I really don’t’ care about the Corinthos or Jerome families. I watch GH for my favorite actors but they are all in stories I don’t care that much for at the moment ): I think they need to do what Gloria Monty did when she saved the show in the late 1970’s and get rid of what doesn’t work – ruthlessly – and in the case of here and now get rid of the mobsters and return the show to the hospital.
I often watch the first 15 minutes of GH and decide to skip the rest of it; it’s not holding my attention. If there is clearly Emmy-worthy work happening I will stay with it and that has happened from time to time.January 23, 2017 at 1:18 pm #1201993141
I often watch the first 15 minutes of GH and decide to skip the rest of it; it’s not holding my attention. If there is clearly Emmy-worthy work happening I will stay with it and that has happened from time to time.
Same, except I usually turn it off after ten.January 31, 2017 at 6:43 pm #1202000384
Frank Valentini tweeted that Emmy winner Hillary B. Smith is joining the cast of GH. Based on the video, it looks like she’ll be playing her OLTL character Nora. Don’t know why we’d need another lawyer in Port Charles with Alexis, Diane, Scott & the never seen Ric already on canvas. But it’s always nice to see a talented actress over a certain age get work. I wonder who else will be visiting from Llanview and Pine Valley. And does this mean we can get Howarth, Easton, Budig and Tonja Walker to start playing Todd, McBain, Greenlee and Alex Olanov again?January 31, 2017 at 6:46 pm #1202000388
I adore Hillary B Smith! I have loved her on ATWT and OLTL and Venice! (: This news makes me incredibly happy! (: Is it a guest stint or a regular role? If she does play Nora does that mean that other OLTL characters can show up in the future?January 31, 2017 at 6:48 pm #1202000391
Her court room scene in 1993 was some Primetime Emmy/Oscar-worthy. It didn’t even feel soapy at all. I’m glad she’s on board. Talented lady.February 1, 2017 at 8:34 am #1202000791
Maybe Nora will reveal that “Franco” is actually Todd Manning and spare us this continued charade?
I love Nora, and HBS is great, so even though this wouldn’t have been my first choice for one of the AMC/OLTL characters coming in, it’s good news.February 1, 2017 at 8:51 am #1202000802
I would be ecstatic if Todd manning came back on to GH! (: (and Blair and Dorian and Star and Bo and Matthew and… aw, just replace the show with OLTL!) (;February 1, 2017 at 11:33 am #1202000952
Maybe she’s the new prosecutor Diane alluded to a couple weeks ago? Also didn’t the legal case keep them from using Skye since she was also an originating AMC character? We could get her and Lila Rae back…
I’m not down with Star coming back unless Kristin plays her. However if they can lure Debbi Morgan in to play either Angie or the doctor character she played on Port Charles (Dr. Burgess) I’m down.February 1, 2017 at 4:24 pm #1202001099
Kristen Alderson did express interest in coming back to play Starr now that the lawsuit is dropped. It might be awkward between her and Chad Duell, though.
The topic ‘The General Hospital Thread (Part 1)’ is closed to new replies.