Pages

Ensoaplopedia

Screen Caps From

Blog powered by TypePad

Legals

  • Copyright © zarathelawyer 2006-2009

Flashback!

30 May 2009

I offer you some Beefcake with this rant

Why yes, my first post in some time, and my first post about Days in an age, is going to be a rant.  

And what’s more a rant about an obscure largely historical point rather than anything actually on the show yet.  So, you’ve been warned.

So Days, which has lost/thrown out/is losing most of its under-25 characters – to go with having thrown out half of its over-45 characters – has cast a new Horton lad for the beginning of summer.  

We all know how that’s going to turn out.  

(By the by, isn’t it kind of amusing that the safest characters on the show seem to be the over-70s and the 30-somethings, the two demographics that for all intents and purposes didn’t even exist on this show two years ago?)

Anyway, we will now welcome Nathan Horton.  A character who, I suspect, we will be expected to enjoy due to his (a) supposed Horton-ness; and (b) abs.  Not necessarily in that order.

Well I am sorry, bringing on Hortons may be a good idea and abs may be good for many things, but neither are going to distract me (for long) from the fact that this is A MADE UP CHARACTER.

For Nathan Horton is apparently supposed to be the child of classic 80s pairing Pete and Melissa.  

I am sorry, but no.  

Nathan could certainly be Pete’s child – although he’d need to be named Charlie and there wouldn’t be any point anyway – or he could be Melissa’s child from after she left town.  In fact bringing on a child of Melissa’s, a grandchild for Mickey and Maggie, would be a sterling idea (memories of their attempt at Jeremy Horton notwithstanding).  

However, the idea of him being Pete and Melissa’s child is just stupid.  It reeks of “let’s flip through the Days history book of couples that got the patented Days supercouple treatment and bring on their child”.  Without ever looking to see if (a) they actually had a child on-screen; or (b) it was in any way likely that they had one off-screen.

Pete and Melissa certainly got the patented Days supercouple treatment.  They were the teen/young couple of the moment when I first started watching – after Hope and Bo, before Jennifer and Frankie - so 12 year-old me had quite an affinity with them.  Good rich Horton girl, boy from the wrong side of the tracks.  Sound familiar?  Runaway teens, drug-related misunderstandings, gangs!, kidnappings, major obstacles in the form of him having to marry the other girl he got pregnant, (adulterous) summer on the run, big wedding.  

Of course, their story did have a couple of unique elements.  Most importantly his secret career as a stripper at Beefcakes, and the fact that they ultimately broke up because she left him for Lars, possibly the wettest catalyst for permanently breaking up a major couple in the history of this show.  

But still, Lars and his leg warmers are important in all of this, because he’s part proof of why Pete and Melissa having a child makes no sense.  Melissa and Pete broke up over Lars and Pete left town to go be with Ivy and their kid.  Melissa stayed in town for, small break for recasting aside, the best part of 6 years afterwards and then made various other appearances for family events over the ensuing years.  She had a series of boring, bad or downright horrid relationships: Lars, in-love-with-Kayla Jack, Emilio, Brian Schofield (he was the in a band with Keanu brother, not the John McBain brother, right?).  She was ultimately responsible for knocking off Emilio and his mullet.

She morphed from a “dancer” into a “singer” and moved to Nashville where she was later reported, I believe, to have married a doctor.  Which was, I assume, an in-joke about the fact that the original and returning Melissa, Lisa Trusel, was/is in real life married to the actor who after leaving Days played Dr Tom Hardy on GH, a part also played of course by Matt “Jack Deveraux” Ashford because soaps are a small world.  But even if that was a to-be-ignored-later in-joke, it doesn’t mean that they can just say she moved to Nashville and married Pete, because if she had she would have said something!  You don’t have a character come back occasionally for funerals and christenings and not throw the audience that kind of bone.

Therefore, I say, this Nathan person should not have been defined as Pete and Melissa’s child.  Nope.  Just wrong.  Melissa’s child, fine.  Pete and Melissa’s child, not fine.

And that’s even before I get on to the fact that no matter the parental permutation, his surname shouldn’t be Horton.  Pete’s surname was Jannings.  Melissa married “Dr Unspoken Surname” but I’m willing to bet that unspoken surname wasn’t Horton.  And Melissa herself may have been Mickey and Maggie’s adopted daughter, but she was always Melissa Anderson, not Melissa Horton.   The slapping on of the Horton surname just seems to be further proof of the plucked out of a barely informed someone’s arse nature of this character.  When Nick was introduced they didn’t feel the need to give him a Horton surname to make him part of the family, so why the need now?  

Ahhhh.  I feel better now. (And perfectly content with dwelling on the past. I am a child of 80s Days, and I am proud. And fond of parentheses.)

And to make you feel better too, relive the most important part of the story, Pete the Beefcake (also featuring Calliope):

Courtesy classicdaysof80s, which you should absolutely check out not only for a lot of Melissa and Pete’s history, but lots of the rest of the show’s classic storylines.

15 October 2008

Reilly

For whatever James E Reilly's later turn at Days became - and I'll leave that aside for now - I cannot for a moment deny that his first stint at Days turned out some true fabulousness. 

Sure, it was also during this period that I turned away from Days after a decade's solid watching because I couldn't quite accept the demonic possession for its true worth, but there was a lot of great stuff.

Jamey over at Daytime Confidential has put together a few clips of Reilly's Greatest Hits from that period, which is totally worth checking out. 

Go do it.

01 August 2008

Total Recall

So yes, the news that A Martinez is joining OLTL may have sent me into a whirlwind of nostalgia which has resulted in me spending the entire evening watching old Eden and Cruz clips on You Tube.

I suspect that may lead to a longer post at some point, but there's two things that have become immediately apparent:

1. They totally stand the test of time. I've spent most of the evening with a silly grin on my face because while there was tons of drama - it took them three and a half years to get married! That would never happen now - one of the best things about them was that they were so much fun. Which should hardly be a surprise given that virtually everything about SB was fun, but it's still nice to be reminded.

2. I have quite a bit of recall about some of these scenes. Not total recall of the dialogue, but a lot of it feels exceedingly, pleasantly familiar. And I haven't seen this stuff for 20 years. I used to tape SB every day (with Days and Another World) and watch them when I got home from school, but I never kept any tapes of any of it - I didn't do that until the early to mid-90s glory years of GH - so at most I might have replayed some scenes a few times before taping over them a couple of days later. But it so much of it feels like I've watched it far more recently. And given how many brain cells I've killed with beer and studying law in the intervening years, that's quite gratifying.

I so wish they didn't have all the music licensing issues with this show so they could show it again. Though all that music feels so familiar too.

09 January 2008

That was one evil dog

There are many things about the GH chain of posts on the TWoP blog that are funny - the references to the hair, the capsule/footnotes review, the silly pleasure I get from not being the only one who can spout 25 year-old stories off the top of my head, my explaining the significance of the rotweiller to my computer screen - but the main one is that I'm now kicking myself for not including Felicia and Colton in the worst couples poll, which I had originally been inclned to do but then I got distracted and forgot. Dammit.

ETA, speaking of Grant Putnam's dog, this is my new favourite place.

03 January 2008

Un-Super-Couple Showdown

We’ve done the best, now for the worst.

Boring (actually, I can think of many more for that list), chemistry-free, outright horrid or just ill-conceived from the get-go? Worst couples.


02 January 2008

Super-couple Showdown, Part Two

Poll-orama

Oh boy, is the first day back at work after a week and a half of doing virtually nothing a struggle. I miss nap time.

Therefore, it’s time for a poll, or two, or perhaps seven, depending on how much I struggle to make my Work Brain start functioning again.

We’ll begin with the Super-Couple Showdown, Part One.

01 December 2007

So much time…

…wasted?

SoapHunks has posted their 100 Most Memorable Moments in Soap History list.

An interesting list. Otherwise known as I have watched way too many soaps over the years.

The first thing that struck me was that I have seen a hell of a lot of those memorable moments live.

I guess that’s aided by GH and Days, the shows I have obviously watched most over the years, getting the most coverage. But still, I’ve seen quite a number of others and now have reasonably definitive proof that by virtue of Y&R showing straight after Days here down under for decades, I watched a hell of a lot more of that show that I would have first thought.

A quick count leads me to believe that I saw about 34 of the 100 live (or as near live as you get down here, which is to say in the case of GH watching a first broadcast of early 80s GH seven or eight years later. Which was by no means a bad thing). Not via clip libraries or You Tube or internet nostalgia.

We’ll not even get into the ones I’ve seen by those means.

That’s a lot of time watching soaps. Especially as I took over a decade off watching Days, and chunky breaks from GH forced by both unavailability and inclination.

Perhaps having watched a third of the list live just means that I had good watching instincts.

Anyway, head on over there, because the list comes with clips! More time wasting ahead!

25 November 2007

Easily Distracted

Making fun of old soap hair, unlike the hair itself, never gets old.

Snark, thanks to the joys of You Tube, is running a 1993 Thanksgiving episode of All My Children. I think I actually saw this episode at the time as it was during my period living in LA - yes, I watched AMC during the Ted/Tad saga, but in my defence that was also the Sarah Michelle Gellar Prinze as Kendall era - but I had to take a glance just for the opportunity to say "oh, they all look so young!"

But I got entirely distracted before I even got to Dixie's hideous red beret. The reason? Erica's too big for the screen hairstyle and gladiator shield earrings.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

I'd also like to add she was wearing a conservative blue suit that was far more covered up than anything she would wear now, 14 years later.

Anyway, hee! And I'm off to make sure that those photos of me in the bright pink lycra leotard with boy hair from 1987 are well hidden.


30 October 2007

Your desk is grass

GH Monday: two largely superficial comments, a contemplation and a prop-related question.

Comment One: Tracy was absolutely radiant.

Plus, using the word “behoove” is always a positive. Mainly because where I come from it’s spelled and pronounced “behove” and “behoove” is so much more amusing on both fronts.

Comment Two: Poor Georgie. And yet, fabulous excited Georgie. They really need to make more use of her.

Contemplation: Sam and Lucky, I like what they’re doing with this now. They have a nice natural chemistry without being in any way schmoopy and I’m pleased they’ve gone down this path. The relationship definitely benefited from Kelly Monaco’s absence in that it got them a few steps away from the manipulation of earlier and I now genuinely have the sense that they’re happy to see each other without an ounce of cheese. But the main source of contemplation during Monday was that with all the kissing and touching and smiling and going to the ball, I couldn’t help thinking that it must be quite a change for Kelly Monaco over her onscreen romance of the last three years with the barely kissing, never having sex and definitely no attending of balls. Between that and the reduction of gunplay and crying, it must be a great change of pace.

Prop-related question: Why the hell does Ric have a pot of untidy grass on his desk?

Actually, one more thing. What had me noticing the odd props was this:

No, not Lily the moments-away-from-being-blown-up annoying Stepford Wife, but rather what appears to be a bust of Neptune from Sonny’s old penthouse, which I couldn’t miss while watching the recently re-aired fabulous Clink-Boom episode (which may be the subject of a separate post). How long was that thing in the penthouse, and how did I not notice it before? Also, why? Anyway, it’s put me on bad/strange prop watch, so I can’t promise there won’t be random screencaps of odd props in the coming weeks if sweeps doesn’t live up to expectations (and those expectations are low, so there’s not too much they need to do to impress me) and I am bored and distracted by random pots of grass.