Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Daniel Avery" data-source="post: 213255" data-attributes="member: 27">Nathalie Kelley is doing publicity for her new show.&nbsp; Her PR handlers do not want the focus of her interviews to be gossipy rehashes of what happened with Dynasty.&nbsp; But mentioning it at all makes it news-worthy, since people continue to be curious (even if we&#039;re told no one is watching/interested in the show).&nbsp; By accepting some of the blame for what happened, she looks introspective and professional in the face of the ill-advised comments she made at the time of her dismissal (which didn&#039;t look professional at all)...which gives her a chance to repair some of the damage.&nbsp; Saying less about the departure is actually saying more when the focus of her interviews is supposed to be her new show.&nbsp; Also, a half-hearted attempt to shoulder the &quot;blame&quot; for the situation is the quickest way to move on to the real subject they all want to discuss, which is the new show.She and her PR people know that people like us will do the debating/discussing for her, so she doesn&#039;t have to say much.&nbsp; Should she shoulder the blame?&nbsp; Was the writing not serving her well?&nbsp; Perhaps the whole situation with filming in Atlanta is an issue?&nbsp; I think all three contributed, but not in equal measures.&nbsp; I thought that what I saw on screen (in her acting/grasp of the character) were fine.&nbsp; If she was struggling with the material and/or the filming location, it did not show on screen.&nbsp; I didn&#039;t know how unhappy she was until I read her interviews in the period after she left.&nbsp; Her comments about not feeling she was up to the challenge of a soap format seems to me to be more of a comment that she was not up to the schedule as opposed to the material.&nbsp; Being outside of LA and NYC (where the unions are more entrenched) allows film crews in Atlanta to demand much more time and effort, with longer film days and fewer breaks when that is needed.&nbsp; A new show is much more time-consuming than a show that has been around a while and has established routines, collaborative spirit and &quot;worked out its kinks,&quot; so that first year had to have been difficult for everyone.&nbsp; I&#039;ve gone on record about how poorly I think the writers handled NK&#039;s departure and how Ana-Brenda was put in an impossible situation due to her ever-changing character.&nbsp; Those are faults of the writers and the writing that should have been corrected within the storylines of the show rather than dismissing the actresses and &quot;starting fresh&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; The way they&#039;ve rewritten Adam in the span of one season shows they could have done similar retooling on any other character that wasn&#039;t working.&nbsp; Heck, they may have been able to hold onto NS&#039;s Alexis if they had written her more the way we see them writing EH&#039;s version.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Daniel Avery, post: 213255, member: 27"] Nathalie Kelley is doing publicity for her new show. Her PR handlers do not want the focus of her interviews to be gossipy rehashes of what happened with [I]Dynasty[/I]. But mentioning it at all makes it news-worthy, since people continue to be curious (even if we're told no one is watching/interested in the show). By accepting some of the blame for what happened, she looks introspective and professional in the face of the ill-advised comments she made at the time of her dismissal (which didn't look professional at all)...which gives her a chance to repair some of the damage. Saying less about the departure is actually saying more when the focus of her interviews is supposed to be[I] her new show.[/I] Also, a half-hearted attempt to shoulder the "blame" for the situation is the quickest way to move on to the [I]real[/I] subject they all want to discuss, which is the new show. She and her PR people know that people like us will do the debating/discussing for her, so she doesn't have to say much. Should she shoulder the blame? Was the writing not serving her well? Perhaps the whole situation with filming in Atlanta is an issue? I think all three contributed, but not in equal measures. I thought that what I saw on screen (in her acting/grasp of the character) were fine. If she was struggling with the material and/or the filming location, it did not show on screen. I didn't know how unhappy she was until I read her interviews in the period after she left. Her comments about not feeling she was up to the challenge of a soap format seems to me to be more of a comment that she was not up to the[I] schedule[/I] as opposed to the material. Being outside of LA and NYC (where the unions are more entrenched) allows film crews in Atlanta to demand much more time and effort, with longer film days and fewer breaks when that is needed. A new show is much more time-consuming than a show that has been around a while and has established routines, collaborative spirit and "worked out its kinks," so that first year had to have been difficult for everyone. I've gone on record about how poorly I think the writers handled NK's departure and how Ana-Brenda was put in an impossible situation due to her ever-changing character. Those are faults of the writers and the writing that should have been corrected within the storylines of the show rather than dismissing the actresses and "starting fresh". The way they've rewritten Adam in the span of one season shows they could have done similar retooling on any other character that wasn't working. Heck, they may have been able to hold onto NS's Alexis if they had written her more the way we see them writing EH's version. [/QUOTE]

Verification

6 + 4 =