They really delayed Gary and Val's reconciliation, didn't they?
- Awards
- 24
The combined Sally's Friend/Danny Waleska stories was one of my least-favorite story eras. Two ill-defined characters thrust into the lives of two of the show's most-loved, star-crossed lovers via a stack of coincidences--when all the viewers wanted at that point was for the show to reunite the star-crossed lovers. Even if the two new characters had been fully fleshed-out and played brilliantly by two ultra-charismatic actors (which was NOT the case in either character, for sure) we still would have resisted, since they were obviously the newest obstacles to the reunion of Val and Gary.
The groan-worthy stack of coincidences I mentioned earlier was also annoying because I knew Latham and Lechowick could craft a better (that is, more believable) story if they applied themselves.
The groan-worthy stack of coincidences I mentioned earlier was also annoying because I knew Latham and Lechowick could craft a better (that is, more believable) story if they applied themselves.
K
Karin Schill
Guest
I agree that it took an awful long time to reunite Val and Gary. I kept waiting for them to get reunited. I think the scene when she is about to marry Ben though and she has that scene with Gary before the wedding is just about heartbreaking.
Her relationship with Danny really didn't make sense though. They could have skipped it.
Her relationship with Danny really didn't make sense though. They could have skipped it.
- Awards
- 27
And miss all the good stuff?
K
Karin Schill
Guest
What good stuff?
I found Danny boring and not likable at all!
I found Danny boring and not likable at all!
- Awards
- 27
- Awards
- 20
I hated Danny (as I was meant to) but I actually did like Amanda (aka Sally's Friend). I wouldn't have minded if they had found a more permanent place for her (same with Paula).
I even found the mystery of the voice on the phone to be quite intriguing but that "stack of coincidences" which followed did stretch way too far.
- Awards
- 24
I know, right? I wrote this long list of crappy stuff he did and started to post it...then realized it would be a huge list of potential spoilers for @Chris2 if this is the first time watching it unfold.
It wasn't so much that I found Danny 'boring,' he was just so two-dimensional and cartoony during most of his run. Most villains on Knots were allowed to have some facets to them. Sam Behrens, a really good actor, could have played those facets if they had been written in. It just seemed he had "plot device" written all over him and was not allowed to be anything beyond "selfish, evil nutjob".
- Awards
- 27
You think those people don't exist?
- Awards
- 24
Yes, but I expected more from a show like Knots Landing, a show with a bit more attention to characterization. We went from complex troublemaker characters like Chip Roberts and Jill Bennett to cardboard cut-outs like Danny Waleska, Pierce Lawton, and Brian Johnston.
- Awards
- 27
I felt that we got to know Danny, he was a very violent control freak. Pierce was a lame copycat, too bad they ditched his ex-girlfriend (Victoria?) because I think it would have been better if that storyline was about two sickos.
Danny was so much more than just another run-off-the-mill criminal, and they allowed him to be very, very malicious. Like, how unpleasant can a soap character be?
I loved every minute of it (unlike Karen's evil co-producer/stalker, what a big disappointment that was!)
Danny was so much more than just another run-off-the-mill criminal, and they allowed him to be very, very malicious. Like, how unpleasant can a soap character be?
I loved every minute of it (unlike Karen's evil co-producer/stalker, what a big disappointment that was!)
Hear, Hear....
It is, Karin. This is one of my most fave' Knots scenes...
I agree. I really liked that Gal'....
Very true, Sir.
I've always enjoyed Behren's performances... He has excellent timing and pace, as an actor.He was totally Naff... !!
- Awards
- 24
The stalker plot was actually a lot better than it ought to be because of the actors involved, not because of the plot itself. Michele Lee stepped up her game a bit when she had Robin Strasser to play off; Strasser (as Dianne Kirkwood) was a really good antagonist for Lee's Karen*. I liked Karen a lot more when she had a villain to mock/insult (like the days of Karen Vs. Abby, and of course Karen vs. Anne). Chris Lemmon (as Jeff) had to remain in the background as Karen vs. Dianne was meant to be the "main event", so it wasn't until later that he got to show he could carry a scene. Though Jeff could not have stayed long-term, I think Dianne would have been a wonderful permanent addition to the cast if they had found a way.
* Strasser had made a virtual career in daytime soaps playing the "abrasive bitch competing with the town saint", having played manipulative Rachel Davis on Another World and wicked stepmother-from-hell Dorian Lord on One Life to Live.
* Strasser had made a virtual career in daytime soaps playing the "abrasive bitch competing with the town saint", having played manipulative Rachel Davis on Another World and wicked stepmother-from-hell Dorian Lord on One Life to Live.
- Awards
- 27
I agree, Dianne was a very entertaining character. Jeff, on the other hand...although I liked that very last scene, when she pretended to be in cahoots with Jeff - to confuse him, or stall for time or something - but again, that was her, not him.
- Awards
- 6
Danny was to Val what Jill was to Gary. Psycho partners. And Danny was to Gary what Jill was to Val. Insanely jealous and tried to kill them while making it look like a suicide.
Yes, they drew out the reunion of Gary and Val for as long as possible. If I remember rightly, Gary and Val were back together as a live-in couple late in Season 11, for the first time since the end of Season 3. Danny was around throughout Season 11. Yet even in Season 12 after Danny's death, there was that whole brain virus stuff which kept things on edge a while longer about whether they would get married for the third time or not.
Yes, they drew out the reunion of Gary and Val for as long as possible. If I remember rightly, Gary and Val were back together as a live-in couple late in Season 11, for the first time since the end of Season 3. Danny was around throughout Season 11. Yet even in Season 12 after Danny's death, there was that whole brain virus stuff which kept things on edge a while longer about whether they would get married for the third time or not.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 3
Up till season 9...gary and Val being kept apart made sense...since she and Ben were a good couple...while abby/Gary were fascinating.
I do think after Jill's demise in mid season 10...that the two should have slowly moved beyond what happened...and had season 11 been the season where the two dated one another without a major committment... figuring after 2 marriages...maybe they were better as friends and Co parents without the added stress of marriage.
I do think after Jill's demise in mid season 10...that the two should have slowly moved beyond what happened...and had season 11 been the season where the two dated one another without a major committment... figuring after 2 marriages...maybe they were better as friends and Co parents without the added stress of marriage.
It's one of the main rules for creating good story ... keep the 2 characters you want together the most apart for as long as possible.
Not only will the audience's anticipation be paid off in spades, "happily-ever-after" is boring (and very hard to write and keep interesting).
Look at both GENERAL HOSPITAL and RHODA. Both programs quickly married off 2 couples whose courtships enthralled millions of viewers. Once they tied the knot, they quickly became boring and major changes were made to keep them interesting (in the case of GH, Laura Spencer was kidnapped, and presumed dead. On RHODA, Joe blurted out in couple's therapy that he never really wanted to get married in the first place and was quickly jettisoned from the show).
Not only will the audience's anticipation be paid off in spades, "happily-ever-after" is boring (and very hard to write and keep interesting).
Look at both GENERAL HOSPITAL and RHODA. Both programs quickly married off 2 couples whose courtships enthralled millions of viewers. Once they tied the knot, they quickly became boring and major changes were made to keep them interesting (in the case of GH, Laura Spencer was kidnapped, and presumed dead. On RHODA, Joe blurted out in couple's therapy that he never really wanted to get married in the first place and was quickly jettisoned from the show).
It's funny - I'm now in the reconciliation episodes and I'm not feeling it. I think Gary and Val have a ton of chemistry, but now it just seems too convenient. "Oh, we've both had bad luck with our various psycho partners, so let's just deal with the devil we do know." Even Mack seems to think they're only reconciling because of the children.
I'm also disappointed Robin Strasser (Diane) was written off so quickly. She's a bit bigger than life, but I think the show could have used a little of that at this point.
I'm also disappointed Robin Strasser (Diane) was written off so quickly. She's a bit bigger than life, but I think the show could have used a little of that at this point.
- Awards
- 52
I agree with this. Not only keeping Gary and Val apart for so long but also having them being married to other people while they were apart just raised the desire to get them back together to a higher level, a bit like Val's babies which played out for an eternity until she finally got them back. I much preferred this approach to what they did in Dallas, for example, when every character that divorced seemed to remarry after a relatively short period of time.