Soap Opera Discussion Groups and Forums

Young And The Restless Discussion Group

Topic: Little Richard


Topic Posted by: Marilou
Date Posted: Tue Jul 1 13:21:59 2008
Additional Comments:

Maybe the perception of an 'actor' problem lies in the fact that 'guests' like Little Richard are REAL live people representing themselves, and not fictional characters like the other ones in the show.

So if they are real live people, it goes without saying that we should not criticize them like fictional people. But if we view them as 'characters' playing the role of (insert name here), it is a different story. Depends on the point of view.

That's why Devon's 'niece', being not well known, is treated like a fictional character and was clobberred.

And Thad Luckinbill, being a singer in real life, was clobbered because he was viewed as J.T. when he sang in Y&R.





Add a MessageGuidelinesTopics ListHomeOther SoapsDaily Recaps for the Show!Registration
Posted by: Shadowdancer
Date posted: Tue Jul 1 20:28:19 2008
Message:
I'm not a big fan of guest performances on the show, it's filler & the writers don't need the break, imho.  Most of the guest celebrities are not people I am a fan of, but it's worse when they have an on-going character performing regularly.  Just write the story, without all the musical interludes, I say!

Respond to this message


Posted by: Augie
Date posted: Tue Jul 1 17:29:35 2008
Message:
Try this. It worked for me. I watched the whole wedding thing with Little Richard in real time yesterday and thought it was just plain crazy. After reading all the pros and cons, I went back today and watched it over again with a whole different mindset. Now, I have never seen him perform before in my life, but I have to appreciate this man giving such a hearty performance and going along with the animated antics of two soap actors. He fell right into the silly mood of the moment and went along with the flow. Say hi to a new fan of Little Richard.

Respond to this message


Posted by: serialmom
Date posted: Tue Jul 1 15:10:46 2008
Message:

Once when we first moved here to FL, Frank Sinatra came to perform. It may have been one of the last tours.  After the show some pipsqueek of a critic reviewed his show.  Some of it was complimentary but he said Frank's voice wasnt up to par.  I have never EVER seen so many hostile letters toward this critic.  One full page, letter after letter.  I've always wondered if this guy is still writing.

 

Replies: (list all replies)

  • As someone said, I think Y&R viewers are just tired of those singers or celebrities that take too long a time on a show, because viewers are not all fans of said personality. If we wanted to see them, we would go to other fan channels. JMHO again of course. - Marilou
  • ITA. We tune in to watch our show, not to be forced to listen/watch some celebrity that we may or may not have any interest in. And since they can't expect any celeb to appeal to all viewers, no matter who guests there are always going to be dissatisfied viewers! eom/faysie
  • I'll never forget when Mr. Sinatra was accepting an award & when he was speaking after accepting it, he was (as everyone does) running out of time & someone in the control booth cut him off, going to commercial or something. It was HORRIBLE. Lots of people were furious & the guy who did it was fired. Technically, he was doing his job, but some people should be given a bit of wiggle room. Mr. Sinatra deserved better & I'll bet that guy will never be allowed to forget doing that. eom

    Respond to this message


    Posted by: DianeR
    Date posted: Tue Jul 1 14:52:07 2008
    Message:

    I could not believe the cruel remarks, futher up the Board about Little Richard.

    He's a performer, and a legend.  If you do not care for him, don't watch.  But to make fun of him because he was unable to stand up, and because of his appearance, is just so cruel.  Nowadays, so many people have no class.

    I, personally, loved that wedding scene, and it looked like everyone was having such a good time.  It was a lighter moment.  It wasn't supposed to be Shakespeare.  It was campy and it was fun.

    When you've achieved what he has, and still have name recognition after almost 50 years, then it appears he must've done something right.

     

    Replies: (list all replies)

  • I FFed the whole scene and I have no particular opinion about people who liked it and watched it in its entirety. They are happy in their own way, and that's what counts in the end, isn't it? - Marilou
  • I was irritated with those who criticized his lack of movement and/or acting. The guy was either playing the piano or pretending to, so he can't get up and move around! And he was playing himself - what's to act? He was simply being himself. To criticize him in this situation was IMO rather mean. eom/faysie
  • faysie, when you go to a show or a concert, do you have only positive things to say about the performer(s)? Or do you sometimes criticize them and voice you opinion rather strongly? Do you make fun of what has happened to actors on the stage or in the movie? I know I do. - Marilou
  • The majority of the people who are playing an instrument or singing on television or film are lip sincing to their recorded performance. It is simply the way it is done. It isn't 'fake' or that they aren't able to perform live, but that it is the way film & television have done it since they began. I'm not saying all, but most of the time that is the situation. Little Richard is also used to performing on a more spacious stage, where he doesn't have the same restrictions on his movement that a tv set has. eom
  • Since there's generally something that I do like about the performance, as well as something that I perhaps don't think was as good, I generally try to accentuate the good parts and not dwell on the bad. That's just me. eom/faysie

    Respond to this message


    Posted by: petunia
    Date posted: Tue Jul 1 14:42:39 2008
    Message:

    Personally, I do not have a problem with Little Richard's being on the show. Hey, the guy has to make a living, eh? The problem, in this case, I think, is that he has always been a stage performer. And, I am sure, most people know that the stage requires broader actions/movements/expressions/ what have you. When these are brought to the smaller screen with a camera focusing on just a face or upper body, such learned actions/expressions show up as very exaggerated. That was a major difficulty in the baby years of tv bringing in stage performers. As to ''oldy but goldy'' stars appearing on the show, maybe, many prefer to remember them in their hey day and not to see them all wrinkled and creaky. I hate when the tabloids catch one-time great stars in their latter years--think Nick Nolte or Jack Lord.

    Replies: (list all replies)

  • I think that over-the-hill performers shouldn't not be shown IF they have lost most of their power of attraction for a huge number of people or IF they have been away so long present generations don't know them. It depends on the demographics targeted by the show. - Marilou
  • But there are lots of performers who HAVEN'T lost their talent & who aren't deemed to be worthy of the public's time! I've seen Little Richard & he is still a very capable, talented performer. He may not be able to do all the over-the-top stuff, but he still has a great presence. Age has little to nothing to do with it. Soaps have benefited from lots of performers who started in films & primetime, who were 'religated' to soaps & provided MANY yrs of entertainment. eom

    Respond to this message


    Posted by: Duffy
    Date posted: Tue Jul 1 13:49:36 2008
    Message:

    I'm not sure I follow that because they are *real* people we can't criticize them.  The real actors on this show are criticized daily.  Remember all the posts on MTS' weight, Sharon's hair, the way Sabrina talks, Amber's voice, Gloria's bugging out eyes, etc. etc.?  Those are not criticisms of the character they are playing.

    I think a lot of people are just tired of all this singing.  How does it further the plot?  In other words, time wasters that seem to have no point.

    Replies: (list all replies)

  • We are allowed to criticize real people when the things we are criticizing can be changed. I'm sure the actors who play: 'Amber' does not talk like that in real life, 'Sharon' doesn't always wear this coif in real life, 'Nikki' doesn't always dress to look matronly and 20-pounds overweight in real life, 'Gloria's' eyes don't bug out in real life, and 'Sabrina' doesn't talk like that in real life. Criticism of things that can't be changed is frowned upon : shape of ears or noses or anything else, height, moles, etc. - Marilou
  • If Little Richard had been 'acting' the part of a character, then it would be one thing to criticize his acting, appearance, lack of movement, etc. But LR was simply playing himself. And to criticize him then is not criticizing an actor, but criticizing him as a person. Which to me, is mean. eom/faysie
  • As I said above: faysie, when you go to a show or a concert, do you have only positive things to say about the performer(s)? Or do you sometimes criticize them and voice you opinion rather strongly? Do you make fun of what has happened to actors on the stage or in the movie? I know I do. - Marilou
  • I try not to criticize the performer (ie the person) - but I would criticize the performance of that person, if warranted. eom/faysie
  • The entire scene was supposed to be a joke. LR knew that and played part of the joke. I see no reason,real or acting, why any of the actors should not be criticized if we feel they deserve it. He came on the show knowing it was pure camp so his performance deserved it.. Personally I thought the entire bit was hilarious, tj

    Respond to this message


    Add a MessageGuidelinesTopics ListHomeOther SoapsDaily Recaps for the Show!Registration