Friday, November 4, 2016

Knots Landing season 11

In the days before the internet and social media, there was little uproar when a good show went bad. No fanzines started ragging on it regularly; no bloggers started penning "whatever happened to" posts -- and if the ratings took a simultaneous tumble, there were no online number-crunchers wondering how long it would take before the network staged a sit-down with the showrunner. If a long-running series took a wrong turn, viewers simply waited it out. The mea culpa that Knots Landing creator David Jacobs offered up seven episodes into Season 13 was rare for the time -- an Executive Producer admitting his show had lost its way and asking for another chance -- but he had no choice but to go public: the show was shutting down production to bring in a new headwriter. Word was bound to get out. But that sort of exchange between the creative team and the audience has since become commonplace. Nowadays, a half-season of subpar episodes or sliding ratings, and the showrunner will be out talking to the fans, assuring them he's "making adjustments." Some network honcho will take to the Television Critics Association, to let them know that the situation is under control; the show will soon be "back on track."

If Season 11 of Knots Landing aired today, then midway through the season, there no doubt would be outcries from fandom about how dark and dreary the series had become, and gurus would be swift to note that its ratings had declined dramatically from the previous season. And viewers would be assured that changes were on the way. And when people, in the far future, spoke about Knots Landing Season 11, they probably would divide the season into two parts -- maybe Season 11A and 11B -- to delineate the point where it "got good again." Because the truth is, it's hard to view Knots Landing Season 11 as one season. Earlier seasons have course corrections, but they're more subtle. The one that Season 11 undergoes, two-thirds of the way through, is mammoth. A half-dozen characters added; a half-dozen characters jettisoned. Stories that seemed designed to dominate the season wrapped up without explanation; new plotlines introduced at the drop of a hat. The salvage job that showrunners and headwriters Bernard Lechowick and Lynn Marie Latham perform at the start of the third (and final) block of Knots Landing Season 11 is nothing short of amazing; it absolutely rescues the season. But perhaps as interesting as the salvage job itself is what got them there in the first place.

Lechowick and Latham were headwriters on Knots Landing from Season 8 through Season 12, longer than any other writers. Their tenure began under a cloud, with an underwhelming first season that jettisoned traditional story-telling and beloved characters for a series of flashbacks and "gotcha!" misdirects. They recovered -- beautifully -- in Season 9 by returning to basics, and emboldened by their success, proceeded confidently into Season 10. Season 10 -- the full flowering of the Lechowick-Latham "house style," which wove a cheeky humor and irreverence into the Knots Landing format -- is marked by one great story-line, one great pairing, and one great exit. The story-line: the fallout from Jill's attempted murder of Val (the Season 9 cliffhanger), which Lechowick and Latham expertly sustain for nineteen episodes. The pairing: Greg and Paige, a legitimately appealing May-December romance that, in Season 9, had seemed to exist only in Paige's head. The exit: Abby's, when Donna Mills decided Season 10 would be her last. Mills' departure was so publicized that even The Wall Street Journal wrote it up on the day her last episode aired; they also noted, as many in the business had observed, that Knots had broken the pattern of declining soap ratings by seeing its audience increase over the previous season. By the late '80s, primetime soaps simply didn't do that. Lechowick and Latham were clearly on an artistic roll.

Or were they? What got overlooked at the time -- as viewers took wagers on how Abby would be written off, while critics marveled at the show's ascending ratings -- is that the final batch of Season 10 story-lines were largely awful. Mack started fantasizing about a younger woman; Gary fell into a flirtation with someone who misdialed him; Val began dating her computer repairman. What was good about the end of Season 10 was how the show ultimately disposed of Abby: a neat twist that seemed both nimble and fitting. And not unreasonably, the writers chose to send her off in the season's penultimate episode, and used the finale to assure viewers the series would be just fine without her. (They lucked out in terms of scheduling, since the final two episodes aired as a two-hour special -- so Abby left, and then the show continued for an hour without her.) The season finale was the first time the show beat its chief competition, L.A. Law, in first-run episodes.

And so Lechowick and Latham started planning Season 11 emboldened. Audiences clearly loved what they were doing. But when the first episode of Season 11 aired the following fall, ratings were down 30% from the end of the previous season. And you could argue that a large segment of the audience wasn't interested in watching the show without Donna Mills -- except they'd kept watching that last hour of Season 10, even after Abby rolled away in her white stretch limo. They simply hadn't liked what they'd seen after that: the one-hour "life without Abby" preview had been a disaster. (One of the cliffhangers involved Mack getting sprayed by a skunk; it was a fitting metaphor for the stench that permeated the final episode.) But imagining the finale's high ratings were a stamp of viewer approval, Lechowick and Latham decided on a soft reboot for Season 11. Why not? They had done so at the start of Season 9, and it had been a smashing success. But the Season 9 overhaul was a course correction; the Season 11 reinvention was hubris: a decision to shake up a story-telling style that was less than a year old, that audiences had clearly welcomed, but certainly not yet tired of. And at the end of the day, Lechowick and Latham weren't at their best when they were empowered; they were at their best when they were humbled. (They dug themselves out of a hole better than just about any scripters in the business.)

The reboot that marks Season 11 is apparent from the opening credits. For ten seasons, the show had offered some variation on the same theme: shots of the leading actors in alphabetical order. For Season 11, we get sculpted sandcastles, with waves threatening to wash them away. The absence of the actors' faces proves prophetic: more than a few core characters will vanish from the show's canvas as the season progresses, either in terms of visibility or recognizability. Tonya Crowe, after eight seasons, is elevated to series regular -- and instantly marginalized. Michele Lee is left without a plot for two-thirds of the season; Lynne Moody is similarly stranded -- in fact, she barely gets any airtime at all. And the character of Valene Gibson is essentially recast as what Joan Van Ark would accurately call "the village idiot." The established actors make way for no less than nine supporting players who come to dominate the Season 11 landscape.

But it's not just the (mis)use of the cast that sets Season 11 apart. When Knots began, it was about four couples living in a West Coast cul-de-sac; with its hot tubs and backyard BBQ's, it celebrated a certain Southern California lifestyle. As characters started to move away from Seaview Circle, the vacation resort Lotus Point took its place as the go-to location: with three key characters stationed there, most of the plots could easily be threaded through this new "sun and fun" setting. But halfway through Season 10, Lechowick and Latham decided to move the Sumner Group to a high-rise office, no doubt in response to the success of L.A. Law. So Greg, wife Abby and assistant Paige moved to new digs, where they were joined by assorted bit players: the unctuous Mort, the nebbishy Bob. And in Season 11, the Sumner Group becomes the principal setting: Karen's son Michael is hired by Sumner, and more flunkies make their way up the company ranks. And the look of the show shifts dramatically, as Knots goes corporate.

There's a tonal shift as well. The emboldening of Lechowick and Latham at the top of Season 11 means more of the "unpredictability" on which they prided themselves. (Latham once boasted to the press that their Knots audience never knew what to expect from episode to episode. She didn't see that that obsessive need to impress the viewer was also their greatest flaw.) They seem to have forgotten the lessons of Season 8 through 10: that their brand of calculated cleverness works best when it's grounded by sound story-lines. As the season gets underway, the story-telling seems jittery and disorienting -- and ultimately, you come to realize it's because Lechowick and Latham are skipping over key plot points, to spring them later as "surprises." At times, they seem to be plotting backwards from the next big reveal.

Gary -- as he was in the final third of Season 10 -- is still engaged in a flirtation with "Sally's friend," the woman he's never met. But as Season 11 starts, the presentation is baffling. When Sally's friend first telephoned Gary, and throughout Season 10, her features were concealed. It was clearly done to suggest that Gary's deranged ex Jill was still alive. The back of her head was much the same; it was all -- like Jill's hair -- a big tease: "Did Jill somehow survive?" (Teri Austin's name remained in the opening credits contractually; Lechowick and Latham used that to their advantage.) As Season 11 starts, Sally's friend is still being hidden: we see her photographed through vases, or close-ups of her legs caressing the telephone base. But Teri Austin is no longer in the opening credits, and the voice doesn't sound like her anymore. So why the mystery? Meanwhile, Val and Danny's relationship has heated up. "It's incredibly wonderful just to be around him," Val tells Karen. "Everything is right about him. It's as if falling in love just happened, and there's nothing you can do about it." Later on, she admits, in riotous hyperbole, "I have never loved anyone this much -- not even Gary." They're accelerating Val and Danny's relationship -- you just don't know why. Joan Van Ark and Sam Behrens do their best with what they're given, but because there's no smoldering chemistry between them, the audience is never persuaded to accept the leaps that the writers are making. And the writers know it. So they fall back on a familiar Lechowick-Latham tactic: having the characters speak for the audience. First Val expresses disbelief at how fast the relationship is progressing, then Karen expresses disbelief -- as if that will preempt our own disbelief.

We eventually learn why the story-telling has been so angular. Lechowick and Latham have decided to link Gary and Val's story-lines by having Danny and "Sally's friend" turn out to be -- get this -- husband and wife. It's an absurd contrivance, but by holding off the reveal for five episodes, and having it come when we least expect it, Lechowick and Latham try to turn it into a great twist. (In the world of television, a great twist is an absurd contrivance the writers aren't embarrassed by.) And the only way they can pull off the reveal -- that Danny is married to Sally's friend, a.k.a. Amanda -- is by continuing to hide Amanda's face. You can forgive one bad coincidence -- but how about three? Because Amanda is also the twins' schoolteacher. Oh, and she sings at the same club as Val's next-door neighbor Frank. And the reason the writers have fast-tracked Danny and Val's relationship? Because Danny is going to do something heinous in a few episodes, and Val needs to be totally committed to him by then, for maximum conflict. The plotting hasn't been this cold and calculated since Season 7.

While all that's going on, Mack has gotten involved in a case of corporate corruption. Correction: another case of corporate corruption. It's a plotline that feels stale even before it gets underway. A company called Oakman Industries has liquidated its pension fund, and is silencing any employees who speak out. This plot drags on for almost fifteen episodes, and why should we care? It doesn't impact anyone in the cast, except Val's Aunt Ginny, arguably the least interesting character who ever stuck around for three seasons. (One episode ends with Mack faced with the prospect that Aunt Ginny committed murder: "Not Aunt Ginny. No way! Not Aunt Ginny" -- as if Aunt Ginny being carted off to jail wouldn't be a relief.) Another ill-advised plot features the return of Eric's wife Linda, who needs to stay with the MacKenzies while Eric is working overseas. Within a few episodes, Eric's brother Michael falls for her. Of course he does: he fell for his step-sister Paige in Season 8; that story was such a disaster, let's revive it -- now he can fall in love with his sister-in-law. But in order to accomplish it, Lechowick and Latham have to rewrite the character of Linda. They introduced her in Season 9 as aggressively opinionated, the kind of know-it-all Twenty-something you avoid at parties. Her only virtue was that she made Eric happy. Now they have to try to excuse her flaws -- and eventually, erase them: not just so Michael can fall for her, but so their forbidden love can be the stuff of tragedy. But because they still need to justify the tension between Linda and Eric, they throw her worst traits onto him, intimating that the marriage failed because he was always judging her. It's exactly the kind of thing Knots didn't do: rewrite years of history to accommodate new story-lines.

To be fair, the top of Season 11 gets a few things right. Paige gets a new boyfriend, dirty cop Tom Ryan, and in a season where the romantic pairings largely fall flat (Penny Peyser's Amanda seems less like a potential love interest for Ted Shackelford and more like his goofy kid sister), Joey Gian and Nicollette Sheridan have sensational chemistry. The coupling of William Devane and Melinda Culea isn't as persuasive, but it's charming. When she tells him that she doesn't want to be his rebound from Paige, he counters that he has no expectations; he's simply delighted to discover that, when you're at your lowest, "Someone new can come into your life and brighten it up." It's such a healthy, sane way of looking at a new relationship -- and such an improvement over watching Greg pine after Paige early in the season, like a voyeuristic schoolboy -- that you're inclined to be patient. And although Behrens and Van Ark don't convince romantically, and although Shackelford and Peyser are a mismatch, Behrens and Peyser seem believable as an embattled husband and wife; his intensity is nicely matched by her smart-aleck delivery. You can see the attraction -- and you understand why the marriage failed.

But back to the Gary-Val-Danny-Amanda quadrangle, because that's going to dominate the first two-thirds of the season. Once the "big reveal" is over, it's time for the main event -- and with horror, you realize the main event is a sexual assault. Danny rapes Amanda at the end of episode 9, and from there, the writers instantly flip from "look how clever we are" to "look how responsible we are." With great power comes great responsibility; the new Lechowick and Latham aren't merely going to entertain -- they're going to educate. They're taking up a social issue, determined to encourage a healthy dialogue -- but you can't get away from the fact that all the contrived plotting up to this point has been designed mostly to put Val solidly, foolishly, in Danny's camp, setting her and Gary at odds. And "Sally's friend," who's been teased for a dozen episodes by that point, is revealed just in time to be assaulted. They essentially introduce a character solely so she can be raped. It's so cutthroat in conception, you can't imagine the execution could be any worse -- but it is. Lechowick writes the episode after Gary learns of the assault -- it's called "Twice Victim" -- and it's a series low point. He structures the episode around a series of monologues -- rhetorical questions that are asked and answered, with key words repeated for emphasis -- and while the speeches are being delivered, the other characters sit in rapt attention. The drama stops dead in its tracks; what's left is a public service announcement, or maybe an afterschool special. Gary tells Amanda that he's going to seek revenge on Danny, and she turns it around on him:

Amanda: That'll make you feel better, won't it? What? You gonna beat him up? You gonna break his arm? Then what happens? Who does he take it out on? Does he take it out on me? On Val? On her kids? And then what? Do you break his jaw? And then what? What does he break? And what do you break? And then what? And then what?

Later, it's Gary's turn to pontificate, while Mack sits uncharacteristically mute:

Gary: I know better than to blame the victim. I'm enlightened. But. But. If only she hadn't gone to his apartment. If only she divorced him earlier. If only. If only I'd exercised perfect judgment my whole life. I mean, you can't fault someone for bad judgment, right? Yeah, right. I'd be condemned for half the things I've ever done. It doesn't matter why she went to his apartment. She could be the dumbest, most irresponsible person in the world -- she could've been drunk and stark naked standing in front of him, and she still had the right not to be raped. I know that. I believe that. So why do I have all these questions? I mean, why do I have even the slightest doubt?

And finally, when Amanda decides to report the rape, but is informed that no evidence can be lifted because she showered after, Lechowick offers up his most stultifying sermon, reducing Amanda to a mouthpiece:

Amanda: You know what is really odd about this whole thing? I feel like I've done something wrong. Isn't that weird? You know that shower I took right after: the "mistake" shower that destroyed evidence? I took that shower because... because I felt so dirty. I felt dirty. I just wanted to wash. I didn't think of him as dirty, I thought of myself as dirty. I mean, people have that image of a rape victim -- they think she's dirty. Not consciously -- probably not consciously -- but they do think that. Maybe that's why after I admitted I was raped, I felt so bad I admitted it. Did you hear that? I said "admit." Are there any other crimes we "admit" happened to us? Do we admit that we were robbed? No, we just say we were robbed. We don't admit we were mugged or beaten up, we just say it. But we commonly say, or hear, "She admitted she was raped." I "admitted" I was raped. Listen to that. It's as though I'm guilty of something. Or of being lesser or dirty or something. Why is that, Gary? Why do I "admit" to being raped?

It's not compelling as drama, nor is it convincing as rhetoric. One doesn't want to belittle a story-line that attempts to open a dialogue about sexual assault. But there's a way of doing it that draws people in, that makes them receptive and empathetic. And there's a way of doing it that feels so pompous and relentless that you want to tune it out, like a bad college lecture.

Don't hate the message; blame the messenger.

The first block of Season 11 undermines some characters, under-uses others, and sacrifices both drama and entertainment for heavy-handed moralizing. In some ways, the second block is worse. The Oakman Industries investigation gets extended, as Sumner's daughter Mary Frances (unseen since Season 5) turns up to expose another company scandal. Mary Frances doesn't resemble the Mary Frances we last saw (she's played by a different actress, but that's not what I mean) -- but there's no attempt at character consistency where Linda is concerned, and she was just introduced in Season 9, so why respect the backstory of a character introduced six "long" years ago? When last seen, she was a typical teenager with a burgeoning libido. As reintroduced, Mary Frances (or "Mare," as she says her friends call her -- her friends presumably being Rhoda and Brenda Morgenstern) is now a surly young woman, angry with her father for all the years of neglect and his lack of business ethics. "Why'd you even bother having a kid?" she berates him in a newly-filmed flashback. "Did you think it would look good on your resume?" Back from Africa with a BS in biology, she's sullen, a bore. She announces, "I've worked for two years with families who've had to watch their children starve and die," as if she deserves a medal, and starts psychoanalyzing her father: "You raised a child exactly how you were raised." If you thought the rape story-line was numbing, here comes Miss Doom & Gloom of 1990.

Mary Frances is killed off after one episode, but we can't catch a break. The next episode is her funeral; in the one after that, she's back as a ghost. You can practically hear Lechowick and Latham salivating in the writer's room: "Let's do an episode where Mary Frances comes back to haunt Greg." "Ooh, and maybe we can bring back Howard Duff as Sumner's father." "Twin ghosts! What a concept!" Two seasons earlier, Lechowick and Latham never would have imagined or dared an episode about "twin ghosts" (can you imagine Paul Galveston turning up after Laura's funeral?), but the newly unleashed headwriters have no boundaries -- or shame. Both the funeral and the ghost episode are written by Lechowick, and part of what's wrong with Season 11 is how many of the scripts are his. Typically he and Latham shared scripting duties equally with others on the writing staff, but in Season 11, Lechowick writes 3 of the first 5 episodes, 8 of the first 17. He sets the tone for the first two-thirds of the season, and it's deadly, because his worst habits are on display. The heavy-handedness, the self-referentialism, the conceptual plotting that strains credulity and common sense. And an alarming willingness to sacrifice character consistency for cheap theatrics.

Funeral episodes are dour by definition, and funeral episodes for a character you just met -- one whom you're not even mourning -- can be brutal; you need a fresh approach to keep them from feeling static and oppressive. Lechowick does just the opposite of what you want him to do; he makes Mary Frances's funeral as grim as possible, choosing -- as the key subplot -- to revisit the rape story-line. Hearing that Val is considering marriage to Danny, Gary threatens her:

Gary: Wherever you are, wherever my children are, I'm going to be watching you. And at your wedding, when the minister says, "If anybody has any objections, speak now or forever hold your peace," I'm gonna yell, "Rapist! Rapist! Rapist!"

(You want to shout at the TV screen: "And then what? And then what?")

As for the ghostly, ghastly follow-up, entitled "My Bullet," it's a "very special episode" that -- like the rape monologues -- brings the show to a grinding halt, as two characters rise from the dead to indulge in aphorisms and clichés. ("Girlie has a pair of legs I'd like to wrap around me twice," Galveston drawls, drooling over Paula. His chauvinism was entertaining in Season 6 as a foil for businesswomen Abby and Karen. Here, he's just spouting offensive one-liners.) Sumner tries to escape them by fleeing to Mack and Karen's, but the ghosts show up in his car. "Trying to get away from us, but it won't work," Mare informs him. "And we don't have to bother with seat-belts," Galveston quips. And the next bit is pure vaudeville: Greg responds, "Aw, shut up," and his driver delivers the requisite punch-line: "I didn't say anything, sir." Ba-dum-tsh. Lechowick isn't resuscitating Mary Frances and Paul Galveston to drag Greg into greater depths of despair -- or to offer him new insight or awareness. They're just there so Lechowick can try something different, do something "unpredictable," show how clever he can be. (The difference between a character-driven soap and a writer-driven one is that, in the latter case, you can hear the scripters, at every turn, going, "What if...?" That question pops up ever more frequently during the Lechowick-Latham era: "What if we start Laura's funeral with just the principals present?" "What if we riff on that new Ann Landers column?" "What if we imagine all the ways Danny might have died?" And of course, "What if Sumner sees ghosts?" There's even an episode early in Season 12 called "What If?" -- why disguise your calculated cunning when you can celebrate it?)

The ghost episode is made even worse by the subplot that underscores it. Karen and Mack's four-year-old Meg brings home a goldfish from the school carnival, and it dies. And so we get Karen and Mack debating how to tell Meg that her goldfish has gone belly-up. Ultimately Karen just replaces it with a new one, but not before linking the two story-lines for us, in case we weren't paying attention: "There's too much death already. She has plenty of time to learn about death."

The season's first block is about rape. The second block is about death. Where, we fear, do we go from there? We start with a creative shake-up: the departure, at the end of the second block, of two of the series' worst staff writers, Chuck Bulot and M.J. Cody, replaced by one of its best, Dianne Messina, returning to active duty for the first time since Season 8. (She'd written "Love In" in Season 9, one of the highlights of the Lechowick-Latham era, and would go on to pen "The Unknown," its last great episode.) Perhaps Messina arrived and said, with bemused horror, "What have you done to this show?" Perhaps Lechowick and Latham (and the reliable James Stanley, on staff since Season 9) realized on their own, after nearly twenty episodes, that nothing was working: that core characters were being underutilized, that too many plots were uninviting, that the tone was too grim and oppressive. But however it happened, it inspires the kind of clean-up job at which Lechowick and Latham excelled. With impressive precision, they make a series of smart moves that transform the season -- starting with a story-line for Michele Lee.

People remember Karen's Season 11 story-line as the one where she gets a stalker. That's not what's memorable about it. The stalker story-line works the first time you see it -- Lechowick and Latham keep laying traps, as they do so well, and you fall for every one of them -- but once it starts to heat up, it doesn't really have any place to go. (It ultimately dead-ends Karen four episodes into Season 12.) What's great about Karen's story isn't that they give her a stalker; it's that they give her Robin Strasser. Strasser, as her producer Diane, puts her on the defensive, and Karen's insecurities prompt her to push back, even when it's ill-advised. What's brilliant about Open Mike, once that story takes off, is that you can see exactly why Karen would succeed as a talk-show host -- her intelligence, her passion, her advocacy, and her lack of artifice are ready-made for TV -- but you can also see why a producer might consider her a prima donna. Karen Cooper Fairgate MacKenzie was, at her worst, opinionated and self-righteous. The people who loved her put up with that, first and foremost because she was generally right. But in a work environment in which she's a novice, where others know much more about putting on a show than she does, her know-it-all attitude can be galling. It's an opportunity to see Karen at both her best and her worst, and it's often those times that Michele Lee excels the most. Her acting choices are vivid and startling. In one of Strasser's first episodes, she takes down Karen, in brutal fashion, for introducing her son on the air: "You are what we loosely call the talent. And talent can be replaced." The brilliance of how Michele Lee pitches her response is that she doesn't get defiant, which would be the expected choice; instead, she gets teary. She gets emotional about the public dressing-down. Her voice shaking, she insists, haltingly, "I was hired to do a talk show... and I talk about things that I think are important to the audience... and I think family is very important to the audience -- and if it's not, it should be." It's about the first time in Season 11 that you go, "Oh my God, that is some great acting."

Pretty much everything turns around for the final block of the season. It's obviously not just the return of Messina to the writing staff that makes all the difference, but it's hard to ignore that her first script of the season -- the twentieth, "Wrong for Each Other" -- puts the first nineteen episodes to shame. "Wrong for Each Other" marks the return of Paige's mother Anne, which is cause enough for celebration -- but more notable is how fully rounded all the characters seem. Messina digs deep. Tom has a magnificent speech in which he explains to Paige how his life has changed since he met her, and she realizes how similar their childhoods were, both of them neglected by their mothers and forced to fend for themselves. We've seen enough of the steamy and stormy side of their relationship; now Messina start to cultivate the sweet side, and it does wonders for both of them. It starts to feel like a relationship worth investing in.

Later in the episode, Karen questions why Paula is spending all her time at the hospital, at Greg's bedside. (He's been shot by Mare's boyfriend, who -- befitting the histrionic middle block of Season 11 -- turned out to be a psychopath.) Paula offers up a passionate defense:

Paula: Because I'm in love with him. Come on, he's an incredible man. He was a prominent senator. He's been married to some phenomenal women. But in the biggest crisis of his life, he's alone: no friends, no family, a paid employee who comes to the hospital with his pajamas. You might say that that's because he's self-serving, mean and shallow. Someone else might say it's because he's sensitive and afraid of being hurt, so he alienates himself from the people who want to be close to him. I don't want to be there in case he dies. I want to be there in case he lives.

On the surface, it's Paula justifying her attraction to Greg; underneath, it's Messina reestablishing what makes Sumner such a fascinating character. (It's knowledge that's going to come in handy later in the season, when we're asked to forgive and empathize with some of his most abhorrent behavior -- ironically, directed towards Paula herself.) It defines and humanizes him in a few sentences, in a way that "My Bullet" failed to do in an entire episode.

Later still, there's a moving scene where Eric, who's returned to town, realizes that his marriage is over, and that it's time to move on. As he sobs in Karen's arms, she assures him, "You deserve to be happy" -- and then, in the next scene, alone with Mack, reflecting on her own life when she was Eric's age, growing up on the East Coast, she expresses an unexpected regret:

Karen: I wish we lived where it snowed. It'd be different if it snowed. Eric's leaving -- I just hate what happened to him. I'm so worried about Michael. I wish I'd raised my sons where it snowed. They would have known what it was like to have to shovel the snow and... the walks... Feel the cold air. Slip on the ice. They could've seen how pretty the snow could be -- and how dangerous. How it could get sooty and stay that way for weeks. How inconvenient. How wonderful. How... out of our hands. Snow would've been good for them.

It's the question every mother agonizes over: how do I keep my children from getting hurt? And the answer Karen considers is not only specific to her background, but to Eric and Michael's: two naïve young men who keeps setting themselves up for heartbreak. Messina doesn't posture that Eric and Michael's upbringing has left them unprepared for life's vagaries. She simply put the question out there and lets it linger – and then has Karen concede the foolishness of second-guessing ("Maybe it doesn't matter") before getting to the heart of what really pains her: "I miss them so much when they're not here." In a season that has set most of its plots in a corporate high-rise with tinted windows, this one speech restores Knots to its roots. It reasserts that however much the Sumner Group seems to dominate the proceedings, the heart of the show is in Seaview Circle: that cul-de-sac overlooking the sea, in the land of perpetual sunshine.

The half-dozen episodes starting with "Wrong for Each Other" are as good as any six-episode run in Knots history. The writers get everything right, pulling the plug on the worst stories (Oakman Industries is never mentioned again), and re-energizing the ones that have grown static. They instantly flip two relationships for the better. Tom, after lying to Paige for a dozen episodes, comes clean about his past -- and she forgives him. Val, who's been foolishly defending Danny against the rape charges, learns the truth -- and takes action. The evolution of Paige and Tom's relationship gives us romance; the dissolution of Val and Danny's marriage gives us suspense. And the return of Anne Matheson gives us a sense of fun that the season has been sorely lacking. Paula observes of Anne, "She is constantly performing. There is not one sincere word that comes out of that woman's mouth" -- but that's just what the show craves at this point: an antidote to all the gloom. When Paula asks her what she's going to do when she can't fit into a size 4 any longer ("Size 3," Anne is quick to correct), Anne simply replies, "Enjoy life. What else is there?" After a second act haunted by ghosts, it's so nice to see someone so joyously alive.

But then, all the characters come to life during the final third of Season 11, particularly the women: Karen, defending herself against Diane's attacks; Val, trying to reclaim her dignity once Danny's actions and lies are exposed; Paige, finding herself (despite her father's objections) falling for Tom, and willing to take the matrimonial plunge. The scene in which Tom gives Paige a garnet engagement ring, during a picnic, is some of the loveliest work the actors do together; it's also another glorious piece of writing by Messina. And the follow-up later in the episode, in which new client Mrs. Richfield spots Paige's garnet and expresses her approval, has one of my favorite pieces of advice Knots ever imparted: "Never worry about anything that's replaceable." Here's to you, Mrs. Richfield. (In the same episode, when Pat is in a coma and Julie refuses to leave her bedside, Frank observes, "One who won't go to sleep; one who can't wake up." Some of Messina's lines play like poetry.)

The final block of Season 11 marks the departure of three fine actresses. The writers can't figure out what to do with them, so they dispose of them. But at least -- over three consecutive episodes -- they give them three great send-offs.

Ah, Tonya Crowe. Lechowick and Latham had Abby disown her daughter before she left town in Season 10, and promised us that one of the Season 11 story-lines would be "Will Olivia, left penniless, become as scheming as her mother?" But Olivia doesn't become anything; she's barely there -- appearing in only three of the first nine episodes, and then only to fight with her husband Harold. It's as if the writers consciously said, "Let's keep Olivia and Harold around, and see if we can drain all the charm out of their relationship." When Olivia implores Harold, ten episodes in, "I don't want to fight about money anymore," you can practically hear the actress begging the writers for a fresh story-line. Olivia and Harold don't even get a plotline till halfway through the season. Newly separated, they try to make money in the ways they know best: Olivia gets in on some insider trading and makes a killing in the market; Harold bets on a football game, and loses it all. At Mary Frances's funeral, Harold recognizes Tom from their mutual mob connections, and you can see a plan form in his mind. It's a sensational idea; it feels fresh -- and it goes no place. The writers ship him off to Florida an episode later, and you realize that for all their pledges to give Olivia and Harold a story-line, they never had a gameplan. And once Harold's gone, they can't figure out what to do with Olivia either, so a few episodes later, in Episode 23, she too gets the boot. She gets a phone call from Harold, telling her life is unbearable without her -- and the look on her face is heartbreaking. She knows her life is empty without him as well -- and perhaps she realizes that if they can survive the wrath of Abby, and arguments over money, and all the horrible things they've said to each other this season, they can endure anything. It's the same look of silent anguish that made Crowe's performance in Season 9 such a standout -- that vivid understanding of how much true love hurts -- and you think, "What a find she was." And with that, she's gone (to join Harold in Florida) -- but what a way to go.

Alas, Melinda Culea. She was hired for one episode in Season 10, when Mack, wallowing in a midlife crisis, goes on a retreat and flirts with the female forest ranger. The writers liked her so much, they brought her back, but never figured out what to do with her. Mack fantasizes about her for the final third of Season 10, but the writers can't recreate the chemistry that Dobson and Culea had in the mountains; once they're on familiar turf, the pairing seems forced and misjudged. Her coupling with Greg is better -- they crop her hair nicely to age her, and give her a bit of a sarcastic streak -- but still she's mostly a sounding board. And when Anne Matheson shows up, she renders Paula obsolete. Paula can only offer sincerity -- the season's got that in spades; what it needs is irreverence. It's a mark of Lechowick and Latham's particular brilliance in the final third of Season 11 that they know just how to ease Paula off the show. As late as episode 20, she seems a fixture in Greg's life, one who's earned our respect; within a few episodes, we delight in watching Anne outmaneuver her. (Of course we do: Anne's the fun one.) And by episode 24, we realize that Greg -- drowning in guilt and self-pity over the death of his daughter -- has shut her out, and we'd rather not watch. Better they let her leave town with a little dignity -- and before she goes, she gets to alter the arc of the season. She offers Paige some advice, in case she's finding herself once again drawn to Greg: "There's the marrying kind, and there's the single kind, and it comes as a surprise, but in the end, the single kind is colossally, monumentally boring." In part, watching Greg dump all over Paula convinces Paige to marry Tom. Culea has served her purpose.

Ave atque vale, Lynne Moody. Her time on Knots was cut absurdly short. By the middle of Season 10, just a year into her run, they no longer knew what to do with her. (Once they'd decided that a romance between her and Ted Shackelford was too "daring," they couldn't envision a story-line for her.) Frank was useful to the writers: working at Mack's law practice, singing at the local club -- they could tie him to ongoing plots. But Larry Riley was merely a solid, dependable actor; Lynne Moody was an original, with a character that seemed fully formed. Pat always seemed to be thinking fast on her feet; it's why you believed she'd been a great surgeon, and why she could survive in WITSEC. And Moody's line readings were spectacular: so full of inflection, she could transform even the drabbest dialogue. Early in the season, Mack is trying to convince Karen he didn't sleep with Paula, and Pat mutters under her breath, "I don't believe this." You've never heard it said quite like that: both an aside and an embarrassed admonishment. At a dinner party for Danny and Val, Danny tells a joke, and Pat replies, "That's funny! Oh no!" It's a generic response, but she manages to seem both charmed and surprised -- and doubly surprised that the joke came from Danny, when everything she's heard about him has made him seem so menacing. Every time Moody opens her mouth, you're grateful for the thought she's put into her delivery. But for twenty episodes in Season 11, while Frank is doing buddy comedy with Mack, or singing, or playing guitar and harmonica, Pat is mostly offscreen -- and when she does appear, her airtime is minimal. In one episode, Frank has to watch over a witness, and Pat joins him at his office; she's in two scenes and has no lines. A few episodes later, Mack asks her to babysit. That's what she's reduced to, after just two seasons.

But her screentime picks up in episode 21, after Val, learning of Danny's past and panicking, stabs him with a letter opener. Pat shows up and -- in one of the season's most crackling scenes -- uses her skills as a surgeon to save his life. And from there, she decides to return to practicing medicine, even though it violates her contract with WITSEC. It ultimately becomes one of the tackiest soap tropes: let's give the underused actor a plot before we kill them off, so their death feels more meaningful. But even in hindsight, you don't care. While she's front and center, she's radiant: determined -- against all odds and in defiance of her disapproving husband -- to resume her career as a doctor. It's not just that she seems too much for Frank to handle; at times she seems too big for the screen to contain. The character's joy at returning to a profession she loves is inseparable from the actor's joy at being given a decent story-line. And then, of course, Danny plows her down with his rental car, and by episode 25, she's brain dead. But Lynne Moody's resurgence is great fun while it lasts.

It would be nice to pretend that Season 11 continues just as strong to the end. It doesn't; the final four episodes are scrappier than the six that precede them. Once the stalker story-line gains prominence in episode 26, the plotting get muddier, and clear-headed story-telling is subordinated to titillation. Greg's plan to sabotage Paige's wedding provides a sturdy cliffhanger, and gives us a nice scene between him and Paige when he proffers a ring and a proposal that they live together. ("What do you think I am?" she asks, in another memorable Messina moment. "Flavor of the month?") But it's awful character assassination for Greg, who willfully destroys Paige's chance at happiness. Linda, towards the end of the season, is reinvented as a schemer and a vixen, and it's the only plotline in the final block that flops; it leaves Pat Peterson with nothing to do but mope for episodes on end -- where's the fun in that? (Why do the writers find it interesting to have Linda walk all over Michael? Their infatuation with Lar Park Lincoln's Linda is unfathomable to me -- but then I remember they created the character, and writers are always falling in love with their own creations. If they were looking to install someone at the Sumner Group as a rival for Paige, I wish they'd used Olivia. It would have been a neat way of letting us see how much of her mother's make-up -- and I don't mean the eye-liner -- had been passed on to her.) And by the time Gary and Val are engaged in a "caper" to get Danny out of Val's house, you feel the season sort of limping to a conclusion. But the season does what the previous one didn't: it leaves you eager for more. And given what a drag the first nineteen episodes are, that's something of a miracle.

A few footnotes, a couple ironies. Although the Sumner Group becomes the primary setting for the final four seasons, Lechowick and Latham never figure out how to make it work as a place of business. It simply becomes a backdrop for the same romantic entanglements and interpersonal rivalries. During the Lechowick-Latham era, no one seems to work on anything of consequence at the Sumner Group; the setting doesn't inform the stories. It'll take Ann Marcus, at the end of Season 13 and into Season 14, to fix that, as she creates a scenario that actually gives all the principals a stake in the success of the Sumner Group. But then, Season 14, ostensibly about cleaning up the mess left by John Romano at the top of Season 13, is also devoted to cleaning up much of the damage done by Lechowick and Latham in their final years. A half-dozen things Lechowick and Latham screw up in their final two seasons -- the conception of Anne, which grows limiting; the scattershot characterization of Claudia; the ineffectiveness of the Sumner Group as a means of generating story; the reduction of Val to "village idiot" and Karen to "voice of the people" -- are addressed and corrected by Marcus in just a few episodes.

Final footnote: I mentioned in an earlier post that the best-remembered Knots seasons have story-lines you can sum up in a few words: "Ciji," "Wolfbridge," "Val's babies." There's no getting around the fact that the rape story-line dominates Season 11; ironically, despite Lechowick and Latham's efforts to portray sexual assault as more than a statistic, that's just how it's come to be remembered in the Knots Landing history books. Season 11 is "the rape season." And although the story-line upends the show's very structure and undermines the credibility of key characters, Lechowick and Latham viewed it as such a success that they took on another social issue -- child abuse -- the following season. That plot proved arguably even more enervating than the rape story-line. And the mere existence of those two story-lines convinced John Romano -- when he took over as headwriter in Season 13 -- that Knots was supposed to tackle at least one hot-button topic each season, and he and his staff settled on adult illiteracy. That story proved so lame that it was one of the factors that led Joan Van Ark to quit the show. It calls to mind a Season 11 exchange (by Lechowick, of course):

Paula: "Don't you ever think about leaving your mark?"
Sumner: "Some might say what I leave is scars."

Lechowick and Latham try to leave their mark, but they stick around so long -- and get so caught up in their own PR -- they end up leaving scars. At one point in Season 11, Karen refers to Open Mike as "my show," and Diane is quick to correct her: "Our show. The show." Lechowick and Latham, during their final two seasons, come to see Knots as "their show," and it ultimately proves their undoing. But the final third of Season 11 -- and continuing a dozen episodes into Season 12 -- is their last gasp of greatness.


Want more Knots? Check out my posts on Season 1, which establishes the characters and struggles to set the tone; Season 2, which pretty much mucks up everything; Season 3, in which the show finally masters the challenges inherent in its premise; Season 4, a shrewd and ultimately successful reinvention; Season 5, the show's annus mirabilis; Season 6, one of the series' best story-lines, and perhaps its greatest acting showcase; Season 7, in which Dallas scribe David Paulsen, newly installed as headwriter, shows an astonishing lack of affinity for the characters; Season 8, in which the characters return, but the plotting goes haywire; Season 9, in which the show once again gets back to basics, after a couple unrecognizable years; Season 10, the year the ratings rose; Season 12, a shot of pure adrenaline that soon fades; Season 13, an epic fail, and an epic save; and Season 14, in which Ann Marcus, who'd guided the series during a critical time in its history, gives it a glorious send-off.

26 comments:

  1. I don't even know where to begin. You hit all of the big issues which were obviously the convenient connection of Danny and Amanda. You could almost feel their buttons bursting with pride over that one but it still doesn't beat when you realize Jill and Peter are connected.

    I have a lot of respect for Joan Van Ark for coming out to express her disdain for what L&L turned her in to. I think you can go no further than the scene where Gary is yelling at her for being so blind for not seeing what Danny really is. It becomes this back and forth questioning where you truthfully want to just slap Val in the face. He screams at her "What is the matter with you?!" And she just calmly says "What is the matter with YOU?"....just hearing it in my head drives me crazy.

    The whole season was misguided (although you can make a case for the episodes you mentioned).

    Another great writeup on your part!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Jill-Peter reveal in Season 7 is wonderful, one of my favorite parts of that season. And it's similar, in a way, to Danny and Amanda, in that they clearly were not designed to have a connection when they were introduced; the writers came up with that after the fact. But with Jill and Peter, the connection makes sense: a brother and sister whose family was destroyed by Galveston, hell-bent on revenge. But with Danny and Amanda, it's pure coincidence. Ironically, if Lechowick and Latham had just revealed the coincidence simply, at the top of the season (have Gary show up at Amanda's for their first date, and Danny's there), we would have forgiven it -- we forgive bad soap coincidences all the time. But by stretching it out for a half-dozen episodes, twisting the story-line to build suspense, and then doing a "big reveal," they only serve to point up what a lame contrivance it is.

      I agree: good for Joan Van Ark for letting her displeasure be known. It must have been so miserable for her. In that big interview where she rails against Lechowick and Latham for turning Val into the village idiot, I remember the interviewer asks, "Why didn't you complain to the showrunner?" and she replies, "They WERE the showrunners." Lechowick and Latham had so much power by then; it must have been awful to see your character decimated and have no say over it -- particularly when, in the early years of the show, Van Ark always went over the scripts in detail with David Jacobs. (What's especially frustrating is that, when they overhaul Season 11 in the third block and wise up Val instantly, you think, "Oh good, she's got her common sense back" -- and then 15 episodes later, they start the whole "brain virus" story.) There's an interview with Michele Lee where she says L&L were her favorite writers, and I don't believe it for a second. The writer says, "They were my favorites," and she says "Me too" -- I suspect she was just being agreeable and gracious. But they pretty much savage her character by the end, too -- not as woefully or visibly as they do Val, but she ends up -- when they turn her into "the voice of the people" -- such a pale copy of what she'd been in Seasons 3-6.

      Delete
  2. I think it was "Okmin Industries," after the producer Joel Okmin. (Greg does misunderstand the name and say, "I've been called many things, but never an Oak Man.") The Lechowick/Latham writing team did a lot of in-jokey stuff with characters and companies. The name of Morton Tubor, a film editor, was given to a Sumner Group peripheral. That of Nick Schillace, the esteemed makeup artist (and husband of longtime DOOL actress Lauren Koslow), was given to Anne's partner in crime. There were other examples that have left me.

    I have heard before that Lee liked this writing regime best. I don't find it hard to buy, though. I think she went for their combination of topicality and breezy humor...and I will admit, I often did as well, and that might be coloring my perception. At the same time, I can see why Van Ark would have felt differently. These were not great years for Val.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh that is so funny: I have always presumed -- when I've seen Joel Okmin's name in the credits -- that the "o" in his last name was soft, so I never made the Okmin/Oakman connection. But yes, of course, I was aware of the Mort Tubor and Nick Schillace in-jokes, so that makes perfect sense.

      And you may well be right, that Michele Lee was indeed taken with what you call (so accurately) the "topicality and breezy humor" of the Lechowick-Latham era; she may well have enjoyed the social issues, and found the comic elements fun to play. (Hell, I myself was more of an L&L fan at the time than I am now.) But I still find her character pretty much decimated by the end of their run, not as disastrously as Van Ark's -- but with an actress as strong and multi-faceted as Lee, I find it irksome that they ultimately reduce her to a mouth-piece. I remember when I originally watched the Season 12 finale, and Karen went into a tirade about violence in society, I thought, "Really? That's all you've got for her to do now?" To my mind, the success of the Pollyanna monologue was, in retrospect, the worst thing that could have happened to Karen; it allowed them to give her speeches instead of stories. More about that, I suspect, when I write up Season 12!

      Delete
  3. Great article Tommy. Season 11 is certainly one of the more interesting season's of the show. You can see its struggle to evolve past Abby, and past the dead-weight that being an '80's prime time soap opera' is starting to be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope you don't mind, but I also just posted an article about my thoughts on the season here. Feel free to delete if you don't want me to link this on your blog, but it's interesting to see where our thoughts align and perhaps, do not align so much!

      https://justmyopiniontv.blogspot.com/2020/04/knots-landing-season-12-1989-1990.html

      Delete
    2. Mind? Of course not! First off, as I've mentioned, I always fear I express my opinions so strongly here (and at such length) that folks don't always feel comfortable disagreeing. And I'm delighted you've started writing about Knots again, and happy that you plugged your latest; I look forward to checking it out. I skimmed it just a few minutes ago, and obviously see key areas where we disagree, and look forward to discussing! Season 11 is indeed one that particularly divides fans, I think; I remember a decade or so ago, at the Knots Forum, James from London did an episode-by-episode review of the season, and he was quite effusive of the tonal rebuilding at the top of the season, and less enchanted when the show returned to its soapier roots near the end -- whereas, of course, I feel much the opposite. I do wonder if, in some ways, Season 11 is the most polarizing season. I think for Anthony (above), it's pretty much his least favorite season (with the possible exception, of course, of 13).

      Delete
    3. It's very true how divided the season is, and somewhat surprising in my book. There are obvious ways it will divide, such as the loss of Abby and the rather dry Oakman plot, but it is still at this point a clever well-constructed show, all of which go completely haywire in Season 12. I do remember James' wonderful posts but had forgotten his position in Season 11 - it seems that I may more agree with James around some of the faults towards the end. Perhaps we can all agree that the middle block was, regardless of how strong or weak the season is perceived, the weakest!

      Delete
    4. First off, I loved your essay on Season 11. It was so lovely to read a different, detailed perspective. And interestingly, I think where we differ is what we choose to *focus* on rather than any huge differences of opinion. You're absolutely right that the season, as it starts, does begin to return to its "scenes from a marriage" roots, and I definitely agree (and note) that the characters of Danny and Amanda really work; you see a marriage on the rocks, and understand both why it might have worked once and why it clearly doesn't work now. I think where we start to differ -- and I think it sours me earlier than it does you -- is the *way* Lechowick and Latham merge the Val and Gary story-lines. I absolutely agree that by pairing them, the writers give them, as you put it,"a point, a weight and a direction." But for me, I wish we'd just found out early on, under "reasonable" circumstances, that Danny and Amanda were husband and wife. Coincidences do happen; yes, Gary and Val starting to date two people who, totally by chance, are a separated couple is a stretch, but weirder shit happens. It is, as they say, a small world. I think for me, if L&L had just let the coincidence be a coincidence, I would have been more inclined to let it slide -- but by turning it into "a huge reveal" (hiding Amanda behind vases as the writers did in S10 when we were supposed to think she was a not-dead Jill; showing Danny "cheating" but not with whom; all the near-misses at the twins' playground), I think it undermines the simpler, relationship-based story-telling they've tried to return to. And so by the time we get to the rape -- and everything starts to fall apart -- I'm already feeling distanced.

      And part of it, as you and I have discussed, is that it's so hard sometimes to separate the feeling you get watching for the first time from the feeling you get from repeated viewings, when you know the traps that are going to be sprung. Now when I watch the early stuff with Val and Danny, and Gary and Amanda, it's all rather spoiled by how much I hate the "big reveal," and how much I see them keeping from us so that they can *have* that big reveal. The genius of Wolfbridge and Apolune merging in Season 5 -- and Jill and Peter in Season 7 -- is that even though there were scenes we weren't privy to to get us to that point (Wolfbridge deciding to acquire Apolune, unseen meetings between Jill and Peter), the story-lines themselves weren't distorted to get us to those reveals. But with the Danny/Amanda reveal, Lechowick and Latham really do jump through hoops to keep it from us, distorting the very nature of the story-telling.

      And regarding the end of Season 11, I agree with you that it starts to fall apart by the final five or so episodes. My affection is really for those six episodes beginning with "Wrong for Each Other" and ending with "The One to Blame," where I do feel the character beats are strong, the surprises solid, and the reveals convincing. But you're absolutely right: by season's end, we're pretty much plot-consumed, and a lot of the complexity of the characters has seeped away.

      Delete
  4. The 11th season of knots won 10 soap opera digest awards. Not everyone thought it was bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That said, with Dynasty and Falcon Crest gone by that point, it was only competing against Dallas, wasn't it? I find Season 11 one of the more controversial seasons -- or at least, one of the Knots seasons that most divides the fans. I'm a big fan of the final block, but some folks I dearly respect don't love that block nearly as much as I do. And some folks love the first 10 episodes or so, but I find them awfully calculated. And folks like my pal Anthony (above) pretty much hate the whole thing. :)

      Delete
    2. I believe Falcon Crest and Twin Peaks were on that year.

      Delete
  5. I think knots only dropped in the ratings from 28th in the 10th season to 29th in the 11th season.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't agree with the hatred for season 11. I thought it was better than some of the other Lechowick-Latham seasons like boring season 9 and ridiculous season 12.

    ReplyDelete
  7. *This* is the worst and most difficult season for me to watch -- I actually don't think I've ever watched it or 12 all the way through - for me they're by far the worst two seasons. I keep saying I'm going to do it someday, but every time I try, I can't get through it. Exciting, right? That there is a "final frontier" of Knots viewing for me? But the storylines are soooo bad and stupid. I can't do it.

    -shaq

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Shaq! You’re definitely not alone in feeling it’s the worst season. My friend Anthony absolutely loathes it as well. And as for me, there are only six episodes I love. I find the first 20 or so grueling. There’s definitely been a shift away from “Lechowick-and-Latham worship” over the last 20 years, which has been so gratifying to see — not because I want people to hate them, but because I want people to see them clearly. When I first started posting at the Knots Forum – I think it was around 2006 – they were practically revered. You would hardly hear a bad word said about them, and it was almost as if most people considered their years the Golden Era. I found it so startling. Now it seems people — or maybe it’s just the people who tend to post here — seem to be able to judge them much more clearly: appreciating them for the things they got right, but decrying them for all the things they got wrong. Following up on something you said about Season 8, Season 11 is the one where you see their self obsession most clearly on display; as I note in my essay, you can see them begin to view Knots as “their show.” That attitude permeates the season, and makes it — for me, at least – difficult to watch.

      Delete
  8. Yes, I’ve noticed that shift over the years as well. I can kinda get why they had such a passionate fanbase in the earlier era of the internet, because if you stuck around for all 14 seasons, that meant that you must have enjoyed the later seasons.

    But it certainly seems that, at the very least, their Knots legacy has become “it’s complicated” which I think is the legacy they deserve. They must have been doing *something* right since Knots outlasted the rest of its genre, and yet coming into an established series and bending it to their own will just feels so wrongheaded. Ann Marcus feels to me like someone who came in and realized the original vision for the series even better than the people who created it - like in season 3 Knots Landing becomes what it was actually supposed to be in season 1 (and, IMO, she does this again in seasons 13 and 14 as well. You remarked in your season 13 write up that she executes Romano’s plots better than he did even though he came up with them. And then in season 14 she realizes the Sumner Group vision for Knots better than L&L did even though L&L created that version of Knots.) Peter Dunne feels like someone who took that original vision for Knots to the next level, keeping what it was and adding another layer.

    Latham/Lechowick, however, seemed more interested in their own vision, whether that was in line with what the show had been prior to them or not. And you can also see this in Latham’s late-2000s stint on Y&R. I remember an interview with her where she said “we’re not lingering as long as we used to” in their camera shots, and I remember thinking, “Y&R is the number 1 soap. Why on earth are you trying to make it more like the other soaps?” And, IMO, she completely wrecked Y&R, and it never fully recovered after her. Her Knots stint had ups and downs for me, but I thought her Y&R stint was a total disaster.

    -shaq

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had stopped watching Y&R by the time Latham took over, but I remember clearly the fan outcry. I stand by what I wrote at the end of this essay: L&L came to see Knots as “their show.” And I’m sure everything they worked on after was “their show.” And I agree with your conjecture that some of it is generational. Ann Marcus, who wrote for TV in its infancy, would never have thought of a show as “hers.” The questions were always: what is this show, what is it trying to do, and how can I make it the best version of itself? Which is what she did with Knots – twice. And with Peter Dunne, I don’t think it’s so much generational as a question of temperament. From what I know of him through Richard Gollance – and from the lovely message he left in the comments to my Season 5 essay – he was practical and kind and self-effacing. When he took over Knots, it wasn’t about “how can I make it my own,” but “how can I maintain what’s special about it while adopting more of the Dallas model” (which the network had charged him to do)? And amazingly, he found a way of using the Dallas model not to dig deeper into plot, but to dig deeper into character — an approach that L&L really never got.

      Delete
  9. Seasons 11 and 12 will always be controversial. It feels as though the Danny/Amanda plotline (and that includes the premliminary ground-laying of the plotline in Season 10) was responsible for most of the things that most dislike about the next two years.

    First of all was the Lechowick/Latham insistence on holding off on big events for milestone episodes numbers. Laura's funeral was episode #200. When Gary and Val would remarry late in season 12, it would be in #300. But 250 is also a milestone number of episodes. And episode #250 of the show was early in season 11 just before Amanda was revealed as being Danny's spouse. So, technically, they could have had Gary and Val tie the knot (heh) three episodes into season 11, and we could have been spared several things we both wouldn't miss: Amanda's rape, Pat's death, Val's brain injury, most likely Linda (Lar Park-Lincoln was originally slated to play Amanda, but was ultimately deemed too young-looking although that's her voice during the phone conversations late in Season 10. She was written back in as Linda as an apology) and the dead -end that poor Tonya Crowe got (I think that it's pretty obvious that part of Linda's plotline in the season , that of causing trouble at the Sumner group, was originally intended for Olivia. Lincoln probably usurped it because it would be cheaper to use her than the veteran Crowe who had seniority, and billing in the opening credits. It's a shame it worked out that way, because I think that Tonya really could have run with it, and, well, Linda was just one of the weirdest , weakest characters they ever had on the show, only really clicking twice in her whole tenure).

    I'd be willing to guess that the reason why we got the plotlines we did was due to a lot of sweating after ABC's Moonlighting had imploded. Although the truth behind Moonlighting's demise was due to onscreen and production chaos (Offscreen, tensions were high amid the cast and crew, onscreen, the characters slept together, nearly immediately broke up, and were kept seperate after that point, with an AWOL lead and a miscarriage adding insult to the audience's injury), the legend involving Moonlighting was simply that once the characters slept together (when really it was what happened after), the audience departed, so maybe they feared that if Gary and Val would remarry that it would bring an end to the show (And in a way, one could argue it kind of did, because they remarried shortly before the disastrous beginning of Season 13, before Ann Marcus came back to clean up a big mess) . So, I can see where they are coming from, but it doesn't excuse everything.

    As you mentioned, 11 is, in terms of the storylines, the darkest season. The rape and the scene where Pat is mowed down are the hardest scenes to watch in the whole series (and the shot of the beef heart being loaded into the box by Karen's stalker is just about as freaky). It also offers up several other murders, the stalking plot, Greg getting poisoned, and lots of bad choices by Val and Michael (the only way in which Val marrying Danny [even after being told what he was really like] makes sense, is if you see it from the vantage point of Val still feeling betrayed by her friends for not believing her about Jill at first the season before, coupled with Danny being the first person to come into her life afterwards that showed her [admittedly false] kindness. As for Michael, he should see how manipulative Linda is; her general demeanor made me think that her stating that Eric hurt her was a lie). And the ratings sagged a bit from the year before because of it, although this was the final year where Knots remained in the top 30 (albeit barely in 30th place). The following three seasons , it would place #35, #47, and #43.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One wonders if this grim tonal state is due to much wondering of what actually made a quality drama series in a pretty quiet format for the period as well as a bad state of affairs at CBS. Only six dramas appeared in the top thirty series that season (Murder She Wrote, LA Law, Matlock, In the Heat of the Night,Hunter, and Knots) , and Knots was the only soap of the group. Dynasty has just been terminated a few months earlier (ironically after their highest quality, least campy, most grounded season in many years), Falcon Crest was ending up its run in a freefall, and Dallas imploded, limping its way through one more season after this with almost all its cast gone. With the exception of LA Law, nearly all the critically praised drama series had low ratings and tonally very different. So, ultimately there was very little grounding for what the mood for Knots should be to meet popular taste. And CBS, the usual powerhouse, had one of the worst years in their history, with nearly all their new fall series DOA, and with the other Lorimar soaps down for the count on Fridays, Knots was their only hit that wasn't on a Sunday or Monday night.

      But part of it too might have been due to the writers wanting to create another suspense rollercoaster like the one they did with Jill and Val. But while Jill was a villain, she was a far more rounded character than Danny. Danny is just a sociopath with fake charm, whereas Jill was a once decent character who lost her mind and went mad, weirdly remaining somewhat sympathetic even after what she did. and also frankly, Teri Austin was a marvelous actress, whereas Sam Behrens, though committed to his part, doesn't serve off the same sparks. [At least they didn't go quite as far afield in the darkness stakes as Falcon Crest did that year, with a gruesome drowning death for Susan Sullivan in the season opener, Jane Wyman being smothered by a pillow in episode two, childlike Emma turned into a masochistic sexual obsessive, and shootings, stabbings, and stranglings in their Christmas episode. And they lost pretty much all the audience they had left because of it]

      Delete
    2. Even in spite of the darkness, what makes the season palatable, at least to me, is that it doesn't try to change the basic essences of Gary, Karen, Mack, Greg, Paige, and Frank which might be a strange thing to say, but it is downright appreciated compared to what was unfolding on Falcon Crest that year, where the show and its characters were unrecognizable. They at least had the decency to keep most of the beloved characters as they were meant to be. Penny Peyser was quite moving as Amanda, and Melinda Culea had a wonderful warmth to her. Michelle Phillips brought a welcome breeziness back in when she arrived late in the season, a nice relief from the intensity of Danny and Karen's stalker plotline. The show finally resolved the last piece of the plotline of Val's children. that had been dangling since 1984. Joseph Gian was a great match for Nicolette Sheridan. The stalker plotline was gripping. And even if her character was acting odd, Joan Van Ark still did a fine job acting, especially in the last few episodes.

      On the debit side though, I really hated seeing Lynne Moody, Tonya Crowe, and Melinda Culea go, there was far too much Linda, the aforementioned scenes were too dark, the Oakman plot was a complete non-starter, probably the most forgettable plot line of the whole series and, the opening episode of the year was sleepy, much like the back half of the season 10 finale had been.

      I'm willing to give the moody Mary-Frances and subsequent death element a pass, as William Devane needed something to do on the show and he really hadn't much been there in the early part of the season. And I guess as the time, enough viewers were impressed by Stacy Galina that they created Kate (and by extension Claudia) to get her back on the show. And given than I liked what she did later on on the show and also that Claudia was a fascinating character, I'll accept this here. As for "Twice Victim", by 1989 standards it is heavy -handed and self-righteous, but after suffering through some "message movies" released in the last decade, even Lechowick at his most lugubrious seems more sensitive and nuanced than writing done now (probably a backhanded compliment). The dual ghost thing? It feels more theatrical than anything else, and not really fully successful, but I don't recall getting angry over it, most likely due to seeing a lot of scenes of a similar nature on Sisters.

      As it stands, the season isn't vintage Knots (that would be seasons 3 through 6, 9 and 10, and 14) but it is still quite decent Knots. And that in itself makes it more pleasing than many other shows.

      Delete
    3. And speaking of my brief mention of Ann Marcus earlier, I was going to say that although she did Mary Hartman, she also was part of the writing team (from season 3 on) of the 60s Primetime soap Peyton Place, and (although most of the episodes are frustratingly split into two halves), nearly all of the 514 episodes of it are online (save for one AWOL episode which was missing replaced by a repeat of the episode just before it, and one episode that only 8 minutes survives of). Marcus wrote over 60 episodes, and there too she pulled a late-in-the-day salvage job helping to cut back on some very late 60s trappings that had suddenly descended on the show in its final abruptly ended season (the story ends in midstream because ABC pulled the plug, but don't let the abrupt ending stop you). It's a very well written and acted series, and very much worth a look.

      Delete
    4. Taran, please forgive me: you write such incredibly expansive and thoughtful comments, and then it takes me a full month to respond. I read through your comments in awe, and simply didn’t respond right away because there was nothing I objected to. LOL Sometimes I feel like we were separated at birth.

      I argue somewhere else on this blog – I can’t remember if it’s in the essays themselves, or in the comments – that it’s unfathomable that L&L didn’t have Olivia go to work at the Sumner Group, expanding upon her rivalry with Paige. But it honestly never occurred to me that – as you say – of course they went with Linda *because it was cheaper*. Just shoddy thinking, shoddy planning and shoddy writing. And oh my gosh, I am so happy to hear you decry the character of Linda. Most fans seem to love her. Quite a few people who post here like her a lot. I can’t stand her — which I obviously write in depth about in my essay on Season 12. I’d be curious to know the two times you think she clicks. (I also have two times I think she clicks – I’d be fascinated to compare notes!)

      Delete
    5. It’s so fascinating to hear you describe “vintage Knots” as “seasons 3 through 6, 9 and 10, and 14.” Exactly what I would say. Over at Season 3, a fan named Shaq posted something last month – which I’m about to respond to as well – noting how much online consensus has evolved regarding Season 3. And it’s so true. When I first started posting at the Knots Forum, back in 2006 or so, most people ignored Season 3. It wasn’t fully serialized, so it almost “didn’t count.” And now so many people – obviously including the three of us — see it as the start of Knots’s glory years. Who cares if it’s not fully serialized? (What does that have to do with anything?) It’s insightful and incisive and glorious.

      Delete
    6. I will definitely check out Peyton Place, knowing now that Marcus wrote a good chunk of it. I know the show only by reputation — because when I was probably eight or nine years old, I watched Bewitched and That Girl on Thursday evening, then was promptly put to bed, so that my mother and older sister could watch Peyton Place.

      Delete
  10. I finally watched this season all the way through for the first time — twenty years into my Knots fandom! To my shock, my overall review of it is a rave. It really does come together nicely; it’s just a bit of a slow burn. But I definitely believe they did a lot of planning ahead of time and it all just works together pretty well and it does kinda have somewhat of a fresh and unique feeling. Something I noticed in the season structure is that they go really hard on one storyline at a time for 2-3 episodes and then move on to another repeatedly. It’s this structure and the way there’s always a clearly defined “A story” and “B story” that I think makes the season work so well for me. I was shocked because I’ve never been able to stomach watching the whole thing throughout my 20 year Knots fandom; once I finally did, I quite liked it (unfortunately, I’m doing season 12 now, and that one’s a different story.)

    I think season 11 could even be up there with the greats if not for one crucial, terrible flaw. Their inability to get the early goings of the Val/Danny and Amanda/Gary right means these storylines, and thus the season itself, have no foundation. Val/Danny is just so wrongheaded, and Danny I think is also miscast. If they could have gotten Danny cast correctly and if they had done a better job making the early Val/Danny relationship believable…. The storyline, and thus the entire season, might actually work. And the thing is, I think they know it, otherwise they wouldn’t have approached the first half of the season with the subtlety of a sludgehammer as they do.

    -shaq

    ReplyDelete