Danielle Fishel recalls Boy Meets World creator threatening to fire her at age 12
Co-stars Will Friedle and Rider Strong agreed that Michael Jacobs fostered a "damaging" set
Aux News Danielle Fishel
Many people have warm memories of Boy Meets World, including cast members Danielle Fishel, Rider Strong, and Will Friedle, who started a rewatch podcast (Pod Meets World) for their iconic ’90s sitcom. As much as they may enjoy revisiting the series, though, working on it apparently left some emotional scars.
In a recent episode, Fishel recalled when she first got the part of Topanga–after another actor had already been cast. Within days, she was on set, and had her first “marathon notes session” with series creator Michael Jacobs and the cast.
“Michael starts off the notes by saying, ‘Danielle, I’m going to give you your notes all at one time, at the end and I’m going to give everyone else their notes now, because if I made everyone sit here through all of the notes I had for you, we would all be here for hours and no one would ever get to go home. So you’re just going to wait for the end,’” she shared. “From that moment on, my eyes welled up because you know, I’m now in front of everybody—all the producers, all the writers, all the cast and all eyes are on me for a second.”
Fishel began sweating just remembering the uncomfortable moment, remembering, “He went through every single one of my lines and what he wanted and what I wasn’t doing right and how slow I needed to talk. … What I know specifically was said is, ‘All I know is, if you don’t come back tomorrow doing this entirely differently, you are also not going to be here,’ referencing the girl I had replaced.”
After getting heaped with pressure, Fishel and her mother ran her lines late into the night so she would nail it the next day. It paid off, as she recalled Jacobs saying the next day: “Let’s give Danielle a round of applause, you did exactly what I asked of you. Thank you, thank you. Congratulations, it was wonderful.”
“He gave me some praise about some specific things and then, he started notes. There were no more threats of being fired, I had done the work and I had shown him that I was worthy,” she said. “It totally sets up that you go after that every week. You’re chasing the dragon of Michael approval.”
Hopefully this doesn’t ruin anyone’s childhoods, but the three co-hosts were all in agreement about the unhealthy environment fostered by chasing Jacobs’ approval. Friedle reflected, “He set it up in such a way that for now when he gives you the standing ovation, it’s like the sun is shining on you. It had nothing to do with your acting. It was just, make Michael feel good.’”
Strong also claimed that the sitcom could be a “damaging” environment, going so far as to say that his performance was “not acting,” but “puppetry.” Of Jacobs, he remembered worrying that “somebody’s gonna get fired if something’s not right or if we don’t make this one person happy.”
“It didn’t allow me the creative joy of discovery and experimentation and recognition that there is no right or wrong in art,” Strong said of the show as a whole. The perils of child stardom are indeed many.
57 Comments
I’m sure the producers are very sorry they couldn’t let 12 year old children experience the creative joy of discovery and experimentation. Drama club is good for that, kids.
Hi, yeah, that’s not how a good director should be working with any actor, let alone children. This myth of directors and acting teachers needing to manipulate and abuse actors (to program actors to seek their approval and feed their own ego) needs to fucking die. It’s a bullshit, toxic environment that is utterly unnecessary. I don’t care if she came in the next day and gave the director what he wanted, he could have given the same notes in a kinder way and still gotten results.
And it’s not like that’s what adult actors do? It sounds like Jacobs would tell them exactly what to do and how to do it as opposed to letting them act. Maybe he just wasn’t adept at working with children at the time, but most directors hire actors to make choices.
Yeah, almost every time I read a story where an actor says a director is great, they say it’s a collaborative process to figure out how to play the character. It’s like any other job really; you feel a lot more invested when you have input into the final product.
It’s also generally time and cost effective to let actors act. I don’t necessarily think this was malicious. It seems like maybe he just lacked trust in the kid actors (I suspect he treated the adults differently), but it seems rough.
I think he didn’t know how to talk to kids. I’m guilty of this myself. I’ve never flat out told a 12-year old I would fire them if they didn’t do their job perfectly, but that’s only because I know I have no business being a 12-year old’s boss.
Yeah, it could definitely be that. I would be interested to hear if any of the adults had similar experiences. Maybe he got his act together because I know there is a story that all the kids were scared of William Daniels/Mr Feeny early on and Michael Jacobs was the one who told him he needed to be friendlier with them (That’s also where the in show joke about them thinking he was British came from because the kids also thought he was British).I do think in 2022 with the changing on set climates, this would fly much less readily.
“maybe he just lacked trust in the kid actors”For someone creating a show with kid actors that’s a failure with him, not the actors.Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
Shut the fuck up.
Tell me you know nothing about acting without telling me you know nothing about acting.
FFS, this mythologizing of creatives as assholes “because of the art” needs to stop. First of all this is a sitcom for kids. The creatives of such a workplace that has a bunch of kids in it need to step it up and figure out ways to run it in a way that’s suitable for kids. Secondly it’s like any collective endeavor; if people feel good going to work they’re going to produce better work. It’s really that simple – and denying that reality has lead to a lot of BS posturing by immature, unstable creatives over the years. Don’t buy into the myth.
It’s funny because your tone sounds ironic even though you’re saying something simple and self-evident. It’s like saying, “I’ll bet those teachers are really sorry they didn’t let 12 year old children experience the joy of learning. That’s what tutors are for.”
So… you’re ok with abusing a child and making them fear you and possibly lose your job at 12 years old? Yes it’s a child working and having a job but you shouldn’t be threatening and causing them serious emotional distress.
I just spent the weekend on short film shoot with two child actors, ages 8 and 12, and a couple of months ago was on a shoot with a 13 year old. I’ve never directed children (I was DP on both of these shoots), but I was very careful to observe how the directors worked with them, and I can assure you, all three children – even the 8 year old – were given space to participate in the creative joy of discovery and experimentation, because – as with any actor, or other creative collaborator – involving them in the process, gently talking them through adjustments you need them to make, and praising and thanking them when they do their jobs well is how you get them to deliver their best work (plus, you know, there’s something to be said for being a decent human being).
I love how miserable you seem. You deserve every second of it.
My thoughts and prayers for this massive, massive injustice.And for whoever felt the need to twist this into “damaging.”
Based on the headline, I was expecting this story to be much worse.
I appreciate that the podcast has been fairly even handed. I was kind of expecting it just to be “Wow, this show was great!” but there have actually been some decent insights into what it was like growing up on the show.
I’m going to check it out!
This podcast has been amazing. I’m glad it hasn’t been nothing but criticism, as much as the criticisms have been disappointing—because I love the show and the actors and the characters and hate to hear that there was negativity. Clearly, Jacobs could’ve done a better job with the child actors, and I’m just glad they all have turned out relatively alright.
Crazy that he had a total vision for how he wanted Topanga to be but then the character drops every single one of her original traits in a few seasons. Not like how kids grow and change, but really may as well have been replaced by a different character.
Yeah, I seem to remember that around the time Minkus left she seemed to change entirely. I think it was maybe when they left middle school (or junior high? The distinction was vague back then, and it’s been a long time) so I sort of let it go, but I still remember being surprised by the radical shift.
A lot of things radically changed in that show. Like also she had an older sister in the early seasons. And came from a hardcore hippie family. And they had a younger sister. And Eric became an absolute sniveling moron.
Is Eric the older brother? Bc he turned from cocky older brother, into a stark raving lunatic.
Eric was definitely NOT sniveling. I will agree that he became a bit of a lunatic.
She had an older sister for one episode (not the only character that can claim that). I don’t believe she ever had any younger siblings.
The younger sister part was in reference to the Matthews family. Then she disappeared for a couple seasons, then showed up again one episode, then made a big deal about going back up to her room for a couple more years.
Ah, that makes more sense, and yeah Morgan did disappear for a while there at the end of season 2. It might have appeared that she disappeared towards the end of the series as well but that was because they were using the Matthews family more and more sparingly then because they dropped the character.
The show changed entirely after they left middle school. Characters disappeared, personality traits changed, tone changed, it became a teen drama. Essentially a completely different show. Then when they graduated and went to college, the entire show morphed again. I’ve never seen anything else like it.
That’s what I was thinking. This demanding and difficult auteur was ruling with an iron fist and threatening a 12-year-old to craft a generic sitcom that radically changed directions every two years. It’s Herzog and Kinski all over again.
Yea, wasn’t Topanga first defined as this strange hippie girl misfit, who was wise beyond her years, and a super non conformist? Suddenly she was a fashionable, bubbly, popular girl.
and he groomed her.
You made Topanga cry? I feel the urge to kill you. I’m sure I’m the only child of the 90s that feels this way.
Not sure how or why it happened, but sometime between the last time I watched Boy Meets World twenty years ago and reading this article today, I forgot Danielle Fishel existed and just replaced her with Michelle Trachtenberg in my memory. I had a crush on both when I was younger, so I guess I just composited them to save space.
Your mind sounds like a sexy sexy place.
If anyone here likes this type of podcast, Michael Rossenbaum and Tom Welling recently started their own podcast around Smallville. They’re on episode 3 now and it’s been really interesting to listen to. If you were a fan of this show, you should check out the podcast, it’s called Talkville.
The discussion was David Trainer on the podcast was very enlightening. He didn’t mince words when it came to Michael Jacobs, and the trio of actors have be honest about Michael too. They aren’t shying away from how cringe some of the jokes were (particularly on the homophobic side). This isn’t just a rose-colored glasses look at the show.
Sounds like it didn’t go well, he told her, she did better, and then problem solvedJust like any other job should work
Rider Strong’s mother must’ve looked at that baby lying in her arms and said “This kid is going to be a porn star! His name is ‘Rider King Strong’!”
His dad’s name was King Arthur Strong.
Descendant of Walker Strong.
That’s…how professional acting works.
This story is ridiculous and a good example of the excesses of current culture.When you go to a grocery store, where products are on the shelves and on which aisle are mapped out by professionals from a central office. A stocker may have an opinion as to why something might be on a different shelf or in another spot and they may be able to express it, but they can’t just stock the store in any or no order if they feel like it.According to the never-ending press about this non-story, Ms. Fishel was hired to replace another actress who for some reason did not work out. On her first day, it seems the show’s producer let her do the role as she wanted, then sat her down to give her notes about what they envisioned for the character and apparently said something to the effect of that needed to work on their performance or because she was new and had obviously never appeared in the role, if she her performance did not meet the satisfaction of the producer, they would give another actress a shot.I have no problem with this. Over time, as the character became Ms Fishel’s, I’m sure she affected how it was played, but on her first day, she probably only had a brief character description and one script. Especially in the beginning, the overall vision for the show belongs to the producer and its creator. She couldn’t just put cereal on the pickle aisle because she felt like it or because she did not know where the cereals should go.
If you believe acting is the exact same as doing a job where there is an objectively correct and incorrect place to stock items, you do not understand acting.
It was the guy’s show. She was a 12 year old.It was her first week, if not her first day and her first big role. He had probably been developing the show for at least a year. He knew what he wanted from the characters and where the first season would go.
That still doesn’t mean micromanaging your actors and singling them out for shame in front of everyone else is a good idea. If anything her being 12 makes it much worse to do such things! Kids that age can be very fragile! You have to be patient to deal with them.Nothing justifies being a dick to people under your employ. It is never necessary to treat actors like that.
I think this story is like that one about Kenan Thompson that was repeated everywhere last week. If you read what he actually said, he did not say that Saturday Night should end at 50, but that it could.I haven’t listened to the podcast because that’s not my kind of thing, but the reports are that she told a story. She got a lot of press when the reboot was coming out because a lot of bloggers were young enough to have watched the show and she did not complain then. There’s really nothing to indicate that she was scarred and as far as I know, she hasn’t said another word about it. Instead the whole thing has blown-up out of proportion to what she actually said and most likely meant.It was the guy’s show — if she had showed-up wearing a duck suit because she thought the character should be a cartoon duck, no one would have flinched if he said no. She and him successfully developed the character and she was on the show for its entire run, later she starred in a reboot and she now has a podcast where she talks about being on the show. She told a story during one of those podcasts and it has taken a life of its own, way beyond what she said or most likely meant.
Giving notes like you describe and humiliating a child by saying their notes are so voluminous it would take all day to read them in front of the entire cast and crew are two different things.
Maybe he could have phrased it better or maybe her memory has been colored by the intervening years. One way to take the wording, maybe more so if you are a sensitive young child was that it was humiliating, but another way and possibly the way he meant it was that he wanted to go into more depth about the character and discuss with her what he expects, little of which would have been of interest to everyone else on the set, some of whom may have been there for weeks and heard it all when the first actress was in the role.She may have felt humiliated then or maybe someone else has suggested that she may have felt humiliated, but together they created a vey successful show and hers was a character that even people who did not watch knows.Hell, it’s like 20 years later and she’s still making a living from the role.
Oh man you sure put that teenager in her place.
No. It sounds like he had stuff to go over with her one on one and that everyone else did not need to sit around while they worked it out.She may have felt embarrassed — I’m guessing at that age, she was embarrassed by lot of things. It’s part of being 12 years old.
Referring to her as “Ms Fishel” is a transparent way to hide the fact that she was a child, and the primary responsibility of the adults in her environment was to look after her. If those adults viewed their primary responsibility as keeping their show on schedule and under budget, that’s simply an example of misplaced cultural priorities.
Having stocked shelves, the person in the central office who maps out where everything goes does not know the best place to display products and likely doesn’t do their own shopping, making everything harder for employees and customers.
The thing is, shelf display plans aren’t based on what is easiest for employees or customers, they’re instead often trying to promote specific products that are either more profitable or where manufacturers have paid for space. There are companies (I used to work for one) that have virtual store shelves you can use for focus group testing to see what placement makes customers spend more, then generate planograms to send out to individual stores. Being more efficient is never the goal – forcing customers instead to spend more time rummaging around so they see more products in the process is actually a benefit.
She was a 12 year old, who according to IMDb had previously done two guest turns for a total of four episodes — two on Full House and two Harry and the Hendersons.Again, according to IMDb, Boy Meets World was the sixth show he had created, plus another he had developed and it looks like he had three shows in production concurrent to BMW for a total of four. I assume the show was his vision, he was responsible for the budget and the entire production.They were not equals and though she may have an opinion about the character, which I kind of doubt because it was her first week and the show had not previously aired, but in no world were they equals and a lot of 12 year olds were embarrassed by their mother’s polyester pants.
As a manager, if I had feedback for a new employee I would pull that employee aside and deliver that message one on one. I would then give that employee a reasonable amount of time to improve, provide warnings if he/she did not (always on a one on one basis) and then start an official performance improvement program if needed prior to firing. And this is with adults, not children! While this story certainly pales in comparison with many of the accounts of physical/sexual abuse you hear out of Hollywood, anyone who acts like this is certainly not a good manager or one that I’d personally want to work for.
Being a TV producer and being an asshole are orthogonal skills.One of them pays you money; concentrate your efforts on that one.