DRW50

Thank you. We see more of Cassandra James in that promo than we likely do on the show.

Thank you @slick jones and @jam6242 . Barely even a Wiki in spite of a lengthy career. Odd. Thank you both for helping get her out there. A real looker - reminds me of Bette Davis, just more glam. I'm glad soaps were able to help her in her last career years. I wonder if anyone ever even interviewed her.

The repeated Buffy references seemed to be Passions' cultural peak.

I do wish we had more of Rita's actual exit because it seems like so much took place after she left that she should have been there for. Add in the Ed recast and how flat a lot of the Hope/Alan material feels afterward, and I wonder what might have been. I think Kobe and Vincent had a bad falling out over his wanting to be in the movie Marie, which is probably why he was killed off.

That may be it. Thanks.

It did seem like for a while they moved away from saying much about the family in comparison to stunts or couples, but I agree not much will change, especially if the idea is that Will's daughter showing up means a Horton focus. I noticed that they made sure to point out Gwen's return was set up before they took over. I guess they don't want any blame for that flop. Thanks @janea4old

We were talking a few pages ago about this portion of the show being hornier than previous years (or many years after)...this just all seems like being pervy in lack of having any real idea what to do. Even reading about this story in the GL anniversary book I was confused. Who decided that Kyle/Roxie was a good idea, especially in these circumstances? Did they think it would make him look like a rogue? Eddie Dorrance (I think). He did. That was the role which made him. I think he got an Emmy, or a nomination.

The ever confusing younger actor categories where 25 year olds duke it out with 5 year olds. Kathleen Widdoes did have some lead material that year with Ned Simon's death, but I'm surprised she got a lead nomination.

Richard Higgs.

Great job @Paul Raven. I think Renee was brought in by the Dobsons.

Thank you.

There's a line in one episode where one of the "good" characters expects Vanessa to gloat over a tragedy (someone dying or losing a baby), and Vanessa says she isn't heartless. So Marland probably was going to soften her with time, as you mentioned. I have seen the different phases of Warren while perusing those years, but none are overly convincing to me. I think the role was miscast. I think Warren Burton was mostly chosen because he had just gotten off AW, where he had also stayed for a strangely lengthy amount of time. I wonder if Trish was written out because she was seen as too dull for the Lewises. Or if Gail Kobe was just obsessed with dumping any character she didn't create. I wonder if she would have been written out in 1983 if not for her last name. The Lewises never have that center after she leaves - Vanessa gets that role, which is a drag on her. Rebecca Hollen was such an understated presence contrasted to how overheated that period can feel. I wish they'd seen her potential.

The Bold and the Beautiful- April 20, 1992 (most) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Thanks. I couldn't remember if he was off for a bit while in prison. I wonder if they would have recast Rita or if Lenore was willing to return. The pregnancy fits with the later rumors they were going to make Gus her son with Alan.

That period seemed so averse to sex appeal. I was watching Trish's last scene yesterday (Vanessa is so sad, it breaks your heart a little), and Ross gives Trish a very passionate, tender goodbye kiss. I was reminded that Ross often was a passionate man. I assume the idea was that this Carrie was meant to be more cute than sexy because one of the Carrie alters represented her sexuality, but I do think that the Ross we knew would not have been so happy with just '40s style banter. Thanks. The handling of Vanessa at that time always seemed to be whatever the plot demanded. If Marland had stayed I imagine she would have finally gotten around to bedding Floyd, Kelly, Justin and Mike. (Vanessa/Justin could have made for a strong pairing, as Vanessa isn't far off early Jackie) I often forget Warren was even meant to be a villain, although I know he did turn into a killer and held India hostage, or whatever went on. The main parts I remember with him when I watch his run is Alexandra's sassy friend, who I guess was meant to be in love with her (Henry/Katie, look out!). The show never really did have a good villain in those years, or for many years. Edmund in later years sort of worked, but the writing for him was such a mess and relied on DAM. If they hadn't taken Will Jeffries too far, he could have worked. And thanks for the answers about Hilary and Josh. You are right that Hilary could have been used to befriend anyone across the canvas. Of course, that's why she was killed...can't have that type of character on the show. I so agree about Diane. I do hope it was Sofia's choice to leave. If not, what a mistake. She is so compelling to watch and has so many layers even though on paper she should have been as much of a plot device as early Vanessa often was. I have seen so little of Alan/Rita, but you make them sound like what could have been a fantastic pairing for Alan (although it couldn't have lasted even if Lenore had stayed, given their personalities). If story plans had to be cut short, that helps explain why Alan is at such a lull (wasn't Bernau also ill at this time or am I mistaken?). The focus on repairing his marriage to Hope is a bit flat, made worse by Marland draining all the life from Hope.

I wonder how much of the OLTL snub was down to how many people in the industry seemed to dislike Gottlieb. Marland seemed to have his share of beefs in daytime, but also seemed loved and respected by many.

The show having a majority black cast is great and is one of the ways to bring in new viewers or lapsed daytime viewers. Sticking with the status quo, or the agonizing tokenism of, say, GH, is a bad idea. I don't think anyone here would want to change that. I think some of us were just trying to figure out if there was any way to thread the needle in getting lapsed viewers and some of the remaining soap fans who may be less willing to give the show a try, but I guess it was never going to happen.

Thanks. I do wonder how true that is for the Emmys at this time. Was there much of a history of them throwing awards at rape and abuse stories? I guess maybe GL winning in 1980, but that was for material after the rape storyline had already been on for months. They also got no writing or acting nominations at that time - no Maureen Garrett or Michael Zaslow. I also see nothing given for AMC's very strong Natalie rape storyline. Judi Evans won an Emmy for playing a rape victim, but I question whether anyone voted for her just for that reason. I guess there was Santa Barbara, although they won three years in a row. I'm all for calling out awards bait storylines - they are one of the main reasons I no longer watch British soaps - but I think there were other reasons for ATWT winning at that time than just this story. But I would have to go back and watch GL and ATWT or their submissions more closely to see.

This is another reason I wish they'd considered making a half-hour soap. I think 30 or 15 minutes are about all many can watch now. Tik tok videos seem to be the acceptable length for many these days. I do agree with you that I don't want to see racists catered to...it's unfortunate that is much of what is left of the daytime audience, due to soaps chasing away viewers who wanted more diversity or representation beginning in the mid '90s.

I don't disagree with you, but for some reason I do connect more with Marland's last years (not all of it - Rosanna, the John/Iva pairing, and yes, the therapy-speak and defanging of anyone beyond guest baddies). They seem most authentic to him and are a fascinating window, with some years-long arcs that aside from Carolyn Crawford have sizable payoffs. His first years are better soap, in many ways, certainly livelier, with a number of very strong set pieces, but they are also so Lily-heavy, plus the attempts at camp and comedy don't feel overly genuine to me. I also dislike the Margo/Tom stuff of that period more every time I try to watch it. That middle period, 88-90, may be the most interesting of his run, if we are analyzing, due to the producer changeover and Marland clearly struggling with where to go after the strike and a number of actor departures.

I do remember seeing a fair amount of criticism of ATWT around 1990 or 1991, although Marlena de Lacroix, IIRC, praises the show around 1991 (and points out the improvement). The Crawford story definitely got panned. I don't know what GL's submissions were for that time but I don't really know why they had their nose in the air over ATWT getting an Emmy for that story. I'm not sure if they are implying that the show got an aware solely because of a rape/incest storyline; if so, I don't agree. AMC had a similar story around the same time, and it wasn't exactly racking up nominations. Genie Francis, a big star on soaps compared to Alice Haining (who should have been nominated), didn't even get a nod. It's a very strong storyline. I went back and watched some again for the first time in a long time and there are some very ugly moments I had forgotten, moments I'm surprised even got through, like the various flashbacks Henry had to his mother controlling and abusing him. It wasn't just awards bait, the way a number of soaps treated those stories.

As @Planet Soap has already said, that wasn't their intent, but I do think the show, and CBS and P&G are walking a tightrope in trying a new soap in an era where many of the remaining soap viewers will likely never watch something they see as "woke" or "DEI" and many of the viewers who don't feel that way and do genuinely want to see more diversity (or want to see a black-led soap) will never watch a daytime soap. The promotion did not have the heavy-handed, patronizing feel of a lot of promotion today based on diversity (like the Doctor Who revival, where they decided to tell people to just not watch if they didn't like it), but if we're talking about why a lot of household viewers aren't tuning in, speculation about other ways of getting viewers is inevitable. Maybe those viewers who only go based on "woke" and "DEI" never would have watched anyway. They probably wouldn't have. In this case it's trying to figure out how to pick from two different groups of viewers who are both unlikely to watch the show. When Tunie was on ATWT, Marland and the producers of the time (Calhoun and then Caso) did a good job of making her become a focal point of the canvas without feeling heavy-handed. I think it was you who said the show hasn't really used her that much. So that's another example where I think they could have potentially brought some viewers who may otherwise not be interested in the show, as they would remember Tunie from ATWT and SVU, but they haven't.

Thanks @Paul Raven . I appreciate seeing some takes from the time. Interesting choice to claim the Marlers were a "bedrock" of Springfield until Marland. I do think Marland underused Justin, although the poor recasting of Jackie was a big factor. Ross was a presence in story, even if it wasn't about him. Lainie was long gone - not sure if viewers cared. Nothing against Ted Leplat, but what I've seen of him doesn't suggest the charisma Michael Zaslow brought to Roger. They also took years to get Roger to where Andy was from the start. Didn't viewers know before he even came to town that he had beaten Trish? The story is extremely unpleasant to watch. The blackmail aspect is the most interesting part, but that in no way makes the character viable in the long-term.