DRW50

@Vee Thanks for tagging me. I know we both always praise McKenna's work on OLTL so how somehow fitting for today's GH that he is dumped in a part that as you've said is so throwaway (I didn't mind Measure and I do think he had a real spark with Laura Wright, but your dragging of the character has been more entertaining than the material he's been given). There's so much you can do with Chris McKenna and this is where you put him? He probably won't even last to the end of 2025. Summer, maybe. I'm not surprised he isn't a Drew replacement, as I imagine Frank and ABC want to hang onto Cameron Mathison as long as they can, but he definitely would have made sense as a new AJ. Maybe Frank is never going there due to the nasty way the show treated AJ and Sean Kanan. I don't have a problem with them losing Martin's accent as it was just something else for MEK to struggle through, but trying to get rid of Lois' accent seems silly when it's a defining part of the character and doesn't seriously affect Rena's performance. When the story came around I wondered if Rena didn't want to keep doing the accent, but if it was a Frank mandate it just comes across as a producer who knows his time on the show (or the show itself) is winding down and wants to grab at any random power move.

Thanks for letting us know!

Finally finished the last few weeks. Some thoughts: Lights Up was nicely done - maybe the best of the "special" episodes in the revival. Memories of past friends and loves were done with restraint, and Harold's memories of Madge had all the more poignancy knowing that Ian Smith is leaving again soon. The scene with Paul comforting Hilary about her old love Kenneth Muir may be the best Paul has had in the revival. I also thought the show did a decent job remembering David a year on, showing how his loved ones struggled with how to mourn him, with a minimum of tears or tantrums but with a clear sense of loss. The idea of Nicolette impulsively letting Yaz flee the country (and even pushing her from immediately confessing) feels true to the character, and Leo figuring out and blackmailing her into firing Seb was an even better twist. I liked that she wasn't self-righteously outraged and instead just did what he wanted because she didn't give a fig about Seb anyway. And her talk with Leo about why she got caught up in the moment with Yaz, how David would feel about the two of them lying, etc. was great. I do think the whole story with Nicolette being belittled and banished by everyone (including Leo) over her keeping a record of Aaron's struggles cast a cloud over these scenes. I wish she had reminded him of his big moral outrage over her actions. And when Jane and Aaron find out, will they have a big angry reaction? Byron in particular should be mad, due to his friendship with Holly. If they are mad, then it's going to pack less of a punch because they were already furious with her last year for much less. The Leo/Krista/Seb story goes around and around without any rooting interest. I don't believe in the Leo/Krista relationship anymore and I think the longer the pairing has continued the blander Krista has become. So much of her personality is about this relationship. On paper, the Krista and Seb history should be much more affecting for Krista than it is. Instead, he just reminds Krista of umpteenth old stories while she gives a wan grin. Rather than Seb pursuing her, I would be more interested if she had fallen back into old habits with him, or even kissed him, by her own choice. Clearly Seb is just meant to be a spoiler for the money couple, so it's telling that the show is so unsure of the rooting value of Krista and Leo that they had to have Seb take a shot at Davod to remind us of who the "bad" character is in this story. I do find the actor who plays Seb attractive, and I think he would have been better served in another role. This one, like everything here, is a nonstarter. Holly may be one of the vapidest characters I've ever seen on a soap. She faces trauma after trauma, but other than variations on, "Why is this happening to me?" she goes right back to factory settings. She is so vapid that when she went to talk with Andrew I couldn't tell if she was flirting with him. The show going back to Max and Holly just makes the decisions made with Max during the time they didn't share scenes more confusing to me. His backstory is also confusing. He was so mad over a female friend being Roofied that he Roofied the man responsible, yet he didn't think twice over harassing Sadie? Speaking of that, have Max, Byron and Sadie had any conversation about that whole period since Max got out of the hospital? What was the point, other than the old cliche about someone starting on a show as a pig so we will get to see them improve? Taye seems to be there for the same arc. Knowing he's one of the few new regular characters makes it more disappointing that I found him so unlikeable. Dex feeling isolated in the family makes sense as something for Taye, who is clearly bitter toward his sister and very emotionally immature, to take advantage of, but it's not something I want to watch. Speaking of characters I don't want to watch, I just don't think I'm ever going to care about the Paul/Terese relationship. I'm glad they finally had some scenes where he talked about his guilt over David's death, they were long overdue for Paul, and I thought Stefan and Rebekah were both excellent. I wish they didn't feel so much like exceptions. A great deal of the time (and this started before Nell's return), I don't even get the sense that Terese likes Paul, I had completely forgotten about Katrina (I didn't even remember her name) until she randomly returned last week, going from a cold and selfish character to running a food drive for the needy. It makes sense for her to return with Chelsea on the way, given that Chelsea got her fired from the hotel (if this is the same character). I hope she runs Chelsea out of town as soon as possible. I can't tell if the show is planning a loneliness story for Andrew or if they just have nothing to do with him so that's why everyone he cares about keeps shunning him. I enjoyed the scenes with Gino and Vera as she was convinced to move into Eirini Rising. I couldn't muster up any involvement in her ties to Byron, Max and Sadie because we barely saw her with them before this story began. We had two mentions of Curtis Perkins in one episode, but no sighting of him. Is this another budget issue or is something else going on? I've seen more selfies of the actor on Twitter than appearances in the revival. The brief moments with Aaron and Rhett had some chemistry, and more depth than I'd expected (learning about Rhett being a father). I didn't invest because there's no point investing in any guest characters. I hope this isn't the end of the story, but there's no point to expect more for the time being. Jane's story with Clint has also sped along, likely due to yet another case of perils of the guest character. We only had a few episodes of her reacting to the age difference before she learned he was a cleaner and pulled back from seeing him. I'm sure there is more to come, but I can't bring myself to care when I know this character may not even be remembered in a month. It's been tough for me to feel much about Byron and Sadie, due to the same lack of development of other couples/relationships, but the whole mini-story where he almost got a piercing to please her before not being able to not go through with it was a good way to see their different personalities and how much they care about each other.

Did Vivien even have an exit? I thought Gretchen worked well enough with Carmen Duncan, but she was probably more of a fit for the late '70s AW than what the show had become. I would have considered trying to build her character up, but I'm not surprised they just let her go.

Those are scenes I'd love to see mostly because they sound like a huge batch of WTF.

That does make sense about Curtis. I just would have had him locked up and more doubt going on about whether he was the killer. Maybe even had Gwyn frame him. His being the last Alden, or reuniting with a Tricia who could not remember him, would have been poignant to me. That Youtube Uploaded I mentioned did complain about some of those early '95/late '94 stories, especially Trucker's exit period. And the whole Danny intro is a mess. I do appreciate what B&E did with the black cast.

I think they were right to cast separate actresses post-Moore. I just wish they'd cast a bit better for Sabrina.

If they had to do the Miranda story (goodness knows why), he would have made more sense than Bob did. He had a history of women the family found unsuitable and he might have been drawn into a whirlwind romance, unaware she was a drug lord, had a tedious daughter, etc. I have a feeling even if Joe hadn't left, Scott would not have amounted to much because of all the turnover at the time. The Sabrina story definitely gave a lot of good material for the first year or so. It might seem worse in hindsight because of how little they managed to do with Sabrina compared to, say, Stuart on AMC or Vicky on AW (other doppelgangers brought into story).

I know there was a claim Marland was going to recast Frannie if he'd lived. There was still a lot left with the character if they had cared. Sabrina was never up to much as a character but if they'd brought her in later on rich and bitter, clashing with the Hughes family values, it could have worked.

I always try to keep in mind that the story being my intro into Loving means I can't react the way more longtime fans could have. I wish some of them could be interviewed or could have been interviewed about how they felt.

I haven't watched it all either (The City) - I think the more human moments are late in the run. But even early on when they have her behaving in nasty ways they seem to try to add more humor (there's a hilarious and weird scene where she breaks into Syndey's apartment, finds a Thighmaster, and does it while using a German or Swedish voice). I do think killing off Stacey was a good way to kickstart a mystery. I kind of think they could have kept Curtis alive and just institutionalized. His death didn't add much beyond more of Gwyn's despair, and we would have had that anyway with him being locked away.

I do think they took Marcantel for granted - he was much more charismatic in the '94 episodes than given credit for. I haven't closely watched what of B&E is out there pre-Murders. I can see where people would feel the show was too dark and mean, not helped by characters like Tess (who seems to lighten up on The City). I know the person that uploaded a lot of 92-95 episodes would go on in the comments about how much they disliked B&E's run. From the bits I've seen I also think they wrote Stacey's stories as being too immature for where she should have been in by that point in her life. Who cares about repeat money stories with Buck and his insecurities?

I think the closest they get to Chris' early Curtis is when they bring in Chip Albers. I wonder if Chris was ever considered at that time, unless someone at ABC really liked Chris on AMC. I like what I've seen of Chip's work (even if it took me a few minutes to separate from his years in softcore), but Chris could have played that run well, even if the writing wasn't up to much.

I'm grateful for what we have of '60s and '70s GH but most of the time the quality is very rough. I'd forgotten they went in on Lucille too. Watching some bits of these episodes and having Lucille saying Audrey just needs to get over her miscarriage, having Steve belittle someone who had committed suicide or was about to do so, etc. reminds me of how rigid GH feels in morality and tone compared to where ABC soaps were heading at this time.

I haven't seen those in years. I remember laughing at some of the content but looking back I feel bad that they would make horrified/disgusted noises any time Emily McLaughlin would come onscreen (I think it was her).

I agree. Writing out Dan may have bought them some more time. The real fault lies in aging them so quickly and then killing off Paul. I think that de-aging Dan could have worked, as Susan and Kim were both vibrant (and Susan was on the way out anyway), but I can see why they made the choice they did. The problem is the choices the show made afterward. Considering how youth-obsessed soaps were in the early '80s, we're lucky they kept Kim through those five years of misuse/underuse. It's definitely something I never expected to see. I'm trying to hold back on my greediness and remember this may be it and just enjoy something that is so precious. I can see it. She also reminds me of Judith Chapman. Sadly we've never seen any of her ATWT work. @Mitch64 I forgot to say there's a line in this that felt like it was written just for you (the one where Lisa says Nancy would never talk about someone behind their back...but Lisa would).

I think you're right. There's criticism if you try too much to put the past into context for media, but I see it that way more than Ingalls trying to be racist the way the Charlie Kirks or the world are now. Most streaming material is slop. The one I hear the most praise of (Apple TV) is the least watched. I enjoy some shows on Netflix, but even those (like Bridgerton) I know aren't actually good - just some good casting and pretty costumes. I'd want more than that for Little House.

I think I remember seeing some of that. It probably could have been exciting but not with Mary living. Mary waking long enough to confess the truth and then dying might have worked. I have vague memories of Mary being styled like Heidi in this period. And wearing pancake makeup. Who am I to argue with Eileen! I suppose it wouldn't have made a difference whether Chuckie or Scott was there. The show was heading to a place where neither were going to work. The mistake was killing him off in the first place.

I wouldn't even say the Dobsons moved away from the Stewarts - they used them all, even the one I might have punted for a while (Annie). They did not use the Hughes family well at all. I don't think that was down to the family being too old, because they could still heavily contribute to story, other than Chris. They could also have done more with Don and Joyce. Joyce was a spark plug and her being written out makes no sense to me. I think they just didn't get the Hughes family. I am not sure why they struggled so much with Bob, as they did a decent job with Ed Bauer. A part of me wonders if they may have blanched at the family because Bridget Dobson had an extremely difficult relationship with her parents, who, from some of her descriptions, remind me a bit of Nancy. Helen Wagner also suffered no fools. Nothing against John Colenback, but I think they should not have brought him back when John Reilly left. Reilly was a popular leading man and seemed to be seen as a sex symbol too - he feels much older by this point, only a few years later.

I wouldn't be surprised if they just wanted Lisa to be child-free and didn't want to age him given that Tom had already been aged by that point. He's what they tried to make Scott. I didn't mind Scott but they should have just brought Chuckie back from the dead.

By that time Valerie was moving out of Oakdale, so I don't think we got to see what the story might have been, but, going on my memories of watching a decade ago, I liked the story. It was smaller, quieter, more character-based, and well-acted. And I agree that Kate, like Suzanne Davidson, felt "real," which is something that (aside from Lily) would be something ATWT started moving away from in the '80s and onward (they seemed to start again in the show's last few years, with characters like Parker, but by then it didn't matter). I love watching Judith McConnell but I am not sure we'll ever see the strongest material she had as Valerie - if she had any. It seems like someone at ABC and P&G decided to just hire some actors recently fired from GH and hope for the best. At least I can finally say I've seen Martin West as Don, with that enthralling dinner party clip just uploaded. Honestly, he's much more Boy Scout-esque than I had expected considering his years playing wicked Phil Brewer. This does fit the Hughes family, in some ways. Conrad Fowkes plays the character as a little darker, if still dull. After seeing that clip, I'm all the more disappointed Robert Altman likely never saw soaps. Barbar Rodell would have absolutely killed in one of his films. Or an Alan Rudolph film.

I read The Long Winter over and over as a kid. I still remember the passages where Laura was slowly dying on the sled, and how cold the rooming house she stayed in was, how even getting under the blankets was too much. I have seen some claim that the books are white supremacist or fascist or what have you, or they say that is true of the background of them. I don't remember them well enough to say. I do think going back to them for source material isn't a bad idea. I just wish it wasn't Netflix, which is generally slop (even what I enjoy on their service is slop). I am hoping at the least they don't try to emulate that smug hack Taylor Sheridan.

I agree ten minutes would make short scenes easier to watch than forty. I think the 10-15 minute format benefits from longer scenes, rather than shorter scenes, but with care, there could be a balance. It's just a shame we don't have that on soaps anymore. Before anyone steps in I know this is off topic so I'll stop.

I don't know if anyone who is advocating for a 10-to-15-minute soap wants 10 minutes of fast scenes. I would go back to the old formats of 15 minute soaps - a small cast with a few guest performers, 2-3-4 scenes in that episode. I also think someone who is not Frank Valentini and is a better producer would manage the format. It goes beyond just short scenes with him, as last year the scenes lengthened and I still don't think the show was very good outside of a few moments and performers. I do think some younger people might watch a soap if it was 15 minutes and made easily available to them. Of course they aren't going to just watch any show. The soaps have been poorly written, produced, and acted much of the time for years and years now. They aren't going to just tune into something because it's shorter. I'd never say B&B is better just because it's shorter. I would say that a 30 minute show allows for more improvement and possibilities. 60 minutes was out of network greed, not to enhance the genre. I do think that with improved quality, a 15 minute soap would be more likely to bring new viewers in today's world than a 60 minute soap. But of course, even with a shorter runtime, if the quality doesn't improve, and if the producers and network actively fight story that was bringing in new fans or exciting fans who had lost interest (like Trina/Spencer did), then nothing will change.

That is the main stuff, yes.