DramatistDreamer

Good for Ms. Rowell. She didn't give up, kept her profile up and kept working, even creating work when opportunity was scarce. She really could teach a course on resilience to other actors.

By then, I don't think the writers knew much about the show's history. Hogan Sheffer himself admitted to not having watched any ATWT before he began working on the show. At that point, I doubt he had much time or desire to watch what came before his tenure as HW. I am not sure if he was the sole or the last writer to resurrect James Stenbeck but whoever it was by then had made what used to be a dashing, charismatic and malevolent force into a caricature. I do agree, it was a device to plug holes in the story that illustrated a lack of creativity.

This show seemed to get a lot of initial buzz when it debuted. I wonder what happened? I still haven't seen it but I have simply stopped trying to keep up with every series out there. I mean what happened besides the obvious ratings drop, lol. I sort of feel for Naturi though because I think she's talented but hasn't really had much opportunity to show what she's capable of. If colorism weren't such an issue, I feel like she could be a central figure in one of those romantic sitcoms, where she's a songwriter finding her way around the dating scene as a divorcée while trying to revive her career after being a stay at home mother for five, ten years.

The difference being though, that Holly and Roger teetered back and forth between enmity and romantic situations. James and Barbara never had that. They never slept together after James resurfaced "from the dead" in 1986 or when he returned afterwards. In fact, James was perfectly willing to let Barbara rot in prison for a murder she never committed, a murder that never happened. I liked when Barbara once told James that she was no longer afraid of him because she was an even match for him, James' eyes lit up as he told her she was never more beautiful than she was after telling him that and Barbara smirked in response. That was the most sparks we saw between these two after their bitter divorce. Not the same type of tension between Roger and Holly, imo. I still maintain that James never should have been resurrected after Paul practically drove a stake through his heart with those bullets in 1989. Those scenes were so powerful, which really should have "done it" for James Stenbeck. I realize that Anthony Hererra was a very charismatic actor and James had been involved in some of the most dramatic stories during the 1980s but the storylines that he was brought back for in the '00s were demonstrably worse, even the spa story was m several steps down from what he'd previously been involved in when on the canvas.

I realize that many times, actors do some 'out there' maneuvers in their campaigns for the Academy award but I don't understand this one. At all.

Wonder what will become of this?

Honestly, that 1989 story really should have been the ultimate chapter (having Paul commit patricide against the man he once idolized seemed like a fairly clear indicator that this should be James' final chapter), but down the road, soap writers who were ill equipped to write a suitable story for the character, decided that they could somehow resurrect the character, which was ridiculous. And I know that later fans claim to have enjoyed it, but having James conspire with Barbara, the woman he terrorized for years seemed so stupid a concept that I really can't bother trying to analyze how idiotic that was. Who consulted on that story, Les Moonves?

You didn't even have to tell me this, because I already guessed it. And one of the lawyers from Sharapova's team for her CAS case being a judge in the Valieva hearing was some type of coincidence.

When I was a kid, I saw this and back then, this sequence was the most harrowing I had ever seen on a soap opera. I wish someone (ahem) had asked Melanie Smith and Andrew Kavovit what is was like to film this sequence when they appeared on that livestream reunion last year. screen-20220217-170255~3.mp4

It did seem bizarre but so much of what goes on in tennis these days is bizarre.

I don't have a problem with Amanda Seyfried speaking ill of her time on ATWT. Any actor who felt they were ill treated or (god forbid) suffered abusive behavior, speak on it. I have no problem with that. I have said this for years. Actors who were dissatisfied with they way they were treated or thought their characters were given short-shrift, what's wrong with being frank about it? I suspected that had more actors taken the leap to speak more candidly, some of these behaviors could have been corrected, with, maybe, as a result, a much better show for the length of its duration. Who knows?

He clarified the situation. Still, a birthday to forget. Spanish media, like much of the media around the world, seems to revel in chaos and creating intrigue.

¿Qué sorpresa, no @Soapsuds?

Figure skating has had some serious problems for decades now (L'affaire Harding/Kerrigan, misogynoir and micro-aggressions toward Surya Bonaly, etc.). As a kid, I used to be a big fan but probably over the last fifteen years, I have been pulling away, bit by bit. And hasn't an American recently naturalized Chinese citizen who competes for China faced relentless cyber-bullying by the home crowd after falling during her skating programs? As beautiful and even as entertaining as a polished performance can be, figure skating as an industry has been as toxic as all get-out for decades now. I mean, I remember not really knowing much about Tai Babilonia, with her era being a little before my time as a fan, but seeing her made for TV movie about the basic toxicity of the people in charge of the sport. I hope that some big improvements will be made but the sport has been rancid for years, lol.

The Netflix effect.

Question answered, I guess.

Oh wow. The series is not terrible. Although I find the backstory to be far more interesting than the current stories, which seem fairly generic. They seem to use that character Margaret to lay out exposition. I did like how that conversation between Lettie and Margaret was written in episode 3. Not too expository (for once) and just enough sniping dialogue beneath the surface to give the scene some bite. And in the meantime, we get to learn some nuggets about the family dynamics and the nature of Lettie and Margaret's relationship. If only all the scenes where writers needed to inform us could have been written that way. Still, the pacing within episode 3 was solid, it certainly didn't drag. Margaret's dialogues need to be improved, they often come off as somewhat clumsy, laying out exposition for the sake of giving out information, but given the ABC/Hulu situation, the writers may not have time.

His character is something of a racist, doling out micro aggressions like pocket change, yet he is cowed by the main character Joe Sandoval. I just saw the episode.

At this point, I am indifferent. Like the interviewer expressed, he's trying to have it both ways-- doesn't want to be seen as a poster child for antivaxxers (which, he essentially is). Concedes that he was vaccinated as a child and the COVID-19 vaccines are likely effective, yet asserts his right to not be vaccinated. Makes little sense to me.

Thank you all for responding. I didn't want to create a separate thread for this but you gave me a response for different soaps, which is basically what I had hoped. Wait, Days won't air their Valentine's episode until after Olympic coverage is over? What, are you serious??

Just a question for everyone who watches regularly, do daytime soaps still do Valentine's Day episodes? Not necessarily, special one-offs but episodes focused on characters recognizing the day? I'm just curious.

I posted my thoughts on that up thread.