KMan101

One of the benefits was always "no ads or limited ads". At least IMO. So, I says Disney+ won't at least initially and it's one of the lowest priced offerings. But of course most realize ad-free isn't sustainable.

I agree, but just how big is that fanbase? I adore the show and keep waiting every day to see it was picked up somewhere. Broadcast seems a stretch to me, personally. But I'd love it. I just don't know if there's this fight over it some think :/

I always thought one of the benefits of streaming was NO ADS, yet that's the future I get it, but I've yet to be encouraged to buy or click on an ad I see play. It often makes me not even want that product ...

Separation in stories does work. It worked very well for Y&R. I agree not "everyone" needs to interact. But I also like shows that have tight nit communities that interact and react to each other. One of the things I love about Y&R is that the families ARE in their bubbles (when on other shows we often BEG for family and friends to interact). But it also helps to have characters interact with others, at least in their age range. Sadly, any bubbles now are budget related, at least on DAYS I've never understood not referring to history as much as you can. I even think at certain times, on other shows, flashbacks would really help drive a story point home. I guess some of it stems from the "fear" of fans wanting certain characters back because the old trope was that if someone was referred to a lot suddenly it meant they were coming back. IDK. It's weird how they often ignore so many things. Not really specific to Y&R either, all soaps are guilty of this. And I've always been amused how their life basically stops and they have no idea what's been going on in the soap town they return to. Especially in the day and age of social media and cellphones. I also always thought when someone exited, while it was a big deal and treated as such, people acted as if they would never communicate or see them again. LOL

Becky Herbst is mostly checked out with Roger Howarth, and I don't blame her as everything goes back to Franco and propping him. But she does well with Liz's kids stuff. I'm glad they're giving her some kid drama but it's still all about Franco. So infuriating. But Mo and Kelly? They've been out to lunch for at least a decade at this point.

Pretty much this, yep. Sarah was the perfect Carly, always will be

THIS I will always vastly prefer SJB in the role. And to be frank, she should still be in this role. I like Laura Wright. She's passable in the role because she at least ... acts and tries and gives effort. Such a truly dreadful time. I've blocked a lot of that out but your fantastic recall has me remembering a lot of that. Sigh. Guza sucked as a whole, but that year was particularly putrid.

I never minded the last Ben, personally. But a child trafficker? Lawd ... I can't.

Not watching, but from what I'm reading, sounds like Ben is once again being written awfully. Not surprised. EastEnders seems to have contempt for it's gay characters. Meanwhile, who isn't gay on HollyOaks? lol

She should make it private and only share the link with those she thinks she can trust. There are full yearly playlists for DAYS that are private, but someone often screws it up for them and they have to start over. Since the networks won't give us soap reruns, the least they could do is leave them up on YouTube ... or, you know, stream them themselves!

I always enjoyed the show in a guilty pleasure sort of way. It was a fun show. I hated them killing Francesca off. Lisa now does reporting on Inside Edition (I believe ... I get my newsmagazine shows mixed up ..) I really liked a lot of the actors and they often shined above the mediocre material. Jason George and Sherri Saum have had great post-SB careers. Apart from playing temp Theresa, Priscilla Garita should have had another soap role. Hank Cheyne just disappeared. I loved Nick Kiriazis. Nick Stabile Always loved Sarah Buxton. Kathleen Noone Lesley Anne Down Shawn Batten Dominique Jennings but for all of those there were the Christina Chambers and Tracy Melchoir (sp) ... Kam Heskin was passable in the role but I always preferred Dorman and was disappointed she left. (But yeah, wow did her IQ drop ... I really never cared for the character after the recast) Loved Mark. It did add a lot to the killing spree. He seemed the most "expendable" so to speak even though I loved him and the audience seemed to as well. I liked the diversity the show had. I was also disappointed Kelly Hu's character was swiftly written out. Also felt there was more potential with Leigh Taylor Young's Elaine. But I can also why they axed them all and why maybe they didn't connect with focus groups (still not sure focus groups should be deciding soaps ... lol) Meant to add in my other post but poor Russell Curry never got much at all to do.

Paulina felt so boring under Judi, honestly (after they totally toned her down). Judi also felt wasted at times on AW, personally. And I never cared for Paulina and Joe ... Judi could have easily been a recast Nancy, Rachel's sister ...

It was all such a turn off

Holmes and Dolan's run was definitely dampened by poor/awful writing. I don't really blame them for checking out ... I felt like I always just wanted something ... a bit more ... out of Dolan's Margo. I too can see why they thought it would work. It should have, she ultimately wasn't a bad choice to play Margo ... but then maybe Dolan felt she'd be playing Maureen all over again. IDK.

I figured they were trying to recapture the attention Bob/Susan/Kim received with Tom/Emily/Margo but it fell pretty flat. You had the Alec nonsense with Margo. Emily and Tom forced together ... and then for years barely a mention or use of Daniel ... for me I don't know that they ever recovered for me after all that, honestly. It felt like a lot of damage was done to all three characters. "On paper" the idea isn't horrible.

But I do love he's actively staying busy. Good for Michael Park Tom, Emily and Margo really lacked for me. As when I started watching as a newer viewer, before I've since done my research, watched old episodes, etc. it just felt they had no real purpose and were all just there. It was such bad writing. Scott Holmes and Ellen Dolan also irritated me sometimes with their acting choices. Dolan's Margo felt cold. Tom was often kind of just there. Sure they had some minor storylines and I started tuning out around the last couple of years but eh ... I never saw what the appeal was until I saw better writing and better actors playing Tom and Margo. JMO ... lol (and I think Ellen was great as Maureen on GL ... she just felt checked out a lot on ATWT, not that I can blame her)

Sounds like it would be right up Mal and Chuckie Pratt's alley ... lol

The writers never seemed to know who or what they wanted Emily to be.

While not dropped, it certainly "felt" that way and I agree that it wasn't actually good. Some good moments and acting don't make it a great story. But like you said @YRBB maybe because it wasn't "satisfying" that taints it for some? I can understand that.

Not really. I guess in terms of "closure" it will kind of suck she won't be there. But she only popped in here and there.

I liked Jared as well. I never understood how quickly they dropped him. I wish I could remember what his 'secret' would have been. I'd have to rewatch the time period. I was half in/half out at the time with the show.

I love hearing the details. And it's probably easier to say "Kay invited Victor to town to run the company". It's *technically* true, but at the same time, it's not at all, if you know what I mean, lol. They probably don't want to bother elaborating on the details of the story. I do like a lot of soap history books but they only actually scratch the surface. So many little details and story threads are virtually ignored.

Not liking her doesn't make her "not a legendary character", but like you said, it's your opinion God, so much this. It was an awful, horrible mess. I do agree it very briefly started off promising.

I agree that she self-sabotaged herself. Many people are like that. If only she had just listened to her kids and kept her mouth shut but she just can't do it. She really has some mental illness issues she needs to deal with. She's not well, at all. That was an interesting read. That's sad. But she has a mental illness and she is a paranoid person. If I think about it from her point of view, she was paranoid about losing her show and in her twisted mind, she sees Sara Gilbert as stealing her show, basically. I get it. Sara took control. Washed her hands quickly of Roseanne and now it's called "The Conners" and Sara's the star. I'm not saying Roseanne isn't nuts to keep blaming everyone but herself (she can't because that's admitting she sabotaged herself) but when someone has a mental illness ... they view things differently. If I were Roseanne, I'd think Sara is after my show and job too. But Roseanne, still, almost a year later, remains unable to actually acknowledge how wrong she was, the mistake she made, and how she cost HERSELF her job. As the comedian said in the written piece from the WAPOST, she could have handled an apology so much better, but she didn't want. She went into the new show thinking everyone was against her and that they were "trying to silence her" (when in reality, they were trying to PROTECT her) ... it's really a sad situation. Her kids desperately tried to get her off social media. They knew what she'd do to herself. And she did. Good. She deserves even more. She was the true highlight. I've always liked her and enjoyed her version of Becky but it's been nice seeing her really take off this time and she's getting a lot of kudos. I love it. She deserves it. She reminds me a lot of Laurie Metcalfe. Just someone who takes you by total surprise and ends up being so great you can't help but watch them.