j swift

BTW between DAYS and Y&R is Allie the new ubiquitous name for ingenues? Is Allie the new Beth?

I mean there is no rationalization for that point, except it was a live show, they had a limited amount of time during the commercial, other awards were presented during the commercials, and Denzel, Spielberg, and others were vying for Will's attention. And the ratings surged after the slap (although that is devious and they had no way of knowing the ratings would surge during the ceremony).

credit to Sunset Beach Central on Instagram - but - looking back 1997 should probably be remembered as a time of real experimentation for men's hairstyles those are some extreme 'dos

I wonder, given that today's reports are based on a CBS reporter who was in the room and didn't see anyone ask Will to leave, if the Academy tasked Will's PR person with the request for him to leave and Will refused? Because we know that PR consulted with Will, just after Denzel told him that that the Devil made him do it. Thus, both sides are correct.

Does anyone suppose that Deacon's role in Diane's resurrection will play into the B&B twist?

Although I didn't watch them in "real time", I am big fan of both the EON Winter Austen story and AW's Walter Curtin plot, because I am intrigued by the idea of characters getting away with murder; even after a trial. Of course, the soap gods have decided that no murderer can go unpunished so both Walter and Winter met their final fate and, to some degree, justice was served. But, what about if Walter lived? I would have loved to watch the outcome of Lenore realizing the depths of Walter's deceit and then having them work through it was a couple. After all, Walter got her off, no harm no foul. And, he wasn't the one who got her arrested and charged in the first place? Once they discussed it, and Walter found out that Lenore was never involved with Wayne, it would have opened a world of opportunities to exploit the idea that Walter had killed Addison for no reason. They could have formed a dynamic where now Lenore could use Walter against another character (either Liz or Jon). She could have developed a "Lady McBeth" sense of power by pulling on Walter's strings. Playing on some of the early snobbery of the character, Lenore could have wanted Walter to gain more wealth, and perhaps she could have become an adversary to Rachel. Eventually, Walter would have been caught and Lenore would be reformed by her love for Robert. But, that could have been fun. And what if Winter got away with murder and, rather than go crazy, she used the experience to gain confidence and power? She got away with it once, who's to say she couldn't do it again? When faced with questions by Nicole, she could have laughed and simply told her that double jeopardy laws would prevent her from ever being re-tried for murder. She could have used her new found confidence to write books and help other women overcome their abusive lovers. Using the cultural issues around feminism at the time (and movies like The Stepford Wives), Winter could use her fame to start a group of empowered women, but it is all a scam because she really was everything as described at her trial. Nancy gets intrigued by Winter when she gets her own show at WMON. Raven gets annoyed by Winter's ability to play Draper and Logan against each other. And April worries about Winter's hold over the men of Monticello. So, Nicole, Raven, Nancy, and Raven team up to expose Winter. Only to face a backlash when her followers accuse them of being bad feminists for going after another woman due to jealousy and spite. Winter uses her fame to move to the big city, but not before plotting one more murder. She decides to get rid of a certain pesky federal agent named Jefferson Brown...

I don't know why, maybe because of all of the outdoors scenes, but it seemed like Falcon Crest filmed on location in Northern California more often than Dallas (or even Knots)? I feel like you could always tell when Dallas inserted a prior filmed on location scene into an episode, because as I recall, they would only film on location for a couple of days each season

@Faulkner I am a big fan of pencil drawn ad art and if you look at the thread on Illustrated Soap Ads there are some amazing examples

Recently I've been downloading public domain digital images and framing them as inexpensive artwork for my home office. I came across this Sandy Dvore Y&R drawing and it would be a perfect candidate. Upload it to an Office Depot or Drug Store in your neighborhood with a large scale printer, print it out at 11x18, add a frame with a border from Amazon, and you've got some art for under 5 bucks https://www.pinterest.com/pin/266556871667490500/

@Michael & @DRW50 It is ironic that after many soaps whitewashed the casting of Latina characters in the 90's (i.e. GH's Felicia - the Aztec Princess, AW's Paulina from San Cristobal, daughter of Maria Hernandez DeSilva , and ATWT - Sierra from Montega, daughter of Jacobo Estaban) - we would agree that soap fans still might be averse to equity in casting, even in a temp role, thirty years later. But, I am glad you both responded in the spirit it was intended, as an interesting idea

Wouldn't it be interesting in these modern times to have temp recasts using BIPOC actors? Soap audiences are willing to suspend our disbelief in all sorts of ways. Why not try an API Alexis for a few days, or a Black Monica? It wouldn't effect the plot and the diversity would be appreciated.

The synchronization is the best part, it reminds me of Ross and Monica's New Year's Eve dance on Friends

I'd re-post this classic dance with or without an apology from passionate soap historians who would rather create their own drama than enter into civil discourse y&r.mp4

How long do we predict that GMA3 will keep the "What You Need to Know” part of their title? I guess it's better than GMA3 and Kiki...

Couldn't anyone just do this and avoid the emotional blackmail?

I guess the challenge will be once we get the twist, who will be the first to be able to source when the same idea was already been used in daytime. As in, "She killed her own son? Well, I remember when Sadie Sue did the same thing on Dark Promises in 1964."

To me, Ashley really stands out because she waited so long to get married the first time. She was the last of the Abbott kids to marry, yet wound up with so many duds. And, for being such a smart and beautiful woman, she always wound up with the scraps. I mean who hadn't been with Tucker by the time she married him?

touche 😄🤣

Don't forget about Phyllis, Genoa-ites would be well served to wait the full year before sending a wedding gift to that serial monogamist.

And they were announced with no context while nobody was paying attention. It was like, here's an idea that flopped, so we'll just shove it in before the third cancer commercial of the night At least a We Don't Talk About Bruno/A Boy like That mashup would have been fun, (if not a little Glee circa 2010)

Agreed At one point it was a character trait for someone like Alexis Carrington or Erica Kane to have been married so many times that their last names read like the local telephone book. But, Victoria has been married to six different men, and each time the audience is supposed to forget her prior romances and treat each wedding as if she was a virgin bride. If I lived in Genoa City, I would want to know if she really expected presents (and attendance at a destination wedding) given that she had already been down the aisle over six times.

Getting back to the show itself, can we discuss Will Packer's piss poor production? Pro's : celebrating the anniversaries of certain films Con's: the random nature of which anniversaries were chosen - i.e. this is at least the third time that I recall celebrating the legacy of James Bond, and last time they got all of the living Bonds together in the same room Pro's: using different bands every hour was a unique idea Con's : most of the musical performances looked cheap and haphazard, the guy from Encanto looked like he was going to trip over the dancing couple. And why was there only one dancing couple on the huge stage? And why give that much time to We Don't Talk about Bruno when it wasn't nominated? It was not even the only Disney animated film nominated this year, so why did it get so much attention (and so few wins)? Where was a number from West Side Story? Controversial Pro: I liked that the replay of awards given during the commercials sped up the show Con : the random nature of who got their awards during the commercials. Costumes and Makeup are traditionally fun categories, but they were during the commercial. While sound editing still merited its own segment? Con: Even before "the indecent" I kept commenting that the stage was too low and close to the audience to make it seem regal. While I appreciate that certain actresses didn't need to trudge up the steps, it looks odd to have the stage a foot away from the attendants Con: In Memoriam is a no-brainer, get a beautiful singer to perform a sad song along side a montage, not bring out a random choir singing Spirit in the Sky while highlighting three people, including Betty White who is not known for film and would be better suited for the Emmy's tribute Con: All of those breast cancer and colon cancer treatment commercials were really a downer - Whatever happened to a good ol' fast food jingle? Con: every single comedy "bit" was a dud. Regina and the Covid testing would have seemed sexist if done by a man. Wanda and Regina giving consolation prizes was offensive to those in the audience. Amy Schumer trying to lighten the mood was not well earned or supported. The monologue lacked creativity, and they were never able to get a great shot of all three of them on stage bantering, because they had no rapport. It was absolutely void of spontaneity or reaction to the events of the night.

On the other hand, I will never understand why a 53 year old man felt that the devil compelled him to hit a 57 year old man in front of 11 million people on national TV right before winning an award that he had coveted for years. No amount of discussion about poor taste, disease, or loyalty will ever explain how an actor could feel that he had the right to yell profanities at a live event, attended by his grown children, because he disagreed with a joke. Maybe if I watched DAYS more often it would all make sense. However, I am willing to take bets today on whether Will be asked to present the Best Actress award in 2023, as is the tradition for the prior year's winner. Because I predict that his punishment will be that he is not invited, despite the fact that we'll all forget about this before next year's ceremony.

Of course, but the point remains that a correlation between the public perception of an artist and their art has changed from the 1970s to 2003, 2018, and 2022, just the members of the academy have changed. So, to make a comparison to an event that happened last night, and to which the academy has had a relatively short time to respond, is faulty rhetoric. In other words giving Polanski an award in 2003 and then expelling him fifteen years later has no relationship to an event in 2022 because the people, actions, and circumstances are completely different. It is like saying Will Smith shouldn't have to give up his Oscar if the Patriots were allowed to cheat at the Superbowl in 2014.

To be fair, I think there is room for a cultural discussion about how police intervention with black men, macho pride, and a false sense of comrade would prevent Chris Rock from pressing charges.