j swift

Donna was totally driven by maintaining her (and her family's) social status until she fell back in love with Michael. Then, by the time she was romancing Matthew, she maintained none of the same concerns. And, I'm not even talking about the recast years when she completely regressed. Her main conflict should have always been the dynamic between personal happiness and concerns about the judgment of others. Rachel and Iris faced the same daddy-issues through every relationship they encountered. Felicia was always conflicted about exposing her identity, due to a fear of rejection, both in love, her career, and with her daughter. But, Donna was a much more poorly developed character, and therefore always felt less rooted in a central dynamic. Which is a shame because she was played by such a wonderful actress.

Yes, but my point is that the 3rd hour of CBS The Morning, which has to play at 9am, would push everything back, and I doubt they'll move Price is Right from 10am, since it is so highly rated. So, last week, The Gates would've been on an hour before GH in both LA and New York, but now they will complete for the same time slot. Which seems unfortunate for a new soap.

Yes, but in New York and LA, the #1 and #2 markets, The Talk is currently on an hour earlier than GH, so they wouldn't have gone head-to-head.

I was just wondering due to the new 3rd hour of CBS Mornings in Los Angeles, if that will push The Gates back an hour, meaning it would compete against GH at 2pm. That seems unfortunate.

I'll be interested to see how this effects programming in Los Angeles. Most daytime shows in LA play an hour earlier than on the East Coast. So, Y&R is at 11:30, followed by B&B at 12:30, and The Talk at 1pm. With Let's Make a Deal at 9 (where the new 3rd hour of CBS Mornings will go) and Price is Right at 10. Given that PIR is one of the top-rated CBS daytime shows, I doubt it will move from 10am. But, I wonder what this means for DEAL, and in the future, for The Gates? If it pushes everything back an hour, The Gates will go against GH at 2pm, which seems like a bad idea.

Looking back, I wonder if part of the issue was the need to differentiate between Vicki and Paulina? They were both formerly bad girls from wealthy families. Jake and Grant were in love with both women. They were both in love with law enforcers. And they were similar aged leading women. Which creates a redundancy. So, maybe after the recasts, the writers and production played into the physical differences between the two actresses. Vicki grew into a perpetual victim plagued princess. And Paulina became a middle-class gal who was freed from avarice due to the love of a man. Because these two women are not playing the same character. Whereas, Rachel, Iris, and Felicia were recognizable no matter who wrote them, or what circumstances they faced. Note: I did not add Donna whose motives and core values changed so much over time, that she bore no resemblance to original character, except that they looked similar.

So, this feels like a fever dream, but I was looking up what happened the last time that Vivian was in town in 2023. First, she lied that she was heir to Victor's fortune, because they never divorced, then Justin outed her lie. Then she shot Dimitri, while he was pointing a gun at Stefan. And finally, she vanished before the police could arrest her. But, does anyone recall why Dimitri was trying to shoot Stefan?

Yes, courtesy of AWHP Jensen's Vicki was such a shadow of her former self during the baby switch, with all the damsel in distress stuff, that it was almost as she merged the two personalities of Marley and Vicki into one character.

From the preview, I really thought EJ was somehow going to tell her. And since she's forgiven EJ for the baby switch, it would further distance Holly from Eric and Nicole, which would explain their absence from Holly's life over time. But, I guess that's just fanfic now...

Well, one of Marley's defining characteristics were her bangs. So, how would the fans know who she was without them? 💇🏼‍♀️😉 That being said, they seemed to have dropped the premise early on that Marley spoke in breathy, falsetto tones, and Vicki was a baritone.

And, why is Finn wearing tan shoes with that outfit? 😉

While British boarding schools require multiple foreign language study, I can see your point on the lacrosse element with Tate. BTW, I wonder how many universities have lacrosse scholarships like Aaron seemed to be planning on using? In general, I want to know more about the Greene's finances. How did Mark afford med school? Do they need extra care for Felicity? Do they own their family home? It would go a long way to explain how they financed this fake Abby plan? At the very least, I'd like to know where and when fake Abby acquired her fabulous wardrobe of knit dresses and lounge wear. Like, where do they fall in the range from Party of Five to Vanderbilt heir?

Justice in Salem is once again very unpredictable. Gabi was in prison awaiting trial for Li's murder (I don't recall that she was ever indicted). But, Brady is still wearing his own clothes and visiting Tate in the police station interrogation room for a self-confessed DUI resulting in injury. Maybe they only have a woman's prison for citizens like Gabi, Kristen, and Theresa? I assume the prison where Lucas was held is still being repaired from when Steven and John broke Clyde out over the summer. How much do you want to bet if they ever SORAS Jude, that kid's not going to know a word of French? I mean weren't Chanel and Tate educated in European boarding schools? But they don't seem to speak any foreign languages (or even appear very well-cultured). And while I can imagine Nicole using google-translate, Eric seems like the proverbial old dog who couldn't learn new lingo. I'm actually going to give Holly a pass for not Googling her father's death. It is not as if anyone has mentioned him (including his mother, Maggie), in the past few years. There's no Daniel Memorial Med Center, and I don't recall if he's in the Kiriakis Tomb. Also, she was in a coma for a few months. But, was it established how Tate knows? Considering his upbringing was mostly out of town, with people who had no connection to Daniel at all. Also, were we meant to be surprised when Mark and Fake-Abby called each other “bro” and “sis”, or was I just spoiled about their relationship? And if Leo is so desperate for some man-on-man action, why doesn't he call that guy who was so eager to bed him a few weeks ago?

Then someone changed Harper Devereaux's will and tried to make Gabi the true heir; yadda yadda yadda 😉

It is an especially odd quirk given that neither gentleman goes by their full birth name 🤔

Was there a “thing” about who called her Abby, and who used Abigail? I recall EJ saying Abigail, but Chad goes back and forth.

The Greene family has an odd sense of morality (re: summer camp tuition, etc.), but I assume a Dimera is responsible for the car accident that killed their parents. So, I was racking my brain for recent car accidents. I know Xander knocked Bonnie and Kristen off the road, Jennifer knocked over Gwen, and Maggie had her accident prior to the time jump. I can't think of a Chad accident (if this is supposed to be directed at him). And I'm eager to see how Clyde plays into this whole affair.

If they are doing a six way shake up of romantic characters, I wouldn't mind if it winds up being EJ/Gabi, Chad/Stephanie, and "Abigail"/Stefan. I get the argument against Stefan and Abby, but given that this isn't Abby, I think it could be an interesting way to reform Stefan and a good obstacle for Stefan and Gabi's ultimate reunion. I also like the idea of EJ being a loser in love once more before finding his next true love. Now Brady just needs a love interest that is not his mother's age (the Ophelia-complex runs deep with that guy). That being said, do we all assume that there is no doubt that EJ and Gabi actually did the deed? Knocked boots? Bumped uglies? Played the no pants dance? I guess neither one was drunk, and they weren't under a magical drug. But, it seemed so odd that neither of them had a clear recollection of the night before. For example, why did EJ need to check if he wasn't wearing pants? I predict that Thomas will believe that this is Abby, but Charlotte's no pushover for a pretty face. She'll see right through her, just like her grandmother. 😉

For a mcguffin, not only was the red swan way too literal, but it was ugly, and easily solved as having a secret drawer. I just think given the amount of time talking about it, there could've been a more interesting story establishing why the tchotchke was chosen. I've forgotten if it was destroyed, but it certainly was never used as a significant piece of set decor, like a portrait, or one of Rachel's busts.

Don't make me break my promise, but, I'm certain someone will mention that Lucci, Hall, or Slezak may have made more than their male co-star. However, I think you could count those women on one hand, and it doesn't mean that they were given equal privileges.

Lastly (I promise), I feel it is the lack of concession of that privilege that makes certain actors seem unprofessional, arrogant, or just plain bratty.

Most men in daytime owe their career to their on-screen romantic partner. And I was moved by Arianne Zucker's statement that when she was asked to take a paycut, none of her male co-stars voiced their support. Also, I don't think it is a huge stretch of the imagination that KM or MM might have been more willing to sign a contract if they didn't see their female peers being asked to accept less money. Especially because KM signed a contract with another network. So, just once, I want to hear some actor acknowledge the sacrifices that their co-stars have made. As well as the privileges that allow them to be more concerned about the direction of their character, rather than whether they'll be disrespected the next time they renegotiate their contract.

I am simply struck by the discourse encouraging actors to spill tea on creative issues, while ignoring what I perceive as the more pressing issues of inequity within production. The creative concerns may be intriguing, but the treatment of women is a great concern for me. Even though I agree with your point that it may not always be realistic to mention it in every interview.

I feel a bit nuts, because it seems like my point keeps getting distorted. Professionalism aside, I am responding to the ongoing issue that actors are willing to express their distaste over creative aspects of the show, while never speaking out on the pay disparity and harassment of their female co-workers. For example, Billy Flynn laments the lack of focus on Chad and Abby, but never speaks to the perceived inequity behind the scenes that may have led to the resignation of both actresses who played the part. When almost every leading actress of a certain age quits or is fired, that is an issue that goes beyond the creative choices of the headwriter. It is just that simple. Meanwhile, I still can't believe that they are going to shoot the soap in the pub. And furthermore, I would argue that Carson Boatman currently has the cutest tush in daytime 9.8/10.

Obviously, my actual point was in opposition to actors choosing only to speak out about creative issues, while remaining mum on the professional issues facing their female co-stars. Because it is ridiculous to be more offended about the fictional Body & Soul, than the allegation that only women have been asked to take a pay cut. @AbcNbc247, arguably, Suzanne Rogers was speaking out against the Scabs, because Maggie smartened up to Konstantin as soon as Ron returned.