Vee

Same, gurl

Every time AOC does something well - and I think she has learned a lot - she trips over herself getting behind dumb shít like this again. I am grateful for the advocacy some of these folks pushed on the eviction moratorium but I don't forget dumb mistakes like getting behind Turner because you're afraid of what angry white brogressives will say.

I don't think there's a problem using the Santoses if you do it carefully. Sadly, most modern primetime soaps on network don't have a sense of pacing or know how to make people wait or build characters. They're so desperate to chase sweeps or the streamers and they burn out quick.

I think Disney/ABC may do it eventually. Sadly I think it may come too late for the cancelled brands, or I fear Pine Valley will follow the same mold of most modern primetime soaps - rushed, trying too hard and poorly plotted and paced, then burning out in a season or two. I hope I'm wrong.

I agree with that. But as I said, I do think the time has come for a similar structure.

The Beltway loves to cast the most unelectable people like Turner as 'the new progressive voices' even when they know better, because it is a better sub-narrative for them to be able to pivot back to Dems in Disarray. (Hence why grinning clown Brian Stelter hosts a CNN panel of 'the new progressives' - made up of pro-life Liz Bruenig, walking midlife crisis Dave Weigel and Briahna Joy Gray.) Nina Turner is not the face of progressive Democrats or the left, but DC wants her to be because it fits their preferred arc. The story of progressivism and progressive voters in the country, as well as in the party, most of whom are center-left, is much more nuanced and much more complex than "can one grifter (Turner) who burned literally every bridge known to man get nominated by disinterested Democrats?" It's much less rewarding to the center-right Beltway to look at, say, the eviction moratorium activism which helped break a logjam with bureaucracy in the WH, or the House fight re: the reconciliation package or voting rights. Because the truth is the Beltway is not happy when progressives in office win fights. Or take office at all. And yes, I think some of those same folks who've been doing good lately re: the above were very stupid to stump for Turner. Her background is not that old. But anyway - good riddance. Maybe guys like Will Stancil will have a rage embolism.

What on Earth is wrong with chest hair?

Lukas Gage was great in the Hulu gay slasher film Midnight Kiss - that was way better than I'd expected and one of very few queer horror films that genuinely felt completely comfortable in its own language and style without looking and feeling like it was made for $8. I'm glad he's doing well. Murray Bartlett has morphed into the go-to gay daddy since GL. I remember the rumors that a certain someone tried to land him too in the final years there and got rebuffed, then quit. Talk about barking up the wrong tree.

I've said it many times, but Linda Gottlieb was more than a little ahead of her time at OLTL in 1991. She got clowned by press and some of the cast for attempting seasonal arcs of 4-6 weeks or whatever early on (the domestic abuser story with Craig Wasson and his wife in fall '91, where Viki and Megan got taken hostage, etc), and that specific structure might have been off for the time. But they were also still threading new characters and long-term storylines into those short episodic arcs; Luna and Andrew being introduced and carrying torches for Max and Megan, Megan's lupus, etc. And when you look at the structure of her show later, the big arcs (Billy, Marty's rape, etc) did have a seasonal-arc feel to aspects of them. Either way, the time has come for streaming soaps to follow a more regimented format. You can air-drop, say, 6-8 weeks of weekly half-hour episodes (or just 3-4 days a week like the British soaps, I don't care) and call that a seasonal arc and structure stories around that seasonal format, while threading long-term stories, couples, triangles, etc. within that framework. Take several months' breaks between seasons. DAYS could certainly do that, and is more likely to be able to get people like Eileen, Lisa, etc. to come in and do recurring or semi-regular appearances depending on how they block-tape for that show. The same way the Hulu soaps were handling things with Roger Howarth, and probably would've continued to do so with Eden Riegel or whoever else.

If this is a pilot program for moving online, they'll need to do more episodes than five and invest in new creative talent. But that's down the road. It is promising for DAYS.

It would probably come from above, not inside the soaps.

I do think it's tacky to the recast to have Eileen play Kristen if Haiduk is still taping on network at the same time. However, if she's out then by all means. Haiduk's very talented but there will never be a real replacement for Eileen.

I still don't know who this dude is.

Stacey Haiduk did her best with thankless material and an impossible recast, but thank God. I would hope it's permanent though, because using Eileen on the streaming series if Haiduk is still taping as Kristen would be beyond poor taste.

I'd forgotten that Jenna Coleman is playing a gender-swapped Constantine in the new Sandman series, and I hadn't seen it posted:

Oh, that's hilarious. I remember the endless lampooning of Brooke online at the time (which was extremely merited, IMO) but not that. I also remember the entire town seemingly rushing to perjure and incriminate themselves during the Jim saga in comic fashion which was ridiculous to me.

Exactly. Every story she had was bad by the time I came around. I didn't buy her with Pierce or various other hunks, but I also barely remember Pierce at all. I was not there for her heyday with Adam, etc. And it took her return in the late 2000s for me to fully get the scope of her skills. She was great when she returned, and she was great as a tentpole of the show in 2013 with that family and with Michael Nader.

I just remember being annoyed by Lauren Roman, period. I thought Brooke's storylines were embarrassing and forced for most of the '90s, but granted I started in the early '90s. I just often felt she was past it and they were trying too hard, but it was the stories that sucked above all. I didn't fully appreciate Brooke until she was gone, and when they did bring her back and put her with Adam it was clearly where she needed to be to fully click again, and she was great. (The same was true in 2013 with her mixing with the Chandlers and Dimitri)

And people will keep excusing it because they like Gabi. It's not the first time she's done dumb shít.

What a shame. He was great.

I just don't think there was ever much to Hayden beyond Budig bringing her typical soap persona to GH. She's Liz's illegitimate sister, big whoop. You can get Gina Tognoni to play Dr. Sarah and do something far more intriguing. People love Budig so they project all sorts of stuff onto the Hayden character when IMO there was never much there. I like Budig but I just don't feel there's much to hang the hat on. I agree with this, though I felt the story was very well done despite the flaws.

I don't fault Cameron Mathison, who I have nothing against. The writing is what failed him in the later years at AMC, and IMO he's wrong for Drew but that's on GH.

I still remember her terrible performance as a drunk with Leo. It was painful. But the early stuff with Bianca, I thought, was good. The rest was a mess, including her bitch phase.

I don't remember people loathing Laura until the Leo mess. But that's me. I sincerely doubt that, lol. Cameron has never been anything but complimentary about the Gillian years. People let their hatred of his character bleed through too much.