Vee

Steve talks about the final scenes they shared, which @DRW50 mentioned.

I've seen Karyn Kusama's The Invitation and it's excellent. I remember Tammy being in it but not Jordi.

Monty. This sequence lives in my subconscious at all times.

Yep. It was more than a theory though, there was something there and it was probably the brother angle. I don't really know how that would've made Miles (already a convoluted, ludicrous character c/o Higley) more relevant but I was open to it. I originally thought in '08 that they would use Andrea and Tina going forward to cover Erika's vacations, which I thought was a smart idea. Unfortunately it didn't happen. I think Tina's story was a mess that year, but I can see elements of it potentially being hamstrung for the reasons rumored re: mandates. And I did think Andrea had wonderful chemistry with everyone including Christopher Cousins, who she'd never shared key story with. They had a surprisingly tender final scene together after having a roll in the hay in November.

I should add since I recently revisited those scenes: I adored the Addie Cramer rehabilitation storyline in '07/'08, and all her subsequent appearances. It was such a wonderful, unexpected surprise at the time. I was as floored as her family, and they just kept going with her painting the town red. My understanding is they had bigger plans for Addie pre-strike, namely allegedly revealing that Miles Laurence was actually somehow Blair's brother (a character I would've liked to see introduced myself, but very differently) - I think there was maybe one scene that did air or spoiled bit that didn't make it to air in early '08, where Addie had some flash of recognition re: Miles. But none of that got followed up when the strike hit. There were rumors in recent times that Frons hated the show bringing back Andrea Evans that same year, as he found her 'too old' and supposedly insisted Tina's storyline be couched around the youth set at all times and then cut short. He was still a micromanager in that era and I could believe it, as her exit was abrupt and didn't seem at the time like something the show was pleased to do in her final episodes that year. So I can believe that he might've pushed back on further major story for Addie and Pamela Payton-Wright, who was even older. But however silly her little stories got (like the fling with David), I was happy for them even when I wanted more, and happier still that Addie never regressed into her illness. And I was thrilled she appeared in the penultimate network episode with the rest of the Cramers. I miss characters and flourishes like hers a lot. This is a scene I never forgot, just before the strike (timestamped below) and one of the best the show did in its final era.

There's a lot of B&B/Bell similarities in the show, but to me a villain like Leslie being tied into the core isn't one of them. It's classic soap operating procedure.

And set the attic on fire!

I'm just amazed they reunited Kat and Alfie again after the hatchet job done to them a few years back. I don't know when it was when they had him come back for a stint while they were broken up and Kat just totally emasculated him in their scenes and unraveled how pathetic she found him, I thought there was no going back. Good for them, I guess.

I don't find any of the Hawthornes (including Jacob's father, Evil Overton) terribly compelling, but I do think another family does need to be built up.

No, that's Jenny Eckert. I believe Tracy is close to the stage on the opposite side of Robert and Anna. You don't need to repost the link each time.

Nor should they have introduced him yet IMO. The many mentions of him and how dark a presence he was have already built the character up a bit. That too is Soap Opera 101. That's the kind of character you unveil in sweeps or something.

I don't think that's 'rewarding' anything. Soap opera has a certain structure. If Leslie is going to have longevity for the future to continue, she needs essential ties. Barbara does that for the character and was likely planned from the beginning. It's also been less than a year on the air, so I don't think we can really say Leslie/Dana will never pay for anything. We're not dealing with any B&B characters here.

It worked in '94! The fact is GH, like too many soaps, has relied on baby stories to fill time and evade more controversial or risky material in the last decade-plus, and it's turned the show into something similar (but not quite as dire) as Ellen Wheeler's Mormon commune on Guiding Light. And yes, they have far too many to ever deal with and it's caused a massive traffic jam across the generational canvas. So some have to die, and many have to disappear for a decade. I'd only keep a few actual small children around to be seen on a recurring basis - maybe James or Wiley (name TBD). Aiden would be only a recurring teen for now, Georgie would be aged up very slightly to be active for the current teen scene and Jake would also be in play again. And then you'd bring on some actual new, unconnected young people who aren't actively aging up and dragging down the current contract cast. That's it!

I can't believe you've brought this back. IIRC Tristan and Finola's priceless attempt at staying straightfaced in the reaction shots was my avatar for awhile.

I think they're holding Dante Green back for a reason. By the time he hits town (assuming he does) he will have assumed that importance.

You don't have to kill them off next month! But I'd def kill one or two in the next few years, and offload the rest for ages to come.

Sure they should! Early and often.

Yeah, I don't see any point in bringing back Gina or Stone II, etc. in any real way. They're not exactly thrilling characters. The only way I'd consider it is to let Stone appear briefly to create pathos re: Wagger's murder, as part of a story where Sonny finally gets some form of takedown. He can show up and give a statement to the court or cops or something lol. Beyond that, who cares? I think both those unnecessary kids are disposable at best but I would kill off Donna to help break Carly down again. Wiley needs a new name - any new name - and a recast, obviously. And then to be rarely seen or heard for years. Amelia is just another of many of these children who should not exist, not that Wiley needed to.

Or they had the Barbara reveal in the chamber for Leslie all along. Which I think is far more likely.

Sooner or later they are casting Dante Green and he will likely be the show's first big bad. I can't wait tbh.

I don't think everything works, but I also haven't finished off the storyline so I don't want to judge - I do think there is a good point in not exploring it through randos we just met who everyone cottons onto and wants to help. Patricia Elliott (Renee) once said it should've been done using Asa/Renee and frankly the setup is there given how ugly their domestic situation has gotten in this period, but I don't think the audience would ever have forgiven Asa for battering Renee. Also, honestly I think some kind of episodic element is the only way forward for a streaming generation of new/old soaps - short-term arcs that tie into the larger, longer ongoing ones in a seasonal format, with filming breaks a la Port Charles ten years later. So I do think Gottlieb was ahead of her time, but I am not going to co-sign the Doug Ebert arc just yet.

I agree Vernon being Leslie's father would've been perfect if almost every man on the show wasn't a cheater lol. I would keep it to just Barbara.

Watching through October '91 continues to have some really interesting stuff - namely, playing the Joey/Stephanie angle however briefly which I suspected they might try. Chris McKenna is considerably, awkwardly younger than Robyn Griggs and Kevin calls attention to it just as others do his relationship with 'older woman' Lee Ann, but the brother conflict as well as Stephanie turning spoiled viper on Lee Ann in the Palace ladies' room makes me wonder again if they were considering at this point really making a go of it with Stephanie in some way. She did have heat with Jason, and Griggs is much more suited to the bitchy, spiky stuff tormenting Lee Ann. I would assume her long-rumored BTS behavior on daytime is what contributed to dumping her, but I'm not sure of when or why. Drunk Asa roaring through the teen social to shame working class Lee Ann is great, campy stuff, very of a piece with the show's roots - heavy-handed and operatic, sure, but it's about going back to the show having a class/caste system again after many years. Malone would revisit this kind of social shaming or public freakout again and again over the years, all the way to Jen Rappaport having a meltdown following her father's death in early 2003 at a Llanview U college party and raging at people. And generally it worked, except when they tried to reskin Jen as Marty for the 2000s. A great bit here with Renee who recognizes her own past in Lee Ann: "I'm not standing up for you. I'm standing up for me. I am you." I think @DRW50 has commented on the sly touch of Mia Korf's Blair arriving dressed like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm and playing up a submissive Asian stereotype for everyone. It's very smart. I missed the Banner city room and its staff interacting with Viki, Clint, Cassie, etc. long after it was gone - seeing at least a hint of the Banner offices in 2013, even confined to Viki's space where single mom Destiny was in the mailroom or whatever, thrilled me lol. Viki really has control of this staff BTW, which is cool to see after so long. Alex straight-up killing Fred Porter and a Canadian mountie(?) to cover her tracks in the Sarah conspiracy is a good reminder of how dangerous she was. They leaned into the more broad comedy later to keep her around and it generally worked out because she was still nuts and consistently aligned with bad people, but I wish we'd seen more of the truly dangerous Alex in her later years. You can't really see the Alex who got outplayed by Bo, Cutter, Kim, etc. here. Megan taking Erin Torpey's Jessica out for ice cream to spoil themselves so she can deal with the 'confirmation' of Sarah's death was great stuff, played lighter after her heartbreak in the right way - she just sort of gets on with it. Those bonds were so strong in these years, all throughout much of the '90s IMO. I especially loved Jessica Tuck's screwball stuff with McKenna and Joey Thrower a couple months prior to this, a bright spot in some very bad story with Kevin/Stephanie in the late summer. Wanda is so warm and loving with so much of the cast, including little Jess who she's known since Jessica was born. I've always loved Marilyn Chris but seeing her day to day again going through the latter half of '91 reminds me of how great she was. You would really need someone like Kathy Brier's Marcie or Roxy or whoever (or both!) to fill that role today. The infamous Doug and Jane Ebert domestic abuse vignette first appears at Wanda's on 10/15-16 (dates may be off on the videos), with the great, chameleonic Craig Wasson from Brian De Palma's Body Double and the very creepy film adaptation of Peter Straub's Ghost Story as Doug. I was always stunned to realize they got him for this, but his career was not exactly A-List. I do wonder what happened to him. So far I don't think the show is nearly as islanded to episodic story as people have always claimed it was in this period - yes, the abuse story, like Wanda's medical crisis and Sheila putting herself on the line for women's health in September, are short-term message arcs, but they are still vignettes playing alongside the larger, long-form storylines - Kevin and Lee Ann and the rising Buchanan family drama, Bo and Cassie haunted by Sarah with Alex on the rampage, Megan tempted by Heinrich/Cain (they make out a lot more than I expected) while Jake is imprisoned in Jaba and being tortured by dominatrix Ilsa(!), Luna's introduction, Blair's introduction, Jason's secrets (illiteracy) and Dorian being tempted by him, etc. Those stories IMO still follow classical daytime structure. And that's the kind of stuff you'd have to do today, I think - long-form story playing alongside or under the short-term arcs, and informing it or vice versa. Next up: Max feels like his old self again.

I do think people are right that Val Jean learned some of the wrong lessons from working at B&B. I thought that very early on this year and I think I talked about it then. And to a point, I get how it happened and why she's adopted a lot of that house style: B&B and the Bell soaps are a dependable workhorse with a very, very loyal audience that has served them well even as their quality went south. You can see the stylistic similarities to B&B or older Y&R (and the differences from her GH) quite easily, and the even earlier classical Bill Bell, Irna Phillips-style expository dialogue or family material. As I've said for months, BTG, even when it's not great, is a really fascinating mix of both very old school soap opera foundation work and fundamentals and very blunt and earnest social issue educational stuff as well as some very edgy or contemporary topics or dialogue (sometimes overripe or tryhard, sometimes good) a la the Prospect Park soaps. It's a bit like time travel in that way. I think it has a lot of good things and a lot of issues. I do think it needs to find a fresher and more consistent and coherent voice, and to mix stronger veteran dialogue staff with its existing ones. I think it needs to go back into the GH writers' corps MVJ came up with, and move away from the B&B house style. (And I think some stuff, particularly with Vanessa going full crime moll, has been pretty good and also pretty redolent of GH.) But I can't argue that that style does not have an audience, or that the heavy audience engagement and interest is not already there online. It's been serving them well both in numbers and on social media.

I think they clearly have Dante Green waiting in the wings.