JarrodMFiresofLove

15 hours ago, j swift said:

OK, but did Theresa Rebecca (or Regina) run away or was she kidnapped because I still don't understand why her father didn't recognize her?

I guess it depends on what age TR was when she left the Kendall home. I assumed she had been kidnapped. If she was just a small child, she would have changed a lot physically by the time she was 16 when she crossed paths with Lloyd again. 

I always thought the runaway part occurred after she ran away from her second set of parents (the Hawkins), before she met Liza & Travis. I could be mistaken on this. In the family therapy episode that aired in June 1985, she says that Mr. Hawkins died...so maybe that is how she wound up on the streets prior to living with the Sentells.

If she had been kidnapped as a small child, how would she have remembered the Kendalls and known she could go back to them?

20 hours ago, antmunoz said:

And wasn’t Martin revealed to have been the father of Steve, thus making only Michael, Alec, Chase and Rebecca full siblings?

 

Even TR’s name—The Runaway, morphed into Theresa Regina, yet born Rebecca Kendall. Estelle is calling her Theresa, not Rebecca, at the end of the series. 

I don't think her name was ever Theresa Regina. It was Theresa Rebecca. Lloyd called her Rebecca, and Estelle called her Theresa. Everyone else (Travis, Liza, Stu, Danny & Ryder) called her TR.

2 hours ago, antmunoz said:

Well, the story, or backstory, of Lloyd and Estelle was rewritten constantly. Estelle was initially named Joanna, when she was an offscreen character whom the newly introduced Lloyd was in the process of divorcing.  Far from “dead.”

The backstory for Matt McCleary was also a bit murky, until he finally showed up on screen in 1986.

20 hours ago, Chris 2 said:

IIRC, they switched Lizas in the middle of a Search “day”. So it wasn’t like Liza one day woke up with a different face. Instead, Louan Gideon showed up wearing Sherry Mathis’ wardrobe from the previous episode, because both episodes took place on the same day.

That's correct. Liza (played by Sherry Mathis) received an urgent call from Lloyd (Joe Lambie) who was at the airport and said she was needed at once. Thinking something happened to TR, she left a conversation with Hogan (David Forsyth) and hopped into her Rolls Royce and took off. That was the last time we saw Sherry Mathis on the show. Episode 8748 broadcast on Wednesday July 3, 1985.

At the top of the next episode (Episode 8749 broadcast on Thursday July 4, 1985) the action started inside Lloyd's private jet. It was a short time later, however long it took for Liza to drive to the airfield. Liza (now played by Louan Gideon, wearing the same style of clothing that Sherry Mathis wore in the previous episode) arrived and stepped in to the jet, asking Lloyd what was so urgent. He closed the door and told her he was "kidnapping" her. He was whisking her off to Burgundy, France for a little vacation. That's how Louan Gideon started on the show, and she remained until the very last episode a year and a half later.

10 minutes ago, Soaplovers said:

Would it have been better to have rested the character of Liza for a bit instead of quickly recasting?  Sherry Mathis seemed so identified with the role that anyone stepping in would have struggled..imho.

It was a bit jarring to go from 36 year old Sherry Mathis one day to 29 year old Louan Gideon the following day. But I think they had to find a quick replacement because they were in the middle of a huge quadrangle with Liza-Lloyd-Sunny-Hogan. If they had written Liza out for awhile, then the other three main characters would have stood around with nothing to do.

Louan Gideon's first two weeks had her working exclusively with Joe Lambie because Lloyd had whisked Liza away on his private jet to Burgundy, France. So in a way, that probably made her transition into the role a bit easier since she wasn't having to interact with the rest of the cast immediately.

9 minutes ago, j swift said:

I was a very casual SFT viewer. I watched the live episode, the flood, and final weeks just because of the hype.

 

My questions are about TR:  Was she kidnapped and then ran away?.  Because it never made sense to me why Lloyd wouldn't recognize her at first sight.  How old was she supposed to be during the circus story (why wasn't she in school)?  Did all of her other siblings share the same parents?  Didn't Estelle live in Europe?  Was she present to raise Lloyd's other kids?  Did any of Lloyd's kids work in his company?

The circus story began in late May/early June and ran through the summer. So TR was not supposed to be in school during that time. Ryder's family owned the circus so he probably received most of his "education" on the road. Danny was a bit older than TR and Ryder and I think he was supposed to have just finished high school. TR and Ryder were around 16 and Danny was about 18 at this point.

Re: Estelle, there was an episode from June 1985 I watched where the Sentells and Kendalls are in a family therapy session with TR. TR talks about losing people she was close to, such as Travis and a guy named Sailor whose dead body she found. In one of those therapy scenes she mentions losing her mother, implying her mother (Estelle) is dead.

So I am not sure if Lloyd had lied about Estelle being dead, or if the writers intended for Estelle to really be dead and then retconned that part later on. When Estelle comes to Henderson in November 1985 she is said to have recently been living in the fictional country of San Marcos, located in the Caribbean. San Marcos is also where Martin Tourneur went to run a casino, when he left Henderson in October 1984.

2 minutes ago, victoria foxton said:

I've seen very little of Avila Mayer/Braxton's run. I do like their character driven approach. TR's therapy session blew away. I agree with you about Suzy & Cagney. After Warren they became supporting characters. Until Suzy's death by Ella Hobbs. Are the episodes with Maureen O'Sullivan online?

I don't think they're online. A YouTube poster named Chuck Snitchler told me he is going to start posting all the episodes that were on AOL (October 5, 1984 up to January 13, 1986). But it may take him awhile.

I bought all these episodes from an online vendor a few years ago. Recently I wanted to revisit how Sherry Matthis handed the role of Liza to Louan Gideon, so I started with July 1, 1985. Sherry Mathis' last appearance is on July 3 and Louan Gideon takes over on July 4. 

Currently I am going through all of July 85. I've been adding plot summaries on the IMDb, because the previous person (Skip Eastport) stopped doing them around Sherry's last episode. 

The episodes I have are on DVD. I don't know how to digitalize them and put them on YT, but Chuck Snitchler is going to do that with his copies anyway.

I think Mayer & Braxton should have given Suzi & Cagney a medical story after their wedding. I would have had Jonah get a disease, like childhood diabetes or leukemia, something serious but treatable. This would have also given Kate and Jo more to do.

Back to Maureen O'Sullivan...she plays Lloyd's Grandmere Elaine Descot in two episodes-- 

8751 broadcast on Monday July 8, 1985

Lloyd introduces Liza to his Grandmere Elaine Descot, who tells Liza about Lloyd's hardships; the real knife barely misses TR during a circus act; Oscar feigns innocence over the matter; Sunny offers suggestions to a troubled Hogan.

8753 broadcast on Wednesday July 10, 1985

Liza wakes up next to Lloyd and envisions Hogan; Sunny surprises Hogan; Stephanie apologizes to Quinn and asks Chase to find a job for him; Suzi and Cagney have finished moving to their own place; Liza tells Grandmere she loves two men.

8 minutes ago, victoria foxton said:

@JarrodFiresofLove  @JarrodMFiresofLove Welcome back!

THANKS. 

I love the conversations you all have been having.

Currently I have been re-watching episodes from July 1985 and have gained a new appreciation of Paul Avila Mayer & Stephanie Braxton's writing. Though I do think they rely too much on triangles (Sarah-Quinn-Wendy, Ryder-TR-Danny) and quadrangles (Liza-Hogan-Sunny-Lloyd). Plus it annoys me they didn't do much with Cagney & Suzi who are no longer in a quadrangle with Warren dead and Justine gone.

I know it may not be a popular opinion, but I am enjoying all the silly circus stuff. Danger at every turn. TR's life in danger every five minutes!

I really loved Maureen O'Sullivan's guest role as Lloyd's Grandmere Elaine in the episodes where Lloyd whisked Liza off to France. The sets for the chateau were amazing. This show still had a good budget and a lot of creative aspects in 1985.

2 hours ago, Franko said:

It's funny you mentioned this, @JarrodFiresofLove, because prior to the interruption of "new" episodes, I had been thinking about how many more preemptions THE DOCTORS would have from 1980-82.

 

I'm amused that NBC seemed to stagger its holiday preemptions in the '80s. They alternated if new episodes aired on Thanksgiving*, always aired on Christmas** and always took New Year's Day or therabouts off.

*Annual Thanksgiving preemptions of DAYS were common in the '90s.

**In later years, SANTA BARBARA would take both Thanksgiving (1988-1992) and Christmas (1990-1992) off in addition to New Year's Day.

Yes, there doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason with regards to the way the holiday pre-emptions were scheduled by NBC.

ALL the soaps were pre-empted the day the Challenger explosion occurred. I remember this vividly because my sister and I were both home sick from school that day with the flu. 

We were having some chicken soup, and turned on the TV in anticipation of the first soap we usually watched. The launching of Challenger was on screen. We were watching it live, thinking that as soon as it ended, regular daytime programming would get underway.

We were shocked to see it just explode. The whole rest of the morning and afternoon was devoted to replays of the tragedy as well as endless commentary. None of the regular daytime programming took place as a result of this. Everything was pre-empted that day.

11 hours ago, Franko said:

Looking at all these dates, I see SEARCH had scheduled/likely preemptions on

Thursday, Nov. 24, 1983 (Thanksgiving)

Monday, Jan. 2, 1984 (New Year's)

(Possibly on Tuesday, Aug. 21, 1984)

Tuesday, Jan. 1, 1985 (New Year's)

Monday, Jan. 21, 1985 (Reagan)

Thursday, Nov. 28, 1985 (Thanksgiving)

Wednesday, Jan. 1, 1986 (New Year's)

Tuesday, Jan. 28, 1986 (Challenger)

(Possibly on Friday, July 4, 1986)

 

Of Note:

Only ABC aired soaps on Thanksgiving 1983, "New Year's" 1984, New Year's 1985, Thanksgiving 1985 and New Year's 1986.

Thanks Franko for the detailed reply. The reason I asked is because I wanted to start adding the rest of the episode pages for Search on the IMDb, but wanted to make sure that I factored in the pre-emptions.

Currently on the IMDb, there is a page for January 21, 1985, which I assume someone created based on the date given for the episode that was uploaded on AOL. However, January 22, 1985 was listed as a missing episode on AOL and given the next episode number. So what I think happened is there was no broadcast on the 21st due to the Reagan inauguration, and that episode aired on the 22nd instead. If true, then this means that episode really has two different numbers...because we have to jump ahead to the next number to get back on track on the 23rd.

When they say there were 9130 episodes on wiki, I doubt there were really 9130 actual episodes since some episodes were probably double-numbered. 

I am sure that if I go by the pre-emptions you outlined above, and I add all the episodes pages from September 1985 through December 1986, I will be shy of 9130 due to the occasional double-numbering. It's going to be an imperfect science.

Hey everyone...I was wondering about the show's pre-emptions. Has this been discussed before?

Jason47's site lists the pre-emptions for Days of Our Lives in the 1980s. 

Can we assume that every time Days was pre-empted (due to holiday, sports, inaugurations, etc.) the other NBC soaps were also pre-empted....including Another World, Santa Barbara and Search for Tomorrow?

On 11/29/2018 at 6:47 PM, InLoveWithSoaps said:

In Italy no less. Did Reva have amnesia twice is what I don't get. When they brought her back in the mid-90's, were the Amish years established as all that had happened to her? How could they introduce the San Cristobel backstory years later and make it fit. It's just weird.
I thought it was such a missed opportunity never to bring on Marissa, Olivia's sister and Jon's adoptive mom, in the mid-00's. Instead they killed her off. There could have been a good rivalry with Reva over their son and an interesting relationship with Olivia, maybe an affair with Josh down the line.
I always thought anyway Olivia could have become Roxie before she appeared on air, with a mystery as to how she ended up in SC. And I thought Crystal C. would have fit the role well. Then again I also felt the looking for Reva's long-lost sister could easily have been reworked into looking for Roxie who would have escaped the mental institution. And if Reva just had to have a surprise sibling, wouldn't it have made far more sense for it to be deserter Hawk's kid rather than Sarah's?

One thing that always seemed fuzzy to me was how did she get from Florida to Italy to San Christobel to Goshen? All that traveling and she never saw fit to go back to Springfield to see Josh, Marah or Shayne? It seemed like different headwriters came up with different versions of where she had been during that five year period when she was off screen (1990 to 1995). And if you try to put it all together and make a coherent timeline of it, it's nearly impossible.

I did love the whole San Christobel arc, so that's the version I choose to go with, even though there are holes in some of that. I like to think that when the car went off the bridge in Florida, some fisherman must have found her in the water and took her to San Christobel. Still we were never told how she actually met Richard and became Princess Catherine.

2 hours ago, Vee said:

This board has discussed the issues of racism in daytime and entertainment since its inception years ago, Jarrod - and many of us are not black. We just have no problem discussing these issues. We are definitely not going to stop for you, so you may as well accept that. You're one of the most wildly ignorant and nasty posters we've ever had. It's no wonder you've apparently been banned virtually everywhere else you've been.

 

 

This is going in the sig!

There are quite a few soap related sites and blogs I post on. So I'm hardly banned everywhere. Putting one of my comments in the sig means anytime you post, your readers will be forced to think of me. So you are doing a form of advertising for me. You should liberate yourself from that. Don't waste your energy reflecting someone else you don't like. Your life and your time are too valuable for me to control even one moment of it.

26 minutes ago, Juliajms said:

That's better. I like how you got your point of view across without being rude this time. Good job.

1 hour ago, Franko said:

Boy, just imagine being an ATWT fan who also takes in NYC theater. Seeing "Lisa" one day, then being surprised to catch Eileen in VIRGINIA WOOLF by day and THE FANTASTICKS at night.

 

Not long ago I watched an old episode of the early 60s TV drama Naked City. She had a guest role on it. It would have been filmed right before she was cast on ATWT. She was quite good in it. She's probably someone who could have had a successful career on primetime if she hadn't become so identified with playing Lisa and typecast as a daytime actress.

Just now, vetsoapfan said:

 

My name it's German.

 

It's Getta.

 

Getta Grippe.

 

I trust this soothes you.

 

Still hiding. Come out of the closet and tell us your name, so we can get a sense you are legit. Otherwise it's a childish game, where nothing said can be deemed to have any value. Why are you allowing me this power? If you had just said "Hi I am Mike" and tried to be civil, even if your name was something else, that would have been a positive step forward. But instead you are choosing to convey to us that you have no manners. Ultimately you're just a made up name on the internet who means nothing. Why would you allow yourself to mean nothing? I don't get that at all.

1 minute ago, vetsoapfan said:

 

Oh, the fun I could have with THAT projectile comment.

 

But I shall refrain.

 

I'm kind like that. 

 

Still not telling others what your first name is. Seems strange to me. Maybe that gives you a false sense of power over others, I don't know.

Just now, EricMontreal22 said:

Maybe that's true.  But is it a good idea to use inflammatory words, words that make you, frankly, look like a Neo-Nazi in a public forum?  I mean sure you say you don't care what people here think of you, but surely you actually care enough about soaps to want your thoughts on them to be communicated without someone reading a post of yours and only thinking Nazi.  *shrug*

You're trying to label me as a Nazi, which seems just as bad as a black person calling a white person a racist who is not one. I sent you a private message where I had said I found your comments and approach disappointing, and it saddens me to think you are still not realizing how disappointing your approach is. Don't you want to learn and grow as a human being? Why are you being dragged into the gutter with me, because you are letting others with issues of their own, pull you down to a level that is way beneath you. That's what we should shrug about.

Just now, Juliajms said:

Maybe because you are a POS Nazi.  You made that very clear. You deserve nothing but dirt from the people on this board.  I knew you would show your true colors eventually. Loser trolls always do. Enjoy the attention because eventually the mods will come along and delete you.

Now we've reached the part of the show where you really want fight with a stranger on the internet. Let me grab some more popcorn.

I think you are using me to get attention. Those would be your true colors. Yes?

1 minute ago, vetsoapfan said:

 

Ahhh, so "FiresofLove" is an actual surname. Who knew? 

 

I notice you're still not volunteering your first name like I have. You're hiding. Why?

Just now, EricMontreal22 said:

Odd isn't it?  I don't seem to have that issue with anyone else on here. 

You're trying to agitate again. Stop wasting your time. Please get back to discussing soaps. Thank you.

Just now, Paul Raven said:

I got the sense from what Ruth wrote was that the GL role was hers from the outset but Irna (in her usual fashion) wanted things her way.

 

So her first day as an anonymous nurse became Nurse Janet Johnson in the following episodes.

 

As posted, many other actresses were finding movie roles hard to come by and accepted TV roles in NY as Ruth had done. It was just that Ruth had that connection with P&G that the soap role happened.

Her financial situation was a factor at the time. Maybe other actresses had made more money and could be choosier with roles.

Totally agree with your first paragraph. That's how I interpret it, not the way the other poster working on some research project keeps trying to spin it.

It was a power thing for Irna to show she was boss, she was in control. The role expanded after the first appearance. Ruth's movie appearance were sporadic in the early 50s. If she was accustomed to maintaining a certain lifestyle and had bills to pay, then she had to turn to TV to find work. Or else go into another sort of non-acting job.

4 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

She was given a contract role.  That's a fact.  She wasn't a day player.

I appreciate your instructions!  Honestly, this is kinda hysterical and has brightened up my day, so I guess thanks!

Now you're back to rude mode. Well actually you never left that mode, did you? You really don't seem to be able to communicate properly with me. Why is that?

And you keep showing others how argumentative you are. Like fighting over Ruth Warrick is going to bring you some great glory. It's quite odd to say the least. But carry on, if you must!

1 minute ago, vetsoapfan said:

 

Do you get a tingly feeling when posting stuff like that?

Why are you using that sort of screen name and not using your real given name? I can't really take a person seriously who posts anonymously on a message board. Maybe if you came out of hiding, your comments would seem a bit more legit, just a thought.

I think there are some very unknowledgable people on this board. According to Google the word Aryan means

relating to or denoting a people speaking an Indo-European language who invaded northern India in the 2nd millennium BC, displacing the Dravidian and other aboriginal peoples.

And that is how I intended it, when I suggested instead of discussing racism on soaps we could just as easily discuss stories that play up the positive aspects of the European American culture.

But some very questionable comments followed by folks who did not exhibit good manners. They went out of their way to call me a Nazi. Maybe those people need to be banned? I think an actual Nazi would have been much harsher than any of my intellectual comments were. Just saying.

2 minutes ago, Khan said:

For the love of God, would someone -- Errol, Toups, someone -- please fix the damn Ignore Users feature?  And if you can't do that, then just do us all a favor and ban this sanctimonious Nazi [!@#$%^&*]?

You're a hoot. Good comedy. Keep it coming!

3 minutes ago, Khan said:

 

Tell whoever writes your dialogue that it's too on-the-nose.

 

Also, eat [!@#$%^&*] and die, you [!@#$%^&*] Nazi.

Thanks for being a fan of my writing. Now if you can just influence some of the others to develop a sense of humor, we will be rolling along quite merrily.

18 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

What was said was that Ruth (and in the book she clearly is joking here) said she would happily accept an under 5 walk on role just to get Irna to even consider her for an actual role.  But that is not what happened. 

I deleted your first sentence so we can see how you should be replying to me. Thanks.

I don't think her part on GL was very substantial when she started. Surely we can agree on that. If not then you are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.

5 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

You sure have a lot to say about how you don't care what others have to say about you.  As to "pro-Aryan" it is a term that is now exclusively used in a way that you'd have to be stupid to not realize.  Sure, continue using it, but if you want people to actually consider your opinions and not assume you mean something you claim you don't than I'd think twice.  Word choice has power.  There are lots of terms I could use if I wanted to because I personally don't feel they carry the meaning and weight that others do.  But the fact that virtually everyone else feels they do carry that meaning means that the point I want to make will not be made.  I'm really giving you the benefit of the doubt here...

BTW, you may wanna work on the things you accuse me of yourself.  Starting a post with, "I think your comments are awful and you seem like you are trolling. You have gone out of your way to insert yourself in an argument which suggests you either have a lot of..."

sure sounds like "lecture mode" (or something worse) to me...

Now you are giving a speech on word power. That is hilarious. In my opinion you are way out of your depth, you can't even begin to know that. I feel you're just not as smart as I am and that you can never be as smart as I am. But I am still willing to entertain what I perceive to be some of your abject foolishness, since when you talk soaps, your passion does come through.

As I said, I will continue using the phrase pro-Aryan if I feel it is germane to a discussion about soaps. Interestingly, you keep bringing it up (as a form of intimidation)...you've said it a few times and now I've said it a few more times. If you disliked that phrase so much, when there is nothing wrong with it in an intellectual sense, you'd steer clear of it. But because you keep mentioning it, I think you know on some level it is a valid term to use when discussing reverse racism, which I feel the person with the geeky Sharon Case avatar is practicing in many of her posts. I do think she's a smart poster, mostly, when she sticks to facts as opposed to "facts" and I will continue to read her posts. But if she goes off on more racist/political stuff in a discussion about a soap opera, of course I will present opposing view which seek to dismantle that kind of nonsense. It will be part of the debate on this message board as long as she keeps bringing it up.

52 minutes ago, Juliajms said:

I can't tell if you are a troll or simply lacking all self awareness. You are so awful and clueless you actually said Jessica was too smart to be raped.  That only happens to stupid women right?   No one with any sense would care about your opinion of their posts or anything else.  Again, you are no one to tell anyone else what to post and certainly not DD who is a more interesting and long term poster than you.  You are not the arbiter of what is appropriate on this or any other thread.

I think your comments are awful and you seem like you are trolling. You have gone out of your way to insert yourself in an argument which suggests you either have a lot of time on your hands and thrive on negative things, or that you are not as intelligent as you try to act. In a vain attempt to validate yourself you are trying to misconstrue my earlier comments so you look good..? Who does that? Someone without a life maybe, I don't know. Your comment that someone is a long-term poster and therefore that makes them a more legitimate poster is complete bollocks. A new person making their very first post could say something more valuable than anyone else has ever said before on this message board. At any rate I think you're just spinning your wheels with me. I'd enjoy it if I was cruel but actually I find your approach and your comments sad and misguided.

35 minutes ago, EricMontreal22 said:

I'm white.  I think I have every right to discuss the myriad reasons blacks and other minorities have often been under-represented, and poor represented on soaps.  That is NOT the issue people have with you.  I am not in attack mode.  If I were I wouldn't address you as Jarrod but rather call you by some stupid name reflective of your avatar, or whatever you're doing here with DramatistDreamer.  That shows you on the defense. 

For someone who claims to be smart, the very fact that you used the term "pro-Aryan" as you did, no matter *what* your intentions (look up any use of that term) shows a shocking lack of intelligence at the very least...

Now you've gone from attack mode to lecture mode. You have appointed yourself someone who has to tell me why everyone's having a problem with me? That's silly. You're wasting your time. If I cared why people were having a problem with my posts, I'd change my writing style but I am not planning to change my writing style anytime soon. Sorry if that disappoints you. I think you are using my name in posts to act as if we're friendly and on a first name basis. We're not. We don't know each other. You think you know me but your understanding of me and the intent of my discussions is based on your own distorted view of people who say things that you can't grasp.

I don't see you are sincere in any way. I just don't. The person with the geeky Sharon Case avatar is someone whose screen name seems odd to me. And I never directly use other posters' names in my comments, that is my preference. So for you to try and control that is really out of line. You need to step back and look at things more clearly. There was nothing wrong in my saying the phrase pro-Aryan. I will continue to use it in discussions where I find it a relevant term to use. I won't allow you to censor my vocabulary. Again I feel you are very out of line.