FrenchBug82

It is so funny because I think just a couple of weeks ago I was posting here how, unlike everyone else, I had some fondness for Krista Allen despite the fact she is not the best actress around Gorgeous woman if anything. Not sure why to recast a character like Taylor though, Sheila story notwithstanding.

And there is a blind item that, unless I am mixing up the clues, pretty clearly hints that I mean, I am all for it but... Not sure if I find this believable.

Oh Gotcha Sorry I thought you were saying ... the deadline for getting vaccinated should have been January

I was being charitable and pretending to take the "concerns we don't know much about this rushed vaccine" trolling at face value. Personally I have been side-eyeing anyone I know who didn't get the vaccine as soon as it was available where they live but even allowing for some people needing time to trust it more fully, by Summer hundreds of millions had taken it around the world and we knew it was safe. No more excuses. Googling Ruby Anderson yields this And frankly still a more reliable source on vaccines than Ingo R.

I mean, this has to happen. Considering Nina's thoroughline has always been her desperation for a child and now the fact that Carly "killed" Nelle, this has too much obvious karmic justice for them not to go there. But then again they had all these obvious dramatic threads to pull from Sonny's return and they didn't so who knows? But yes to a pregnancy.

He is lucky that he "still has time" when we are in late October. Frankly this needed to happen at the beginning of Summer at the latest.

I will say it is completely stupid and I have no idea why but I feel Tyler Christopher sounds more exotic than Tyler Baker which sounds like the name of a country bumpkin. Not that there is anything wrong with that! But I sort of see how one would prefer the former to the latter if one overthinks these things and I can totally see Hollywood types like an agent or Marcil overthinking those things. Personally I think all of them would have been better served to pick a name and stick to it - including actresses that get married. Alison Sweeney (who was mistakenly credited as Allison Sweeney in one of her non-Days appearances, I found while researching this thread) has the right idea imo. A name is a brand. The only thing it matters for is consistency.

This is Czech porn twink level of akas (those who know, will know)

Yeah Yeah as much as I love these characters and actors*resses, I don't think it worked and I don't think it would work. I was more bothered as an OLTL fan for the way they added things I don't like to the characters' off-screen continuity than I was as a GH watcher but either way I don't want them to bring characters wholesale. But cameos in a non-story capacity like Nora acting as a lawyer? Why not? I hated HATED what ATWT did killing off Vicki and Jake rather than let them be out there but Cass' cameos were fun enough. So I am good with them doing it this way.

I wouldn't... actually mind that. I am not super fond of force-feeding characters from a show into another show - it annoys fans of the still-alive show AND often ruins the characters for the fans of the dead one (see ATWT killing off AW characters that I would have much preferred to imagine being somewhere out there living their lives). BUT a cameo by Nora in a professional capacity could be fun.

Hearing Michael say "A law has been broken" when the male role models/father figures in his life are a mob boss and a contract killer. And that his own mother took over a mob organization while Nina's "law-breaking" was taking place. I mean... It is Carly-level of high-and-mighty hypocrisy so I guess it is somewhat in character but this makes me hate Michael so deeply that I'd take zzzzz scene between him and Willow over it in an instant. It is at the point where if I was giving them more credit than I do, it seems they are really trying to make Nina as sympathetic as they possibly can - and Carly/Michael as unsympathetic - so that the backlash when they do finally go there with Sonny/Nina (and clearly they are going to) is as small as possible. But then I read reactions on YT or other social media and the Sonny/Carly crowd clearly thinks this is vindication! So what do I know? They might be playing this stupidity straight. Or trying to give CW another brilliant courtroom speech to parallel the past since I would assume she is a shoo-in for at least Emmy pre-noms next week. Who knows?

Not to overthink this but I don't think that's quite right. It is saying that what sometimes people assume is a physical-issue ED turns out to be simply a lack of desire for a specific person or a specific situation that people, for other reasons, don't realize is happening. If you think yourself sincerely in love with someone and you genuinely rationally feel they are attractive, it can be complicated to realize your body's non-reaction. It was a reasonable assumption that Eric's problems were ED because of his age but it turns out it was psychological. That's an error that happens a lot more than you think. Psychological factors are responsible for about 10%-20% of all cases of erectile dysfunction and it is still considered ED. Of course I don't expect the show to be thoughtful on how they address this - clearly there was a way for Eric to realize his ED was linked to Quinn in another way than a campy honey tryst - but it is neither medically inaccurate, nor issue-offensive. It would be interesting to explore why Eric's desire for Quinn has gone despite him feeling still in love with her but they are not going to go there. They are going for camp and giggles coz sex is funny, I guess. But I maintain, against the grain, that the storyline is not inherently offensive or degrading and that, told properly, it could have been as interesting as a cancer storyline or whatever.

What's weird is the original tweet describes them as "TV Dads"? If we are talking fatherhood, I'd say Victor, for all his flaws and heavy-handedness with his kids, is still a better more rounded father. If only because he had interactions with his children. As a side note, I really wish they hadn't dropped the subplot of Victor's stepdad relationship with Kyle that paralleled Jack's relationship with Nick back in the day. It was an interesting wrinkle but as so many things during MW's stint as Diane, they started a lot of stories that they then completely dropped.

On balance, you may be right; changing a character to fit the actor rather than the other way around is why recasts often fail. And just putting an actor you want to hire in an existing role is a lazy way not to have to establish relationships and backstory. BUT playing Devil's advocate... On the other hand, had they cast him in a brand new character, fans would have quickly complained of a "new" character taking over the show while core families are neglected. Sure they could have used it in small doses at first but you don't hire RH at what must have been pretty money in order to use him "in small doses" This is why I am in general opposed to poaching "big names" for the sake of poaching them without having an actual plan for how to use them organically. Casting a role you want to cast with a big name is different from hiring an actor and then thinking how to use them. As I said, personally, if I ignored everything that had happened before he was cast (a huge if, granted) I could enjoy his performance on the merits. But the original sin is that they simply wanted to hire Roger Howarth and THEN started thinking about how to use him. Does that sound like a familiar pattern?

You know, I may have watched too many soaps but when I see a situation where they kill off a character in a way where the body doesn't need to be shown and they STILL write it in that he was found and IDed, I am like, damn, they *really* wanted the actor to know he ain't coming back. I am not sure this is the wedding I would have chosen but that dress is fierce.

Re: the turnover Many years ago I was watching the show religiously. It was my fave; someone was posting episodes on YouTube everyday and in the aftermath of mourning the death of many US soaps I was very excited to thoroughly enjoy SS. So many old storylines were also on YT. So followed SS for many years and then it became harder to find new episodes on YT. I kind of tried to keep up through recaps but obviously that's not the same thing. Finally a year later someone posted new episodes again and I literally did not know two-thirds of these people on my screen. And don't get me started on now three years later. Even having tried to catch pieces here and there, it is almost akin to starting from scratch. And I agree with what someone said above: the habit of writing characters out abruptly without warning or exit interviews is frustrating.

I hope @Frank2803 won't mind me reposting his comment from the Unpopular Opinion in this thread: I thought this was a really good for this thread too.

Yeah they definitely completely changed how the character had just been portrayed to fit RH indeed and while I wasn't mad at it because it would make sense for Paul to not be a straight-up good guy considering his parents, it was jarring at first and that probably compounded the fan rejection of RH's Paul as a diet Todd. I think it would have been easier to accept if Paul has been off the canvas for a long while before RH was cast.

Yeah I am fine with it. First Donna was the best pairing Eric had post-Stephanie IMO. Second they actually, wait for it, TELEGRAPHED it for weeks and planted the seeds for that reunion so, for once, B&B actually gave us a twist that made sense AND that they had prepared - heck Donna's missing Eric has been a thing for years so it was actually, wait for it, in character. The actual scene was, well, campy but I am just going to sit back and enjoy one of the few times where B&B tells something they seem to have planned out rather than thought at the last minute. And the fact that with Carter sent in Katie's direction, it leaves Quinn stranded in a way that could be interesting story-wise. So for all my complaints I am not mad at it. Between that and the fact Deacon/Sheila seems to work - I wanna wait until the actual plot to determine whether it does work - and the fact we had a variety of storylines moving in parallel, I wanna recognize this was one of the more competent weeks of B&B we have had in a long long long time. If they could combine this basic competence at soap-storytelling with those campy moments they'd have pure gold. Right now it is more a rusty bar covered in cheap metal with a glimpse of the gold underneath peeking here and there when Bell bothers to scratch the surface.

I put my hand up that I tend to read a lot into things that may not necessarily need to be read into but... Considering how easy it would have been to just swap Gaston in - who is not busy as far I can tell and married to a show actress - when it all went down AND how long they have taken to recast despite the fact Chance was obviously needed in the story they had planned, they really really must not have wanted to hire Gaston long-term for some reason.

I am not sure to which extent this is an unpopular opinion since I wasn't online much then. I gather people clung to their understandable emotional attachment to Erin Torpey but I actually liked Bree Williamson and while we can argue with the retcons necessary for that story and some of the writing along the way, I think she was doing mostly good work with the DID. I had then and still have zero interest in OLTL's Marcie and Michael and I cannot understand why the show played them for so long. A ATWT one would be: I did prefer Scott Holroyd in the role (as many others, I think) but I actually ... didn't mind RH as Paul? I mean, yes, he was playing Roger Howarth as Todd Manning as Paul Ryan but it made sense enough considering the Ryan history. I am a bit more sour on RH now after the GH messes, but at the time I confess I was enjoying watching him do his thing as Paul, even admitting that it changed the character towards the kind of material he is more comfortable doing. I actually liked PB's Jack with Nikki. Their first marriage was and still is my favorite PB pairing.

I am hopelessly naive and it would obviously never happen since they are, after all, competitors but imagine what could be done if soaps each had custody of a handful a few shared basic sets like a courtroom or a police station they all need from time to time and lent/leased them to each other (you can come film these scenes in our studio, etc.) It is in the individual interest of the soaps that all the four remaining ones survive in my opinion so the genre should have solidarity. Again: of course it won't happen. It is a business not charity. But I think it'd make more long-term sense that someone with a nose on the short-term financials would realize.

Can't imagine why a producer signalling "Good riddance" about a show that the audience watching loved enough to stick with to the end might have been poorly received by said audience. I mean, come on. I don't recall that moment and, yes, SB was probably unsalvageable by then but this is classless, even if one agrees with the sentiment.

It hadn't occured to me but that would explain why I mean, granted, the difference with his usual behavior isn't much these days but I thought that was unnecessary, even for him. Now if your theory is true... that'd make a bit of sense

Obviously the fact she had just had her daughter drove the point home more than anything else but I wonder how much the fact her last role on OLTL turned out to be largely a damp squid ended driving home for her that it was time to move on.