Tisy-Lish

Emily Prager was the best adult Laurie Ann in my opinion. She played the young ingenue during the Keith Whitney/Jonah Lockwood plot. I don't think I remember Jeanne Ruskin in the role. But I do remember disliking Linda Cook as Laurie Ann. Cook was a good actor, but miscast as Laurie Ann. Cook just did not have the innocence or the ingenue quality that the role deserved.

Yes, Canary would have worked and should have worked. Better writing and better direction would have helped so much. And, as you suggest -- time. TPTB gave up on him too soon. And having Steve finally choose Rachel over Alice was the nail in the coffin. WTF? But again, WRITING. Not Canary's fault.

Understood. And oh yeah -- So in less than seven years, Steve has gone from being an unidentified amnesiac found in the outback of Australia, to being wealthier than MacKenzie Cory who had generations of New York wealth behind him and his publishing empire. Dear God in Heaven, was anybody supposed to believe that nonsense??

I can't answer your question about why Steve chose to return at that particular point, as it was not explained in any way in the scripts. But it should have been, of course. So great question. Do you think the story would have been better had George Reinholt returned? Well, that would not have changed the lazy writing. But at least Reinholt would have played Steve as he had before -- giving Steve the same personality. So to that degree, I'd say yes -- it would have been better if Reinholt had returned. But the writing was really the problem, and also the directing -- but not the casting. David Canary could certainly have been successful as Steve, but he needed some direction on how to play the essence of Steve -- not to copy George Reinholt, but to have a grasp of Steve's quiet, almost melancholy personality. Steve had never been loud, boisterous, overly positive, with a big smile on his face. But that's how Canary played Steve, and it didn't work. All Canary needed was some direction. And better writing, as I have said.

One of the ironic things about new-Steve not mentioning his family and his working-class roots upon his return is that, in 1975 Steve's helicopter went down in Australia. Around 1979, Willis and Gwen moved to Australia and stayed there permanently. Soon after that, nephew Evan joined them in Australia where Willis and Gwen raised him. Meanwhile, sometime after 1975 Steve was found alive but unidentified (in Australia). He had a short struggle with amnesia, but soon his memory returned. Strangely, Steve stayed in Australia for years, creating a new company -- Black Hawk, which was far larger and more successful than Frame Enterprises in Bay City had ever been. But all this time -- post amnesia, Steve never found out that Willis (his favorite sibling) was also living in Australia?? Apparently multi-millionaire Steve had no interest in checking-in on his siblings (not even secretly)?? Short-story long: In 1982, Steve makes his way back to Bay City without Willis even knowing he's alive, and apparently without Steve even knowing Willis had also been in Australia for years. Lazy writing, absolutely no research, and lost plot opportunities. Worst of all, Paul Rauch had been executive producer through both versions of Steve. Why didn't Rauch speak-up and tell the writers to include some of Steve's real history in the scripts? Did Rauch also have amnesia? And I'm assuming Vicky Wyndham was biting her tongue and rolling her eyes at all this idiocy...

I often marvel that Lemay actually called Marland's writing "dark." Meaning darker than his own writing, I assume. Although I was a huge Lemay fan, I truly can't imagine a soap opera darker than his Another World. However, I've discussed this with other soap fans who agree with Lemay. So I guess it just depends on how one defines dark.

I agree with this. It seemed TPTB just slapped Pat and Brian together because they were approximately the same age and both single. Plus I can't imagine Pat getting involved with a rich New York attorney, and certainly not with a man who had been married to Iris. By New York attorney, I mean he lived in NYC for years before he moved to Bay City. And he was part of the New York jet-setting group that followed Iris and Mac to Bay City. Not a good love match for a Matthews, in my opinion.

When Steve returned in 1982-ish, he barely mentioned his original background at all. And I'm almost sure he did not mention any of his siblings by name. I could be wrong, but I had started watching daily, because Steve and Alice were back. Needless to say, I was quite disappointed -- more disappointed with the writing than the casting.

I believe Steve did build Iris's big house. So they would have interacted during the construction. Robert Delany was the architect. Steve also built the Cory Complex for Mac (again designed by Robert Delany), and Steve did the renovation of the old mansion Mac bought for Rachel, which became the Cory mansion. Carol Lamont did the design work for the renovation, but Carol was an employee of Robert Delany's architecture firm.

In the 1970s, Iris and Steve didn't often cross paths, but they were acquainted and did occasionally have scenes together. Iris tolerated Steve, because he was wealthy and influential in Bay City. But she felt above him in many ways, because of his working-class Oklahoma roots. She felt Steve was "new money," while she and Mac were "old money." Don't forget -- Steve died in 1975, and AW was a 30-minute show until 1974. And on 30-minute soaps, the characters nearly all knew one another, and were never as isolated as some characters became later in the 60-minute soaps, So yes, Iris and Steve were acquainted and did interact. But not often.

During one of Peter Simon's "breaks" from the show, there were rumors GL was planning to cast Gil Gerard as Ed. I believe this was around 2000, possibly very late-1990s. It was definitely during the time Mary Stuart was playing Meta. And I think the failure of Robert Gentry's return was because (upon returning) he was not on contract, and so he didn't appear often. And of course, no storylines were built around him. Gentry was talented enough to pull it off, but TPTB didn't want to invest in Ed at that time. And perhaps the writers were not interested in writing for Gentry's version of Ed, which was a bit more intense (without being a sourpuss. LOL).

Isn't Roger Howarth a lot younger than the actor who previously played Matt Clark? Does anyone know the how many year apart they are in age? And how long ago was Matt on Y&R? I've been watching for years and years, and he was long gone before I started watching. But I do remember seeing photos of the actor in soap history books. Can anyone give me a brief synopsis of Matt's history on the show? Matt seems like a rather obscure character to bring back. But perhaps I'm wrong about that.

I'm sort of wondering why Granville Van Dusen was chosen for the cast. I'm sure he's a good actor, but why cast with three former soap opera actors, and one (Granville) who isn't?? Why not cast another former soap actor and keep it all in the family??

I watched only part of Susan's first scene and her FaceTime conversation with Kathryn. Susan certainly appeared very healthy, and as beautiful as ever... I'll try to watch more later.

Any opinions about Susan Sullivan's (Lenore Curtain on AW) new web soap? Sorry I don't have a link, but it should not be hard to find. I understand David Selby and Kathryn Leigh Scott (both from Dark Shadows) are in the cast.

Well, as I said in my post -- I was not directly answering your question. I was just speculating on why some fans might dislike Jamey. Plus, I am not one of the posters who has been bashing him. And again, as I said -- although I dislike some of Jamey's writing preferences, I still support the guy. I will never bash Jamey.

I can't answer the question directly. But I am aware Jamey is a huge fan of camp, comedy, over the top storylines, and over the top characters. Plus, I believe he prefers very short chopped-up scenes, rather than longer full scenes. So that's enough to turn off a lot of long-term soap fans. On the other hand, Jamey has also studied soaps most of his life, and is a big fan of writers such as Bill Bell, Harding Lemay, and Agnes Nixon. And Jamey loves the genre. I think his biggest problem is, he has been influenced too much by Ron Carlivati. Jamey idolized Carlivati. (as a fan), and then worked with him for several years. So his first instinct seems to be to "write like Ron". Although I don't know Jamey personally, I feel he would comply with the directives of TPTB to write in a style that fits the vision of a particular show. But he would need to be directed to do so, otherwise he would likely write in the way he feels is best. I am personally supportive of Jamey, but I also understand his faults.

Nicole has a new assistant?

Are they setting up a possible romance between Julie and the former owner of the bookstore?? Sorry, I've forgotten his name. Just my opinion, but I think it is too soon for a new romance for Julie. There are lots of other plots that could be written for her. But not a romance at this time...

I was watching during the meat locker episodes. I was a sophomore in high school, so this must have taken place during summer break, or possibly Christmas break. And yes, Meg's husband was involved. If I remember correctly, a local public school was suspected of serving horse meat in the cafeteria. So Van and Cal went to investigate -- not sure of their motivation, but perhaps one of them had been working as a newspaper reporter or something. They went into the meat locker and Van somehow recognized all the meat was horse meat. Somebody closed the door on them, so Van and Cal nearly froze to death. Meg's new husband, Jeff Hart, was Rosehill's crooked mayor, and somehow involved in selling horse meat to the school. Although this all sounds rather humorous -- it wasn't played with humor or camp. It was played dead serious, as most soap operas did at that time. It really was a great storyline, and was surrounded by other wonderful plots that Labine provided to the show.

I'd agree the early to mid-1970s were one of the golden ages of Love of Life. The early 70's which featured the love story of Tess and Bill really helped update the show's "old fashioned" reputation. And Claire Labine's head-writing tenure in the mid-70s, although brief, should have won Emmys for best writing. Love of Life was nothing less than splendid, under Labine's pen. Sadly, when Labine left to create Ryan's Hope, Love of Life's golden era ended abruptly and the show never recovered.

LOL. I'm glad somebody finally acknowledged this. And I can't argue with your description -- although I don't feel as strongly about it as you do. I never thought Mac was a good choice for Nancy's second husband. I can't imagine Nancy being attracted to him, after a lifetime with Chris. Mac was too gruff and rough around the edges and too working-class. Plus the actor was not particularly strong on daytime (although he seems fine in all the old primetime shows I've seen him in). He certainly wasn't a strong enough actor to play out the Alzheimers storyline that was intended to go on for seven or eight years. Here's my opinion of Marland's motivation for giving Nancy a second marriage so soon: Mac had been on the show as the police lieutenant since at least the Douglas Cummings storyline, and possibly even earlier. And he was the proper age. Marland was eager to do the Alzheimers plot in which he wanted to involve Nancy. So he just shoved Mac and Nancy together, despite their seeming incompatibility, and started down the road to dementia quite soon after they married. Maybe Marland felt he didn't have enough time to introduce a new (more appropriate) older man to be Nancy's next husband. So in order to kick the Alzheimers plot into high gear, he just chose Mac and moved forward. Although I didn't mind the Alzheimers plot and felt the writing was very good, I truly feel it would have been far more effective and believable with a stronger actor. And the lack of appeal between Nancy and Mac also harmed the plot, in my opinion. It was great to see Nancy finally have a storyline (was this Nancy's first real storyline ever?). But I would have preferred perhaps a retired doctor or retired college professor as Nancy's new beau. All this is just my opinion, so feel free to disagree.

That phrase should be banned from the message board. It is offensive to the entire genre.

Is Donnell really gone for good? That's a mistake. The actor is magic. Keep that kid in town and surround him with a small group of young people around his age. How far away is his university supposed to be? Isn't it somewhere in DC? Why not just let him commute to classes, and live in Fairmont Crest??

OMG, that chokes me up every time I watch that scene.