Khan

I like Anders Keith, too. Instead of casting him as grown-up David, however, the new guys could've casted him as Frasier's new TA at Harvard: still cute, still goofy, still riddled with neuroses. (By the way, did I hear correctly that, in one episode of the reboot, Frasier gives David a "B" on his term paper? I'm sorry, but I find it incredible how Frasier's nephew also would be one of his students. That doesn't sound something you could get away with at a real university.)

Oops, I hit a paywall.

Unfortunately, I was born on a Saturday, lol.

Exactly. There was a time when new sitcoms were so bogged down by their premises - most likely as a reaction to the success of shows like "24" and "Lost" - that they left writers no room to deepen their characters. The first season of "The Mary Tyler Moore Show" is pretty rough, but at least you can see them figuring out slowly how each member of the ensemble relates to Mary - Lou as the father figure, Rhoda as the best girl friend, Murray as the colleague and best guy friend, Phyllis and Ted as the antagonists (who aren't evil so much as they are irritating). I've said it before, and I'll say it again: this new series doesn't need David. It's like they wanted Niles to be there, but since David Hyde Pierce said no, they brought on Niles' son instead. But the truth is, the new series doesn't need ANY surrogate for Niles, or any surrogate for other past characters, for that matter. It really needed to be its' own animal, with the Frasier-Freddy relationship as the bridge between the two, and everything else either feeding into that dynamic or presenting an obstacle to it. I also think they needed to wait until the second season - provided, of course, that there IS a second season - before bringing in anyone from the old shows - and that includes Lilith. The new series really needed the entire first season just to figure out what kind of series it wanted to be.

RS left OLTL for the first time in '87, so she would have been available to play Pamela, depending on when the Dobsons would have needed her and whether she still was on OLTL at that point. It's a shame RS never appeared on the show, though. I think she would have made a fantastic addition to the show - if not as Pamela, then as another character.

I would include AW. NBCD just wouldn't leave their shows alone.

For some reason, I do remember reading in one of the soap mags at the time that Haidee Granger rubbed many people at the show the wrong way.

For sure, I would have introduced a brother or half-brother for Marlena at some point. And since this is DAYS we're talking about, he would be a love interest for Carrie, lol.

Please tell me Addie Walsh was told beforehand, or else that would have been a very soapy moment, lol.

So, Pamela was your basic mix of Alexis Carrington and Y&R's Vanessa Prentiss. And did they really have Pamela and Sophia get into a pie fight? LOL!!

Now there (Samantha's long-lost child) was an opportunity to introduce an African-American character with ties to one of the main families on DAYS. They could have said that Samantha got pregnant by a black man - perhaps, an O.J. Simpson-type, who was a successful professional athlete-turned-actor - but gave up the baby, because of her career, and because she was afraid her family never would accept a half-black grandchild. Even better, they could have revealed that Samantha turned to prostitution when her acting career had stalled, and that her child was fathered by one of her johns.

I like your ideas, @DramatistDreamer! Those definitely could have worked!

I think the Dobsons (or just Bridget, since she was EP) wanted Marj Dusay to play Pamela, but Anne Howard Bailey and Charles Pratt, Jr. wanted Shirley Anne Field, so the Dobsons bowed to Bailey and Pratt's judgement, because, as Bridget would put it later, "We want our HW's to be happy." What happened to Pamela is indicative of what happened to most everything on that show: a great idea that is ruined (and quickly!) by horrendous creative choices. NBC would have been better off just dumping Bailey and Pratt when the Dobsons wanted them to.

First of all, @carolineg and @Paul Raven, I absolutely love your ideas on how you'd rewrite the Alex North story. So much better than what JER concocted, lol. I think I would've gone down an entirely different path with Alex. In my scenario, Alex would be an abusive ex-boyfriend of Samantha's from Denver, who would be back in Marlena's life, but with an assumed name and new face (preferably not Wayne Northrop's). Alex, or whatever he was known as back then, disappeared years ago under mysterious circumstances. Except, those circumstances wouldn't be all that mysterious for too much longer, as we would learn (through newly created flashbacks of Marlena's, featuring younger versions of herself and Sam) that Samantha killed Alex (or believed she did) to protect Marlena, whom the boyfriend had attacked while Marlena was trying to keep him from hurting Samantha again; and then convinced Marlena to help her dispose of his body. Subsequently, Samantha fled to California to pursue her acting career, while Marlena took the job that brought her to Salem for the first time, with neither sister ever learning that the boyfriend, in fact, survived his injuries.

Could someone clarify some facts for me? IIRC, when the Dobsons sold their show to New World Television, it was with the agreement that they (the Dobsons) would retain creative control. However, when the Dobsons elected to replace Anne Howard Bailey, New World barred them from production, then sued, claiming that the Dobsons were jeopardizing the show's future. In turn, the Dobsons countersued New World, saying that they were well within the terms of their contract by trying to fire Bailey. If all that is true, then how does NBCD factor in? Because, I know the Dobsons also sued NBC (or NBC sued them, or both), I just don't know when or why. (Dear God in Heaven, that situation was such a mess, lol.)

And it did, and they were.

But seriously, I thought that (Petey's transformation from nerd to hottie) was one of the few things AMC 2.0 did reasonably well - which is to say, at least they covered all the bases - and I think that's almost exactly how the new series should have handled Freddy's transformation as well.

You know, as I was wrapping up my previous post, my inner voice said, "@Vee is gonna read this, he's gonna bring up Pete Cortlandt's transformation and you're gonna hafta tell him that, as a matter of fact, you actually agree with him." Sure enough, lol!

I thought "Storm of the Century," which tied in with a Stephen King miniseries that ABC was airing at the time, was Josh Griffith and Michael Malone's baby, but I could be wrong. I dunno, I had a hard time accepting Joey as an insta-priest, especially because his joining the church happened entirely off-screen. It's like, "We haven't seen or heard from him for a minute, and when we do, he's Father Ralph de Bricassart all of a sudden?".

DYNASTY never could write their characters out properly. They'd either die in some horrific way, or they'd simply disappear, never to be seen or heard from again.

On the other hand, it solves some story problems, such as how Marlena, or "Marlena," came into Stefano's possession, even though she "died" at a time when Stefano wasn't even involved in the goings-on in Salem. Heck, you could even say "Marlena" is really back-from-the-dead Samantha, whom Stefano kept alive and in a medically induced coma after being "killed" by the Salem Strangler, explaining that that is why Stefano always has been enamored with Marlena before or beyond all that "Queen of the Night" [!@#$%^&*]. Again, though, nobody needs to see Deidre Hall play another dual role, lol.

I was kidding. Lordy, I remember that, lol.

I didn't think much of "Back to You" when I first heard about it. (I'm not a fan of Patricia Heaton's.) Nevertheless, I wanted the show to succeed, because, the four-camera, adult-oriented situation comedy had already become an endangered species by that point. On the one hand, I thought the supporting players were well-cast; and even if I weren't a fan of Heaton's, there was no denying that she and Kelsey would make terrific sparring partners. However, I also thought that the premise had one wrinkle too many. Kelsey and Patricia as former co-anchors/estranged lovers who reunite professionally after years apart was good. Theirs was a situation that allowed for plenty of relationship-based comedy and witty banter. But having Kelsey's character learn he was the father of Patricia's character's daughter? What on earth FOR? It's as if networks today don't trust the simple premise that places the emphasis on well-rounded and unique characters with strong relationships to one another. Now, there must be some sort of ridiculous gimmick or narrative twist attached, or else they're afraid viewers won't tune in. (I can only imagine how CBS would respond to the pitch for "The Bob Newhart Show" if the MTM people were to pitch it to them today). Moreover, Christopher Lloyd and Steven Levitan would later admit that FOX interfered creatively with the show, which doesn't surprise me. If I had been their agent, I would've told them that FOX was the wrong network for that kind of property and to take another network's offer. (After all, FOX is also the network that once aired a short-lived Pamela Anderson sitcom set in a bookstore, called "Stacked.") Yeah, I could've told the new people that Frasier returning to his alma mater, with its' rarefied air and storied reputation, would not yield that much humor. For one thing, Harvard's never been too keen to have folks film or tape anything on their campus, let alone use the university as a source for satire or a punchline for jokes. With limits like those, the premise of Frasier teaching there becomes a comedy dead-end. I thought it would have been funnier if Frasier were to teach at a smaller university that was struggling academically as well as financially, and one that didn't view its' psychology department as a high priority either. (IOW, a state school). Frasier's immediate circle might scoff at the idea of his teaching there, but he would have looked upon it as a personal and professional challenge: "How best could I use my considerable talents, background and reputation amongst my colleagues in the field of psychiatry to elevate this mediocre department into a top-notch institute for training the mental health professionals of tomorrow?". That way, the comedy would come from Frasier always trying to overcome the bureaucracy and anti-intellectualism inherent in his new profession, and never quite succeeding. So, yes, if I had anything at all to do with the revival series, I would phase out Alan and Olivia. (I suddenly feel like I'm talking about GL). Frasier doesn't really NEED a buddy, and Olivia serves no purpose beyond luring him back to Harvard. As dean of psychology, Olivia should've been resisting the idea of Frasier joining the faculty, given his past as a "radio shrink" and daytime talk show host, not coaxing him into taking the position. Because, it isn't as if Harvard NEEDS someone with Frasier's level of fame, know what I mean? It's Harvard, not Whatsamotta U. I'd have Frasier sell the building or maybe even go into bankruptcy and lose everything after his accountants or business managers steal all his money, thereby forcing Freddy to take him in. That way, with father and son now living together, they're forced to work on their issues and truly learn about each other over time. I'd either phase out Eve and her baby or fast-track what I'm sure is an inevitable romantic pairing between her and Freddy, so that Eve would have a much stronger tie to Frasier as his new daughter-in-law or daughter-in-law-to-be. I'd send David packing, because I just don't feel he's necessary to this show. BUT...Frasier NEEDS to be hosting a podcast; preferably, with some Boston-based comic with a working-class disposition, so that Kelsey would have a blue-collar type to play off of. Finally - and I don't know how well this would go over with anyone - but I seriously would advocate for Freddy quitting his job and going back to college, preferably to study psychiatry again. I get that. And I'm not saying that Freddy couldn't have changed as an adult so that he would serve as a contrast to Frasier and Lilith, per se. But...it's kinda like what happens when you take a nerdy kid on a soap opera and SORAS him into this hunk who not only doesn't look like the nerd, but who also shares little or none of his behavioral attributes or quirks. The hunk is playing the same character as the nerd, but in name only. That's how I regard Jack Cutmore-Scott's Freddy. He's a blandly handsome guy who's not at all like Freddy when he was younger in even the slightest of ways. Yes, people change as they get older, but not that much!

His abs? His pecs? His blonde hair, gorgeous eyes and kissable lips?

Going one step further: Marlena, as the Salem Stalker, "kills" Josh Taylor's Roman. Roman turns up alive on Melaswen, but now he's played by Wayne Northrop again. And in Salem - which, I assume, would have been almost like a ghost town at that point - Kate, still grieving over Roman's "death," meets Chris Kositchek, played by JT, who has returned suddenly in the wake of all the killings. I think I would've liked that twist, if only because Marlena never has been written properly since her return in '91. You'd have to redeem the faux Marlena, however, because of her connection with John. And ideally, you could pair them together again and still pair "the real Marlena" with Roman (that is, if Wayne is playing Roman again, as he would be in my scenario), while pairing Josh Taylor, as Chris, with Kate. But we all know by now how difficult it can be for Deidre to play dual roles for a number of reasons, lol.