Khan

And it's only Sunday.

I don't even know what to say anymore.

Either that, or it's another Michael Muhney situation.

Somehow, I can't see Christian LeBlanc filling Burl Ives' shoes. (Or Fred Gwynne's. Or Charles Durning's. Or Ned Beatty's. Or James Earl Jones's.)

Between the stiffness and the extra pounds, it truly seems like LL was miserable on that show.

With that hair and beard, he truly looks like a villain on an episode of "Charlie's Angels." Like, he's running a bike messenger service that's a front for a call-girl ring; and any minute now, he's gonna tell Don Stroud or Tim Rossovich that Cheryl Ladd's getting too close to exposing the entire operation, "and she needs to be dispatched with -- and I mean permanently!"

IKR? Common sense would tell ANY one that phasing out a show's original families and replacing them with brand new ones is bound to be a little messy unless the first families were just awful, which the Brookses and Fosters clearly weren't, despite all the recasts and dud stories. It's just incredible that CBS and Columbia/Screen Gems/Sony trusted Bill Bell enough to let him figure out how to retool the show. Otherwise, they might have allowed John Conboy to go through with his plan to replace Bell, and who knows what would have happened to Y&R after that!

To this day, Jamie and Vicky's relationship seems like one of the most random things ever to occur on AW. It doesn't feel organic at all.

In a way, Stuart's post-Genoa City years are kind of a blank slate. Maybe Stuart married again. Maybe he had another family. If I were HW, I'd reveal that he had two sons: one, who's very driven; and one, who's a total cad. And maybe his daughters have very strained relationships with their half-siblings, not just because of the age gap, but because they've always regarded their second stepmom as a gold-digger and beneath the family's standards. It'd be a good way to reintroduce the Brookses by having those sons arrive in GC and shake things up for the Abbotts and Newmans, too.

IOW: the rivalry with Sheila was always the game plan. Lauren's marriage (to Scott) was just Bell laying groundwork. Gosh, I miss the days when the writers would plan ahead. Even if the story was predictable, you still watched, because you trusted they were "going somewhere." Besides, as TPTB have apparently forgotten, it wasn't WHAT happened next that mattered, but WHEN. And Bill never even bothered to explain what had happened to Stuart either, did he? Not even in '84, when the Brooks girls returned for Victor and Nikki's first wedding. I think it was just assumed that he and Liz had split, and that he was living away from Genoa City. And I think it was only when Theo was revealed to be his grandson that we learned that he had, in fact, passed away (which I thought was a mistake, but whatevs).

Yep, I'm ready for 2023.

Granted, I never knew Bill Bell, but I could see him saying as much, lol. I've often wondered whether John Conboy had considerable influence over the casting and recasting and whether it was that influence that caused so many recasts to be so godawful. I mean, Brian Kerwin, Wings Hauser and Howard McGillin as nuGreg? In what universe? RE: Scott/Lauren/Sheila -- How long were Scott and Lauren married before Sheila arrived on the scene? I wasn't watching then, so I have no idea, but I wonder if Sheila was created BECAUSE it was becoming evident that Scott and Lauren's relationship was becoming a snooze-fest. It's not that I think Howard McGillin is a bad actor. Far from it. But, speaking as someone who is familiar with Greg Foster, I just think he was/is all wrong for the character. IMO, he would've been much more suitable as a Brock recast. I could see him having a good mother/son chemistry with Jeanne Cooper's Kay.

Jesus, it's 2016 all over again. Now I know how people who lived through the Dark Ages must've felt.

Agree. Y&R had a good opportunity to introduce a new family onto the canvas that could shake up the mediocre goings-on. It just boggles my mind how Griffith/Morina/Sony literally run from making this show more exciting.

I'm not suggesting "the devil = all men," but I think it's time for this and other stories to show what our culture is beginning to recognize: namely, that women gots the skillz. Trust me, if Alice Horton were still alive, she'd be gathering all the forces she could, male AND female; and she'd summoned every last ounce of faith and courage that she could to look the devil in the eye and tell him where to go. For her sake, for her family's sake, for her community's sake, for the sake of the entire world if necessary. Because, as she showed us throughout her entire life, Love. Always. Wins. Plus, it'd be pretty powerful to see all those women, gathered around Johnny, holding vigil, praying without ceasing, while the devil and Beyonce's wind machine threaten to blow them all away. Like I've always said, I've never been fond of stories about demonic possession, because I feel that's literally inviting, through entertainment, the devil into people's homes and minds. Not every viewer out there is strong enough psychologically or emotionally or spiritually to handle it. But, this clip from "Soap," as Jessica Tate confronts the devil, who has taken possession of her newborn grandchild, is more-or-less how I'd handle the current story on DAYS (just replace Jess with Marlena):

Ignorance and selfishness have always been parts of the human condition, I'm afraid.

Or...he could just use something from the Indigo Girls.

It's truly ridiculous to see Chloe (who is herself a few eggs short of a carton) praise as "the best of the best" someone who once harassed, stalked and even threatened to rape Christine.

I am just so damn sick and tired of Alan Locher.

All I remember Maggie DePriest doing with John was having him strut around shirtless and come onto Donna.

True. If I were a filmmaker today, I'd be doing sort of the opposite, inserting all sorts of soaps references into my work. Interviewer: "That sequence in the hall of mirrors was fantastic. Was that a direct reference to 'The Lady from Shanghai'?" Me: "No, that was inspired by Roger Thorpe chasing Rita through the hall of mirrors on 'Guiding Light'." Interviewer: "Really? You got your inspiration from a soap opera?" Me: "Hey, we can't ALL be Hitchcock fans!"

Great, now I'm picturing Chanel chanting that "jambo jambo" mess in mid-orgasm.

Someone needs to tell Christian J. LeBlanc that the "'Hart to Hart' Guest Star" look is not for him.

S.M.H.

Because, we've seen men (John, Eric) try and exorcise the devil from Salem, and clearly, that ain't worked. Because, DAYS viewers, in particular, have been conditioned over the years to expect the men to be the saviors, while the women merely step to the sides and coo (that is, when the women aren't the antagonists -- in which case, they're labelled psycho bitches and either get killed or get cold-cocked and then tossed in jail or the psych ward); and it'd be fascinating, not to mention refreshing, to see things done the other way around, for a change. Because, it'd also be great to see THIS group of women band together and fight a common threat; and to do so in ways that, if told right, could impact their lives for years to come. Because, at the end of the day, soaps are a women's medium; and it's high time that everyone -- the writers, the actors, the "suits," the viewers, everyone -- be reminded of that fact. Because, whatever his moral deficiencies, Joss Whedon, through his shows, told one, profound truth: that women CAN make a difference in this world. And, finally, to quote one Bernice Clifton, of Atlanta, GA... When Christ was crucified, and all the men had gone home, it was women who stayed until the bitter end; and it was women who were the first to herald the news of His resurrection. If women possess enough faith to do that...? Surely, they possess enough faith to vanquish His greatest nemesis, too.