Khan

I thought and said the same thing when I read the news earlier this morning (and I'm not even a fan of ST). Frankly, I'm not surprised Harberts and Berg turned out to be such lousy show runners, since I've never liked any of the stuff they've penned for various shows.

Yeah, I think it is AT. So, lemme get this straight: everyone on the street's congratulating Tony Blair, because he has his poll card? Wow, if only we here in the US could get that worked up over someone going off to vote!

Well, so much for the come(y)back tour!

If she's moving out, then it's only because she's gotten everything she could outta Bill and their marriage and is ready to move on.

God knows that, by all accounts, Irna was a real character to work for, or work with. However, I wonder whether at least some of her more bizarre behaviors wasn't a put-on. After all, Irna might have been the "Queen of the Soaps," but she was still working in an industry dominated by men. Ergo, maybe she saw being aggressive and eccentric as her way of ensuring that she wouldn't be second-guessed or taken advantage of by the higher-ups at the networks and the sponsors.

True. However, I think LOL hung on for as long as it did, BECAUSE she was still there. Otherwise, it seems as if there was little or nothing there to keep even the diehardiest of diehard fans (the kind who never, ever quit on a show, no matter how rotten, because, "like a tree that's planted by the waters, I shall NOT be moved") from fleeing. I mean, even Sammy Davis, Jr. and his "Candyman"-singin' ass would have been out the door the minute the news broke that Audrey had quit/retired/died, and he was supposed to be LOL's #1 true-blue fan! Contrast that with GL, for example, which seemed to do okay (for awhile, anyway) w/o Charita Bauer as Bert. Not only that, but it was also their way of capturing the attention of newer (read: younger) audiences, who could form their own attachments to the newer characters and families, in the same way that their parents and grandparents had formed attachments over the years to the original ones. In the case of SFT, I think the tactic worked, even if it was ultimately undone by a revolving door of HW's and EP's who ruined the show with one bad story-related decision after another. Unfortunately, where LOL was concerned, growing the show in that way seemed to have almost the opposite effect (again, from what I have read about its' history): not only did expanding the show's canvas alienate large sections of the show's standing audience, BUT, it seems as if the younger audiences whom TPTB had desired weren't all that interested either. As (I think) Mimi Torchin once said, LOL was doomed to be just "your mother's soap opera."

So, bringing it back to THE DOCTORS... Given her fan following from THE SECRET STORM, I'm not surprised TPTB would ultimately snag Jada Rowland to succeed Carolee Campbell as Carolee. However, I AM surprised that Rowland herself joined the show at a time when several others -- AMC, Y&R, etc. -- were beginning to eclipse TD both in ratings and in acclaim. Does anyone know specifically how or why JD came to work on TD? Did any other shows attempt to court her? If so, what made TD the more attractive opportunity? (I, myself, have wondered how JD might have fit in on AMC.)

For better or worse, DePriest was there for the start of the whole "Supercouples to the rescue!" era at DAYS. However, unlike the other architects of that vision -- Pat Falken Smith, Sheri Anderson, Thom Racina and Leah Laiman -- DePriest wasn't employed already at another soap OR out of the business entirely. Ergo, from a certain standpoint, hiring her to head-write another NBC soap being targeted to younger audiences made sense. It's just unfortunate that, in SUNSET BEACH's case, they weren't blessed with a good enough cast to overcome some abysmal writing.

You're right, she did. Damn, I wish I knew more about this show.

Agree -- and to tell you the truth, I'm not even 100% sure it was DePriest who instigated that story. (We tend to forget that Lorraine Broderick and Victor Miller were still on staff, even if they had been demoted to associate head writers.) Regardless, though, as bizarre as it was to learn that Eric had been reduced to working as a clown for a circus troupe, I, too, feel like it was a good way to show Erica that he was NOT the man she had built him up to be in her mind; that, as Susan Lucci once said in regards to the storyline, he very much had feet of clay. Agree here as well. Now that Erica had become a mother, the time was right for her to mature emotionally; and reuniting her with her father was the key. Unfortunately, the problems with Eric Kane and his storyline came afterward, when DePriest and her team tried making him a permanent part of his daughter and granddaughter's lives. (I, myself, would have been fine with him living outside of Pine Valley, but visiting occasionally, like w/ Nick Davis.) Bringing some resolution to Erica's "daddy issues" was one thing, but having him back in town full-time, and Erica giving him Enchantment stock? Unless Eric is played by a "lovable curmudgeon" like Barnard Hughes, there's nowhere to go with that kind of character. Thankfully, when Agnes Nixon returned as HW, she sent Eric packing, lol.

True -- and I guess that was my point in my last post. SFT's focus DID expand over time, to the point where the show's mere survival didn't rest entirely on Mary Stuart's (and Larry Haines') shoulders. Don't get me wrong, there were times when SFT was so bad that seeing Stu and Jo onscreen was the only thing keeping fans going. However, if MS and/or LH had passed away or retired while SFT was still running -- yes, it would have been a blow, just like losing any original cast member is to any show -- but I feel like the show itself could have weathered the losses (with the right production team in place, of course) and carried on. But could LOL have weathered losing Vanessa? Again, going on what I have read about the show, I don't think so. I think if Audrey Peters had died suddenly, or if she had chosen to leave the show for whatever reason, LOL would have been as good as gone -- which tells me that the show never evolved as much as it probably should have. Am I wrong, or didn't Vanessa adopt a child at some point? Actually, AMS, I would have developed Vanessa and Meg's offspring the other way around: Meg's kids would have been (more) virtuous and had more in common with their "Aunt Van," while Vanessa's own children would have ended up more like Meg. But that's just coming from personal experience.

At this point, not even Randy Dworkin can save his ass.

I cannot WAIT to see the start of Douglas Marland's work on this show. Something I never would have thought possible before now. (I realize he isn't everyone's cup of tea, though, lol.) Now, if I could just get my hands on his complete run at GH.... I wonder whether they let Cenedella go BECAUSE they were used to TD being such an action-driven show under the Pollocks. (Never mind the fact that the Pollocks themselves had clearly burned out by the end and the ratings were already falling.)

I've often wondered, though, whether LOL's main problem was that the premise was too limited. Just from reading about the show through the years, it seems like LOL began to suffer as they tried to expand from stories with Vanessa at the center. (Of course, I've seen people say the same about SFT, but I feel like THAT show could have survived even if Mary Stuart had passed away or retired.) Also, I've read somewhere that LOL's audience was largely older, and that they balked whenever the show even ATTEMPTED more progressive stories featuring younger characters. Is that true?

For me, it depends on the show. I can watch online an episode of her AMC, or her DAYS, or even her OLTL, during that brief period when she and Craig Carlson were HW'ing the show. But if it's AW or SUNSET BEACH? Forget it!

So, does this mean Ann is no longer impotent? (I can't believe I just asked whether a female character on a soap opera is able to have sex again.)

That was...something.

You could say the same about GL.

The truth is that too many on the right are more concerned about remaining in the political spotlight than they are about saving the damn country. That's why it's up to the rest of us to do the right thing and vote these people out of office. Complacency just isn't an option anymore.

Nowadays, a hack HW working on Y&R would take that backstory w/ Brock and Lorie and -- SHAZAM! -- create their long-lost love child.

True dat, lol!

God bless Agnes Nixon. Maybe she saw the value in those episodes where others didn't.

Granted, MEK will always be "Tad the Cad" to me, but I have to say, Kurt McKinney, who was Kurth's predecessor at GH, would have been way more suitable for the role than Kurth himself. Perhaps. But if you were like me, and you were one of those fans who had a hard time dealing with Joey's intelligence, or lack thereof, then watching dim-bulb Brody Hutzler take on the role of Viki's son would have sent you into cardiac arrest.

Nola's obsession with Buzz was a step back for her in SO many ways. Even when she WAS more of a villainess, manipulating poor Morgan into thinking Kelly was laughing about being with someone so young and inexperienced, Nola wasn't the type to STALK a man. (Fantasize that he's like some character out of an old movie? Yes. Stalk? No.) Moreover, after Kelly, Quinton and even Floyd (!), Buzz just seemed like a downgrade (and I say that as someone who is a fan of Justin Deas'). At best, the two should have remained close friends, supporting each other through various relationship and familial crises, with Nola unsure whether Jenna was "the one" for him. (Heck, even in my mind's eye, I see Nola trying to hook him up with her returning BFF, Gracie Middleton!)

I would be surprised if he could pinpoint ANY place on a map. Hell, I'd be surprised if he even knew what a map was w/o being prompted.