Khan

Michelle Collins made me long for the days when Debbie Matenopolous was co-hosting.

If that's all it takes to co-host a morning talk show, then allow me to recommend a terrific kazoo player who opened once for Tuck & Patti.

Same!

I think much of Ellen Weston's GL consisted of last-minute rewrites. It might sound crazy and unbelievable, but yes, I would take '85-'89 GL over '03-'09 GL any day. True, it was not the best of times for a great many people; even MY favorites were gone by that point. But as long as it wasn't on Johnny and Chelsea? It still had its moments.

If it had been, though, I would have wanted it to be closer to Hamner's original vision than what the first series became.

Paul Dumont? I thought the guy in that screenshot was James Karen.

I'm probably one of the VERY few who enjoyed GL even back then. But I was also still in grade school. For me, GL stopped being the GL I admired and respected around the time Megan McTavish began her stint as HW. It rebounded somewhat during the early part of the Paul Rauch/Esensten & Brown regime, even though signs of trouble were already apparent, with dumbed-down stories such as Matt and Vanessa's reunion, Beth's return and OOC relationship with Carl, Annie blaming Reva for her miscarriage, etc. Yes, I still tuned into the show -- through B&E, through Claire Labine and her kids, through Lloyd Gold and Millee Taggart and new EP John Conboy's partner-in-crime, Ellen Weston -- but not as frequently; and by 2004, or whenever David Kreizman assumed the HWing reins and turned GL into an extended, Coopers-vs.-Spauldings edition of "Family Feud," I was ready to say goodbye.

I'm not in. But for Justin's sake, I hope it takes off. The sooner he ankles Y&R, the better off he'll be.

You know, even if I could ignore history and accept Olivia as a latent lesbian, I still couldn't buy her being in a relationship with Natalia. I'd sooner buy her hooking up in the end with India von Halkein.

Any paying gig would be better than Y&R.

She could be Olivia Birkelund (ex-Arlene, AMC) but I could be wrong. If he is smart, he will. Even if the NBC series were to die a quick death, he'd just be better off away from the Y&R sinkhole.

I liked the CONCEPT of the cornfield opening since it brought back some of that middle-class, Midwestern feel that might have been lost in the days of big action/adventure and business-oriented stories. But, yeah, the execution of that sequence was just dreadful to watch.

It's funny, but most of the time, whenever a soap opera is cancelled, it feels almost like a mercy killing. You're not glad to see it go, but at the same time, you are almost relieved that nobody else can mess with it anymore. But ATWT and EON are probably the two shows I can think of that I would say didn't NEED to be put down.

Good question. Many believe Wendy Riche (GH) might have made for a good EP. However, I might have gone in a different direction and hired someone like Edward Scott (Y&R, B&B). And if I couldn't have persuaded Nancy Curlee (GL) to come out of retirement, or Kay Alden (Y&R) to set aside whatever issues she might have had with Scott when the two worked together at Y&R, then I might have thought outside the box and hired a novelist such as Richard Russo or Jane Smiley. After all, CBS' Lucy Johnson had wanted August Wilson to succeed Marland (allegedly) and although I'm not entirely sure that's true, if it WERE true, I think it would have been a step in the right direction. True dat. That's true as well. I mean, forget about attempting to usher in a new golden era for that particular show. You would have needed to junk about 90 percent of the regular cast AND re-revamp the entire production model (a more definite hybrid of studio and on-location taping with someone in charge who knew how to pull it together and make it more economically feasible) just to make the damn thing watchable again.

Honestly, you could write a book (or several) on all the missed opportunities on ATWT. But what's even MORE amazing to me is that despite P&G's very best efforts, ATWT remained, at the very end, about one good HW and EP away from being a truly good (if not great) show again. Enough of what was good about the show in the first place remained intact enough, IMO, to rebuild upon; and what had been lost could have been restored with minimal effort. I don't think you could say the same about GL -- and I say THAT as someone who adored GL the most.

the best scene was him without the tee It was certainly better than when he threatened Rohm's character physically in the kitchen. JP is either too nice IRL or too wooden as an actor (or both) to portray a convincing menace. Rohm's character was a true sap to have been taken in by his second-rate con.

Jon's character, Gavin (aka Michael), wasn't supposed to be Italian. But, as his partner-in-crime said, he never could get the accent right, which made Rohm's character look like even MORE of a dunce, since it was apparent from the start that the accent was fake. Like, "that's-a spicy meatball!" fake.

"Seduced," right? I caught a repeat of it earlier this evening. As I watched the movie, however, I couldn't understand why Elisabeth Rohm's character, who was supposed to be this incredibly intelligent businesswoman, couldn't see through his character's deception. I mean, his cheesy Italian accent -- that should have been an immediate giveaway. Then, whaddya know, his co-conspirator expressed to Rohm at the movie's climax the Exact. Same. Sentiments. As if the writer had been reading my mind the entire time, lol.

IA. She wasn't a favorite of mine on OLTL (as Luna Moody Holden) but I might have been more receptive toward her as, say, a distant relative of the Snyder clan, or one of the Shelbys.

I don't know which was worse: SuLu's haircut (not her most flattering, and was she going for the Megan McTavish look?) or Erica's reprehensible and near-irredeemable actions in that abominable storyline.

Structure-wise, LOVING had a lot going for it with the original four families, their varied economic backgrounds and interrelationships. As well, setting much of the drama at the university was good, if only because it was different from the usual settings, and it allowed youth-oriented stories to be part of the show in ways that would make sense. (More sense, anyway, than having someone Jack and Stacey's ages running major corporations right after high school graduation.) But I do feel Marland and Nixon struggled almost from the beginning with casting and with really knowing what their show was about; and I think that that's why LOVING ultimately failed to live up to its promise.

I've read that piece as well. Of course, I think she's right; the writing on PASSIONS, IMO, was godawful. (No offense, PASSIONS fans.) But...I don't know...I'm not sure whether she should have said as much to tvline.com. Perhaps she could have been more diplomatic (for lack of a better word)?

Pretty much. And I know what came over him. It's the same thing that always comes over him whenever he is thirsty for attention. Followed by a "Did I do that?" straight outta Urkel.

It's official: I hate you.

TBH, the more I think about the possibility of Holly being gay, the more I'm glad they decided not to go there. Now, you could say her issues with men had to do with her emotionally unavailable father and with Roger, and you'd be right. But saying it's because she actually preferred women? I don't think so. Besides, if anyone could have been a convincing lesbian, it probably was Dinah.