P.J.

Wow---I have zero recollection of John having a brother on the show. Or of Brock having something to do with Duke's story. Thanks for filling me in. Re: Steve. I remember being caught up in Steve and Betsy's romance and thinking Craig was just short of the devil for keeping them apart. But I also think that my POV has evolved a lot, as has the viewerships' in general. Sure, Steve got more overbearing after they married and after Ryan left to cause some kind of tension in their marriage, but we're also looking back at behavior that would either be a bad example or completely unrootable (couple-wise) on soaps today.

Because Lucinda had walked all over John, lying her ass off to him. The breaking point (IIRC) was her trying to ship Duke out of town, right? Or was it the Holden thing? I think by the time they could have maybe reunited them, the "family" dynamic they had with all the assorted family members bunking at the Walsh estate at one time or another had disbanded. Lily was gone, Andy was living with Julie and boozing, Duke obviously couldn't live with Lucinda, etc. Plus, Lisa Brown and Bryggman were dating and Iva and John hooked up. Then Marland died, and both Lucinda and John moved on.

Part of the reason Steve "took off" was obviously the pairing with Betsy. But also I think there was a bit of fascination with Greece and the Greek culture in the '70's-early'80's in general, due to the Jackie Kennedy/Ari Onassis marriage. Sure, in retrospect, he comes off as an overbearing chauvinist pig (and his brother Nick wasn't any better with Kim), but at the time, he was a character that shook up whitebread Oakdale.

*waves* Damn right I hated Rose and the accent she rode in on. Not because I loved Lily (who had degenerated into the lowest form of twitdom---ugh, I remember being done with the bitch the minute she handed over Hope without even bothering to tell Holden--aka, the man who'd truly bonded with that child for a year while Lily was going through her baby blues or whatever---over to that crackhead bitch that sold her baby to David Freakin' Stenbeck. I hated Rose because she ate the goddamn show. They served up that cutie-patootie Paul (Hoylrod) up on a platter to that aging showgirl. That's reason enough. (*teehee* it feels good to vent. ) YEP! *stands up to be counted* That twit and her fairytale stories.....BARF. The kid Jack chases and then tries to save off the pier? Yep, that's the same kid.

I saw that episode and that didn't show them cosummating their relationship. Steve was always ranting about Craig because he and Craig had bad blood and Steve continued to distrust Craig, period. He also knew that Craig was still pining for Sierra, so Steve was convinced that Iva would get terribly hurt. Steve and Iva were very close, Steve felt a personal duty to protect Iva, starting from when one of his employees practically tried to jump Iva's bones and Steve caught him, threw him out and fired him. Steve and Iva were so close, that Meg was somehow convinced that he and Iva were having an affair and used to insinuate this to Iva several times (while throwing the fact that Iva had already had an affair with her married boss, Tad Channing). It's just strange that on a soap opera where I even remember seeing Iva's mother, Emma, in bed with her boyfriends (John, that same year) I don't ever remember a scene with Iva and Craig in bed together, where I've even seen Thanks for confirming that! LOL....I'd hate to wonder what my brain was thinking if it hadn't been shown onscreen. Maybe you're right---Tonio was already there to be the bad guy, and it might have made Craig seem like a man-ho to have him jumping Iva (after his long list of conquests) while longing for Sierra. Marland didn't go the obvious route and have Iva come between Steve and Betsy...so maybe it was a way of showing that Craig wasn't "using" Iva to get over Sierra and was reformed. But it seems really weird to me then (if they weren't lovers) that Iva doesn't get laid on the show until like late '88 or early '89 when Kirk shows up.

That's really not true. A show having more than one lead Emmy nod has been pretty standard over the years. Many soaps -- including AMC, EON, OLTL, GH, GL, AW, Y&R -- have had more than one actor/actress nominated for a lead Emmy over the years. It was pretty common in the 80s. I remember Sharon Gabet and Ann Flood from EON being nominated for lead actress one year. In 1983, Dorothy Lyman and Susan Lucci (AMC) and Erika Slezak and Robin Strasser (OLTL) were nominated. And notice, it didn't occur on ATWT until 2002 when both Byrne and Zenk were nominated. ATWT doesn't even have a Lead Actress nomination until '86 and Liz Hubbard, who'd just freakin' arrived. (Hell, GL didn't have one either until the year before for Zimmer). Setting aside the fact daytime emmys didn't even exist for the first seventeen years of ATWT's run, it's still ridiculous and convinces me either there was an ingrained bias against ATWT or bloc voting on other shows to get their nominees recognized.

I'm like 75 percent sure they did. I can't recall a specific scene though. I remember Steve running around being pissed they were seeing each other, and I have this odd memory of Craig and Iva like, walking through a field of wheat or something.

I think voters/judges 'slept on' ATWT in general a LOT. Maybe it's just my bias. But you also have to remember that the nomination and voting practices were different then as well. It would have been very unusual for a show to get two Lead emmy nods.

"Should've"? I dunno---other than the CBS' actresses, I didn't see the competition. I know she gave emmy worthy performances every year. And she didn't need a twin, an over-the-top death or jumpin' around in her skivvies to deliver.

Unfortunately, Hubbard was up against the juggernauts of Kim Zimmer and Erika Slezak. Unless they'd given Hubbard a slutty twin, she wasn't going to win. I do think Hubbard fought against making Lucinda appear vulnerable, and that's why blue ribbon panels want to see.

I'm by no means a soap historian, but the only example I know of is Mike Bauer going from GL to AW and back again. And Bell taking Sheila and Lauren over to B&B is the only modern era example I can think of that was an unqualified success. Not just some kind of extended stunt like the Linda Dano experience across the ABC shows.

Well, I can understand that a GL/Y&R crossover in the '90's would have been a logistical nightmare, with seemingly few benefits. They were owned by different parent companies, and (I presume) at a time when CBS had less say than Bell or P&G. It's Bell who really pioneered (or reinvigorated) "transplanting" characters from one show to another with Sheila on B&B. But I would have thought it would be more natural on the P&G shows (at least ATWT & GL which were both on CBS). If I'm not mistaken, there was a time they filmed in the same building. I'm don't think the initial Y&R/ATWT crossover with CJLB was "desperate". I think that was a unique circumstance with CJLB, who'd kind of floated doing a cameo for a while, IIRC. Something like that at least made a little sense, even if story-wise it didn't amount to diddly. I think CBS was constantly in the position of trying to play catch up with ABC. ABC was doing "fan appreciation" stunts and the huge AMC/OLTL baby swap arc around the time. The later one, introducing Alison back on Y&R as a bud of Amber's---yeah, yuck---but they were also kind of trying to push onto new platforms. Wasn't there some online produced content about how Ali met Amber or something? CBS just always seemed about three steps behind the times. I think attitudes have drastically changed, at least around shows produced by the same set of PTB. Maybe it's a byproduct of the multi-produced show era. L&O, NCIS, FlArrow----if you've got three or four hours of tv to fill a week, isn't it at least a little more efficient to use multiple characters on multiple shows?

But that was like in the '60's. The sly winks to other P&G towns (in the '80's and beyond) on bus schedules, etc., isn't exactly the same thing as living in the "same universe". At least in the current definition, where what's happening in Springfield affects life in Oakdale, or there are crossovers.

I don't think it makes her a homophobe if she thinks her 15yr old isn't ready for that kind of role. But I also don't think it was all about Jake and his schoolwork. And given the way P&G whored out Luke as their banner-waving gay....it was probably for the best Jake left and didn't have to deal with all the BS that came of the role. I mean, Van Hansis was 9 yrs older and at times seemed overwhelmed by the "everything else" that came with it.

There were multiple rumors. That either he or Kim didn't want him taking on a gay role. That it was developing into a bigger role than he initially committed to. That he needed to concentrate on school. That he was concentrating on his music. I think Zim repeatedly said it was his schooling. I gotta kinda wonder why she allowed him to audition for the role in the first place. She had to know being the son of the show's leading heroine (arguably) meant a significant amount of airtime. I also kind of think her contract was coming up, and she knew it wasn't going to be pretty. She might not have wanted him to be caught in the middle.

I think Superman needs to be more than some text message or a voiceless consoler on the other end of a conversation. The creators made it an issue when they brought James Olsen over from the Superman sphere, constantly talkin' about his BFF. Granted, they probably would have had to address the issue at some point, because it is Supergirl....but they pushed the issue appropriating some of the Superman universe.

It might have ultimately been his call, but it was one of Pissy's first suggestions when she came in after CCulliton left/got fired. Who kills off a legacy child with so much potential? When Billy Ross is just sitting there, begging to have a bullet put between his very cute, but basically soulless eyes? Other than actually being happy whenever someone used Bryant's memory to knife a shiv into Craig's gut, it was a meaningless gesture. I still remember how happy I was when Craig found out Bryant was his and not Tonio's. I will never forgive that hack for it either.

I think they used Craig's position in the show, if not his "history". On the surface, the split between Craig and Bryant could have fueled years of story, if written correctly. That the casting was piss-poor (for both roles, Todd Rotundi was awful too) just compounded the problems, and then someone unleashed Pissy on the situation, and Bryant was killed off. I watched the sneak preview of Animal Kingdom. It's not exactly my cup of tea, but I thought Weary (who thankfully got rid of the dorky haircut he had on ATWT) was good in it.

I don't think ATWT would have ventured into a Rick/Jen affair/ons. That was GL territory. IA that TIIC didn't really use any of Craig's history. But given who they had in town, I understood why bringing Craig back made sense. I do wonder who might have been cast in the role if they hadn't had to push back his arrival for Maura's pregnancy in the fall of '99.

Like I said, I don't really have enough memory to really have an opinion on Rick, but from what I've read in the bible, it seems to me Rick was more of an irritant to Bob than a fully fleshed out character. About Craig---it wasn't his return to the darkside that gave me fits. (Honestly, there were a couple of years where Craig really did nothing but hold the hand of every woman he knew. That was a waste of SB's talent, IMO) It was Sheffer's relentless refusal to give Craig any hint of motivation and Block's overbearing "style" of acting that literally couldn't ring out anything close to a human emotion. It's no accident the man couldn't even buy a nomination the year his son died. Soapsuds---it was Meg's miscarriage that Pissy wanted to hang on Craig, and SB made Craig sympathetic anyway. Paul and Meg were so obnoxious in their tortured romance (with both of them lying to Craig and Rosanna) that a lot of people (other than the loyal RH fans...) took Craig and Rosanna's side (Rosanna had just come out of her first coma, and Paul really used her feelings for him that just made him look like an unfeeling ass). It was one of the few times that Pissy spelled out some understandable motivation, although unintentionally, it was for the "villains" of the story, not the star-crossed lovers.

Yep. Rick Ryan. The last time he was brought back ('85-86ish) they laid Kim's non-miscarriage at his feet. I really don't remember him, (even from the '80's stint) but it would have been fascinating to see Barbara interact with him. Re: Mike & Rosanna---(or even Rosanna and Hutch)....y'know, at the time it was happening, I didn't think they were that bad. It's when you look back and think about it that I realize how unoriginal and blah they were. Sure, it's revisionist, and I think it was Maura West really igniting that triangle that showed me how bland SC and YP were, but that's how it goes. Y'know who would have made a good Rick? Terry Lester.

I think the only Tom that Hal would lose to (theorectically) is Gregg Marx. Deas (in his less hammy days) might be a draw. But it's definitely Hal over Scott Holmes' version of Tom. Personally, I liked Hal/Babs way more than Hal/Margo, and I never really got a sexual vibe from Hal/Margo, period. She used him. And if HBS hadn't ended up preggers, I doubt they'd have done the deed, period.

If SuperBreath, HeatVision, Cratering Asphalt and Flying cost 1.5 million per episode, the producers are being ripped off. The Flash has better special effects, IMO.

Nuh-uh. Maybe it felt better because a) all of the sudden GL got more publicity about it's cancellation than it had in the previous 20 years combined, or b ) it had fallen so far that the gruel EW served up looked better than the [!@#$%^&*] on a shingle she'd delivered in Peapack, But I will never forgive the WTFery of Billy and Vanessa's wedding (after most of their reunion being served up off-screen, BTW, and I know that's a fact because they'd sucker me in with spoilers and then be on for a grand total of two FREAKIN minutes while some huge non-event in Otalia's relationship played out for a majority of the eppy) being usurped by Buzz and Lillian and two non-credited Y&R homage-inspired "guests". They freakin' killed Alan and dumped his ashes three feet off a beach. I may hate, loathe and DESPISE the way Luke's dead lover ate up more than half of the last month of the show, and that Katie got more sympathy than the dead matriarch of the show---at her own funeral. Or that that bitch Janet befouled Carjack's honeymoon suite with the afterbirth of her bastard son. Still doesn't make GL's ending better.

I'm torn between admiring the unusual level of honesty, and dismay at how out of touch it feels. She's crowing about a temporary bump from Holden's return like it was Moses parting the Red Sea. I mean, I forget who's writing it at the time, but not to far in the distant future this much praised "revitialization" goes through three sets of writers in less than a year. I honestly don't think I've ever heard an rationalization like she gave for firing ART---well, the pair wasn't working, so instead of ending it, we doubled down. Doubling down with a himbo hair model who'd been on the show probably about two years, and whose popular TV brother on the show is flying the coop. I will not even get into the fuckery that is GL at the time. "The Twin Dilemma" set a new low bar in storytelling. Although it did teach me a new word---superfecundation, which is the term for twins having two different fathers.