Michael

Well, that's disappointing. I was beginning to regard her as a really shrewd bit of casting.

I think Brady is pretty played-out romantically, too, but I could also see a use for him as more of a middle-aged dad. SORAS Tate, bring in Parker, keep Brady and Chloe together trying to make this crazy blended family work (with that little demon Rachel in the mix). I like EM a lot -- they've just thrown a LOT of love interests at him. To his credit, he's made most of them work at least somewhat, but it's resulted in a character without much of a throughline or evolution.

That Stefan/Brady moment actually made me laugh.

I think they mentioned last fall that Parker is in boarding school. Prior to that, he had been in NY with Nancy and Craig because Chloe "didn't want to pull him out of his school" or whatever. Amazing how easy parenting is in Salem!

Pretty sure that photo was taken at the 50th anniversary celebration in 2015.

17 hours ago, Tonksadora said:

Okay, I'm afraid I'm going to have to call a foul on the play for fictitious narrative. I do not believe that either Abe or Paulina has ever said word one about Sloan! And, @AbcNbc247I know that you did not say this, that it just quoted wrong. I'm not so positive if Nicole has said anything. And I know many fans have dragged Sloan but let's be fair to Abe & Paulina! 

Sloan's entire reason for coming to town was Paulina and Chanel. Paulina has said a LOT about Sloan (whether one considers it warranted or not). She also paid off the authorities to rule Sloan's mother's death an accident, while Sloan blames Chanel for the death *and* Paulina for the cover-up. Paulina has been wholly unsympathetic to the fact that this woman lost both her parents. 

Just now, janea4old said:

In today's episode, Nick and Jake remark that once the ladies awaken in their bodies alive, they won't remember anything from this otherworld experience.

So why did we as viewers need to endure all that crap?

I wish I could join them!

On 2/20/2023 at 2:03 PM, KLN said:

First characters that came to mind were Chloe and Nicole on Days.

This one seemed so ridiculous in 2008, but it actually works for me these days. They just really skipped over that whole "Hey, you put flesh-eating bacteria on my face" business in favor of "Uh, Sami is annoying, right?" 

Then it actually upset me when they gave them tension over Daniel (UGH) a few years later.

This is an absolute f***ing disaster. How can the financials at Y&R be worse than DAYS?!

36 minutes ago, Tonksadora said:

Thank you. So, now, with people wanting Eric & Nicole to have Marlena grief sex & come out of it with a miracle baby, they mean that she would carry to term? Or just that they'd conceive? 

I'm assuming fans want to give them a biological kid. Much crazier stuff than that has happened on Days, but it's a tough sell that pushing-50 Nicole, who could not carry a baby to term in 2008 or 2012, would somehow be able to do so now. 

1 minute ago, Tonksadora said:

I just godawful love them!! Whose child is Holly? 

Biologically she is Nicole's daughter with Daniel, but Chloe carried Holly to term after Daniel's passing. 

12 minutes ago, KLN said:

I'm always surprised by the popularity of Eric and Nicole.

They've built appeal over time but they were hated in '98. So boring on the heels of Reilly 1.0. It wasn't til Nicole dumped Eric for money and social status that she became interesting and fans fell in love with her.

Eric floundered with Greta and was written out but when they brought him back (with Greg Vaughan) years later they wrote it like Eric and Nicole were some great romance and suddenly people loved them.

I'm still trying to figure it out.

I think a huge part of it had to do with Nicole's standing at the time. They'd brought her back as a vixen-type, paired her with EJ (which was a popular pairing, but EJami was clearly the focal pairing there), and built this narrative about her desire to be a mother and essentially losing three children: the baby she miscarried, Sydney once the switch came out, and Daniel Rafael (BLEH) when she fell down the stairs. So there was a ton of rooting value, and she was primed for a redemption arc. GV's Eric showed up and felt like a handsome, decent man who was actually brought on *for* Nicole, but his standing as a priest and her self-destructive tendencies were their obstacles. It was a great setup, so I think it was more what Eric *represented* for Nicole than some actual great love for the past. She essentially had a chance, after 15 years of f*ck-ups, to reclaim the Good Thing that she'd tossed away for five million dollars a decade and a half prior.

The writing and comings-and-goings since obviously haven't landed all that potential nearly as well as it could have been handled, but I totally get where and how the myth of it all took root.

16 hours ago, TEdgeofNight said:

So there ya go. Because you take pictures, all is well. 

Why are you so sure that she was fired? I'm genuinely curious if you know something we don't.

Yeah, it appeared that her contract ran out and she stuck around for a few more weeks on a non-contract basis to play out Allie's exit. But I could be wrong! It feels pretty obvious onscreen that there was an abrupt shift away from Allie/Chanel to me.

23 minutes ago, TEdgeofNight said:

Can't wait for Bo & Hope. Days needs.............something. Anything. The show has been so dull.  

I wonder why they fired the Allie actress. She was bad but usually they sign the younger people for 3 or 4 years and they let her go early in her contract. She must have been a nightmare.

I don't think she was fired. She chose not to re-sign. It also sounds like they are generally doing shorter contracts these days, though I'm not entirely sure why. 

It wouldn't shock me to learn that Days is the most-viewed original series on Peacock in terms of sheer numbers, simply because there are five new episodes a week. Technically, yeah, it'd be getting a lot more eyeballs on it because it releases a lot more episodes than anything else Peacock is producing/releasing by far.

2 hours ago, Tonksadora said:

I thought Liesl was fine. Scotty was adequate. Only Brad was really special. Getting alone, not having his brown paper bag be conspicuous, the two spoons & eating a little bit of the ice cream. And, then I LOVE how mad he is. It is so real. My BFF, since 1974, who I talked to on the phone every single day, died last year. The Omicron variant stole her away. And what I felt was anger. I was so mad, for so long! 

I'm very sorry for the loss of your friend.

Was this Ben Hogestyn playing Lucas?

Yeah, I don't think Nick is literally Satan -- I think it's yet another form Satan is taking.

It's still ridiculous! If Blake Berris is open to returning, can't we just say Jessica had twins and her DID had recurred so she gave one away or something?

2 hours ago, Cat said:

Or it could be as simple as Alexia let S4 go to her head, planned her strategy to go for Nicole and simply overreached. I do think she is stressed about something, and that is the situation with Peter. She has coddled and protected that manchild for too long. He beat up a homeless guy back in the day, and it was brushed off as He's a Triubled Teen. He still talks and acts like his 15, but he's 30 now. So her acting out could also be deflection.

She's a strong personality, but Todd wears the pants in that relationship, and I wonder if subconsciously she's acting a fool because of the pressure that brings, too. I don't think she can easily sway him to do things her way generally. 

Those are very good points, too! Something has definitely shifted.

I got the impression, watching this week's episode, that something is going on with Alexia. We all know she's dealt with a LOT in her life -- which makes her a really compelling Housewife -- but I do wonder if, now that she got the wedding, she's not as happy with Todd as she wants to project, and she's lashing out at others as a result. There's a meanness and irrationality to her attacks this season that feel like they have to be coming from someplace else.

It's jarring to see side-by-side scenes of her supporting Frankie and those of her refusing to exhibit any logic or humility in picking fights with Adriana and Nicole.

I could be wrong here, but I THINK the residuals for characters that a writer created doesn't apply quite as broadly as fans have been led to believe. In primetime, there's something about how the writer who wrote the teleplay in which a recurring character first appears -- NOT the showrunner -- receives residuals any time that character appears in a subsequent episode. But those payments stop if and when the character becomes a series regular. So if episode 5 of season 1 introduces a quirky clown, and that clown is also used in episode 12, the writer of episode 5 gets a residual payment. But if the clown is such a hit that they make him a series regular for season 2, the residual payments no longer apply. I do not think it applies if a new character is brought on as a series regular from the get-go. Don't quote me on that, but I'm fairly certain there's provision of that nature.

Daytime is a different beast, obviously, and there's a head writer, breakdown writer, and script writer all with their hands in the pot for any given episode. And lots of characters are introduced AS series regulars -- i.e., with a long-term contract -- so I'm not sure how that would impact residuals for daytime characters and writers.

I've been both a script coordinator (the person who tracks these appearances and submits the invoices for them) and a writer who has received the payments, and this is as much clarity as I have, which tells you how confusing it all is!

Yeah, if we ever got rid of Heinle, we'd probably get Rebecca Budig as Victoria or something.

I don't really think Christie Clark would've been the right recast in 2005, or even now. She just projects a different air than what Victoria is supposed to be. I've always wanted to see Clark play a REAL bitch with an edge, though!

I wasn't watching Y&R during her brief stint, and I can probably guess the answer, but what did people think of Sarah Aldrich as Victoria?

7 minutes ago, j swift said:

I get your point, but the ratings do not support your thesis.  While RHoSLC is down this season, the variability is not statistically significant, which means that it is due to chance versus audience rejection

And season 12 of RHoBH, (which was certainly not my favorite), was also a ratings success

RHOBH Season 12 hitting a series high in total viewers in the ratings. According to Nielsen, Episode 10 earned a 0.26 in the P18-49 demo and 1,212,000 viewers, up over the year prior (0.30 / 1,138,000)

That doesn't even take into account DVR viewers or Peacock.  So, while we complain they're still raking in the dough which gives very little reason for change.  If anything the expansion to Miami and Dubai demonstrate that they are committed to the format.  And Peacock's decision today to use Andy for the Traitor's Reunion suggests that they are committed to him as the face of the network.

All of that is to say, our opinions may be valid, but we should be careful toward believing that there is universal agreement based on social media feedback when it often doesn't reflect the actual audience support.

I was going to say -- this is the first year that the episodes are reliably available on a streaming service almost simultaneous with their premiere on the network. There are likely plenty of folks who either no longer even get Bravo or, since they don't watch it night-of, just fire it up on Peacock on Thursday or over the weekend. 

I do think the shows will continue to evolve, as some elements become outdated, and certain cast members or full franchises will be left behind in the process, but that's always been the case. 

4 hours ago, te. said:

To be fair to Thaao - how many times did he actually *know* he was supposed to be playing Andre? Tony kept being retconned into really being Andre, so he basically had no chance to really create two separate characters; add that sometimes and sometimes not Andre was clearly supposed to be in for the long haul (until some producer decided they didn't like Thaao again), so he had to add likeable elements to the character.

 

In all honesty, I think Thaao himself is understandably confused as to how to play Tony. I do like having him (and Anna) on the canvas though.

Oh, I agree. It's all so retroactive and ridiculous. There's just nothing to distinguish them from one another anymore besides loving Anna, and I guess that Tony is nicER or sillier or whatever. They're just not even really characters to me.