DeliaIrisFan

I totally think Brenda was exaggerating her importance—at the same time, making Sonny feel guilty and twisting the knife re: Karen—but now that you mention it, that dialogue does ring a bell. So does the other stuff. Now that you mention it, I wonder if they had actually been planning to pair Brenda and Sonny whether she would have emerged from the Jagger breakup as more of an outcast. I assume the original plan was for Brenda to end up with one of the Quartermaine brothers, so she had to at least have Lila's seal of approval. But instead, Sonny and Brenda could have bonded if more people blamed both of them. I also wonder about how the cast cuts that were made to finance Luke and Laura's return, and if Brenda and Julia were both on the list. And I momentarily forgot about Sonny and SJB's Carly, so I will amend what I said previously: Sonny arguably should never have been heard from again, except for one guest stint in 2000. At the time, I thought the story leading up to Sonny leaving Brenda at the altar was stupid, and her believing Jason was stupid, and I have absolutely no desire to rewatch anything from GH in 1997 so I can't say if I'd feel differently now. I was actually thinking of something darker for the tragic exit that the Labines planted the seeds for: after a year or so of becoming more and more cut off from everyone he once cared about, Who Killed Sonny (with or without a body)? His brief return to impregnate Carly could have been an homage to James Stenbeck on ATWT: Hello Brend...wait, who the hell are you???

Not only that, but RH's title worked (until it didn't, when ABC kept trying to sideline the titular family, but that's another story) because it was a half-hour show. Every good story that show ever told tied back to the Ryans in some way. I don't see how an hourlong, daily soap could feature one family nonstop, and I fear the rest of the characters' stories would feel like filler if the show were named after one family. Anyway, I love being able to quibble over the title of a new, promising soap opera.

Ah, my bad - I was thinking only of U.S. soaps. Sorry about that. But to answer your question, I was (and still am, on YouTube) able to forget the HOTL lyrics altogether whenever the instrumental background score comes on. It was great at Hamp and Gilly's wedding, when Roberta Flack appeared to sing it, and the lyrics were appropriate if not groundbreaking. After that, though...

I agree 200% with both takes on Hold Onto Love. I will always associate the opening as well as the melancholy (instrumental) background score with the best soaps can be. That said, the lyrics were very superficial, and didn't add anything. In fact, at times they cheapened great scenes: like in the courtroom when David was exonerated. How many soap themes have had lyrics? These are the ones I'm aware of, ranked in terms of quality of the lyrics: 1) Edge 2) Search for Tomorrow (We'll...) 2) One Life to Live, (We Only Have...) - admittedly I may be downgrading this one or two rungs because of Paul Rauch 4) Another World (You Take Me Away to...) - this is tough because I have so many happy memories of it, but the lyrics are mediocre at best 5) Hold on to Love 6) Didn't Loving have not one but two lyrical openings? Both were atrocious IMO.

Was Brenda really Karen's bridesmaid? Which wedding? The red dress Brenda was wearing on her way to the one that didn't happen looked nothing like any bridesmaid's dress I've ever seen, let alone what Karen would have picked. And I just FFed through the wedding at Kelly's on YouTube: Brenda was also wearing red there, and her outfit looked nothing like Robin's. I assumed Brenda was invited (both times) as a courtesy, which seemed reasonable in a small town, etc., but that she was not part of the actual wedding party. Bridesmaid may have been overkill, but otherwise, I can't blame the show for not lingering on the gross Brenda/Karen stuff as it's described here (I wasn't watching). If nothing was ever proven, it's reasonable that other characters wouldn't hold it against Brenda, and I can't imagine seeing it litigated on-screen would have been entertaining at all. Presumably the decision had been made to keep VM long-term, so isn't that what Brenda "paying" for it would have required? @dc11786 - a Labine GH without the mob would have been interesting to me as well, but I can't imagine any other plot device from Luke and Laura's past adventures that she would have had any desire to explore. The mob (at least at the time) was a credible source of physical and moral conflict, but could exist in the same universe as realistic, character-driven stories. Of course, why Claire Labine was selected to write GH during L&L's return given her style remains one of soaps' great unsolved mysteries for me, but I can't fault her for how she executed any of it. Tony Geary may have hated Luke's 1993-94 story and/or given himself and his friend credit for the idea, but Luke and Laura's comeback was well-written, compelling, and true to everything Labine and Riche wanted to do with the show. In fact, I give Labine even more credit for how seamlessly it all came off on screen, having read Geary's account. As for Sonny, what he became under later regimes (and what the rest of the show eventually became to sustain him) was a travesty, but I don't blame Labine for any of that. Other than Ryan, I've never even heard of any of those early '90s villains, but Sonny would have left a lasting impression for me even if he were never heard from again after he first left. In hindsight, I can see how the Labines may have actually been laying the groundwork for Sonny's downfall (moving way up in the organization + losing the people who brought out the best in him) if their successors had been willing to go there, knowing MB's contract was up the next year and he'd probably want to try other things. I loved Sonny at the time but I believe I could have accepted that, and I don't argue that a break from the mob would have made sense at that point.

The current GH writing turnover coinciding with a "fan favorite" return made me think of Luke and Laura's 1993 return (not to say Jason is in their league). I just rewatched that Friday show when L&L appeared for < 1 minute at the end and GH supposedly tied(?) Y&R in the ratings in the second half hour. I am curious about some of the choices that were made for this episode, when millions more eyeballs were on this show than ever would be again. I believe the only characters featured that day who had met L&L were Felicia and, of course, Scott. Unfortunately (from my perspective anyway), all of Scott's scenes were with Katherine Bell - Lucy was still a few weeks away from exposing Katherine as a con artist. I just wonder why Bobbie and/or the Quartermaines wouldn't have made an appearance, to give returning viewers some familiarity. That said, I wouldn't exactly say the show was catering to newer viewers, either - there was no exposition to explain who Luke and Laura were. Bill Eckert was also MIA, so someone who had only watched the show for 5-10 years or less could theoretically have wondered if that was him with a new hairstyle in the cliffhanger. I don't mean to fault Claire Labine for trusting viewers to figure stuff out, or even for the way she chose to arrange the deck chairs < 2 weeks after officially taking the helm. The larger what-if for me is what would have happened if the network had gotten their ducks in a row sooner: if the writing team had been in place for at least a few months. Wasn't it ~ 6 months from the time the news broke that Francis was returning before Luke and Laura first appeared? GH got a boost in the ratings from their return, but there could have been even more of an impact if, say, BJ's accident had happened on the same Friday we first saw L&L. Also interesting was that the very last scene before we first saw the Spencers in Canada featured Karen, who had run off with Jagger, deciding to return to Port Charles and come forward about what Sonny and Ray had done to her. This really makes me wonder if Michele Val Jean had pitched the idea of revisiting Laura's rape years before it eventually happened, with the intention that it would dovetail with Karen's story in much the same way it eventually came up after Liz's rape. I know Vee has written about the scene a few weeks after this when Laura found an old disco light and freaked out a bit. Karen being Scott's daughter would have made for an interesting dynamic.

Wow, this is such incredible news. There isn't much more to say that hasn't already been posted. I'm just so happy for MVJ, and for the possibility of some kind of future for this genre.

For sure, Valentini and Carlivati have an enthusiasm for veterans that is admirable, whatever else you could say about their work. (And post-2009 at the absolute latest, there is little else good that I have to say.) I just don't think any writer or producer would have been empowered to center so many characters in their 40s or 50s to such an extent for about 10-20 years there previously. It seems like every regime had to pick and choose, and the vets who got airtime all had to be tied (by any dubious DNA test) to one or more of the teen characters. Or they and/or their love interest were about to be killed off...

Reilly is probably a stretch, true - although to hear Nancy Curlee tell it, he did not play along with CBS/P&G's efforts to divide and conquer their writing partnership at GL. And he did manage to get some of the best GL script writers to Passions (I'm not sure what they did there, based on the dialogue in every scene I ever saw). It wouldn't have had to be a big public thing, but there were writers and producers with proven track records of delivering successful material and not taking any sh*t from the networks who were recently MIA at what turned out to be a critical juncture.

There was something I noticed when I tuned back into GH after many years for Jackie Zeman's send-off last month. This is a slight exaggeration and certainly not scientific at all, but it seemed to me like there are more Gen X breakout soap stars of their day featured prominently on that one show than there were Baby Boomers on the frontburner across all the soaps in the late '90s/early '00s, who would have been around the same age then. To say nothing of even older cast members. It seems like those actors are there now because someone thinks they'll appeal to lapsed soap viewers, even if those viewers are older now. Of course, many of those middle-aged+ performers who are now getting work on GH made their names on shows that are off the air (like Maura West, to bring it back to ATWT) and/or in stories that were mostly lackluster to begin with. And whether they're being well utilized is even further off-topic, so I'll just leave it there on that note. It's just sad this couldn't have happened when there were still ~ 10 soaps with 40+ and 50+ year-old veterans who had rich histories that could still be mined - ATWT chief among them, of course. That said, I don't know if the all-powerful demographic has actually been debunked or if networks have given up on the idea of 18-34 year–olds watching a soap, or perhaps any other network TV in the daytime. Still, knowing what I know now, a part of me wishes TPTB had decided in 1990-something that soaps were on borrowed time and let them keep doing their thing for as long as it continued to make sense to keep them on the air.

Exactly - whatever creative freedom Reilly enjoyed at that time, he might have seen the writing on the wall and spoken up if he had seen multiple writers he knew and respected being steamrolled by the suits. So many showrunners in place at that time seemingly were in over their heads. It's hard not to think some others just didn't care. You might say the networks stepping in was justifiable, at least until they rehired writers and producers who had proven histories and apparently treated them the same way.

Most notably, Doug Marland had died the year before, so ATWT was both struggling creatively and written by people with little to no experience standing up to networks. Nancy Curlee had just left GL, and Robert Calhoun a couple of years before that. Agnes Nixon was allegedly sidelined at AMC during Megan McTavish's tenure (wasn't MM the first person besides Nixon to be credited at the top of AMC's writers?) so probably less inclined to do battle with ABC. And, controversial or not, didn't Linda Gottlieb also leave OLTL that year (although that might have been an effect as opposed to a cause of the changing power dynamics)? Of course, others going back to Irna Phillips had been long gone. ETA: SB had been canceled the year before, so—also controversial—Pam Long and the Dobsons were not working in the industry for the first time in over a decade and several decades, respectively. I just wonder what would have happened if a few more of these veteran showrunners had been around to present a united front with peers like Labine, and Bell, even if he was less personally affected. Even Reilly, with his newfound clout, by all accounts did not like being micromanaged. But he was probably just doing his own thing and to some extent oblivious to what generic writers at lower-rated shows were dealing with.

IMO the OJ trial happening when it did, as opposed to the timing of Iran-Contra, etc., made for kind of a perfect storm for soaps. In hindsight, a number of formidable writers/producers with strong points of view were recently gone from the industry or stepping back. Many of the shows weren't offering up their strongest material to begin with, and nearly all of the showrunners were less experienced than some of their recent predecessors at successfully standing up to the networks to protect their vision (to the extent they had one). For my money, GH was the only soap that was at the top of its game by June of 1994, and Claire Labine has said managing the networks was something she wasn't the best at. But she and Bill Bell (who was probably more insulated from network meddling) had decades' more experience as head writers than just about anyone else working. I also suspect Reilly's DAYS benefited from being, unintentionally at least at first, counter-programming. On the increasingly rare day when even 15 minutes of a soap aired, the possession story was different from anything in the wall-to-wall OJ coverage. Of course, by the time the ABC/P&G shows started getting mandates to copy it, the trial was no longer offering up sensationalized drama that was at least related to real-life issues, which had been kind of the bare minimum you could expect from most soaps up until that point. And the drop in ratings across the board seemed to feed into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Network execs doubled down on their micromanaging, which had already probably weakened some of the lower-rated shows, because now almost every show's ratings constituted a crisis. At least, it did in their minds, although the fact that any shows are still on the air 30 years later—all with much lower ratings—casts doubt on the idea that most/all soaps weren't still turning a healthy profit back then.

The May 1995 episode is a great find from the Labine era. I've seen that mob shooting montage itself—which, unlike any number throughout the late '90s and '00s, involved characters who were genuinely trying to extricate themselves from that kind of life of violence, and the emotion was earned—a number of times over the years. But I'm not sure the full episode has seen the light of day in almost 30 years. Although the shooting happened at night, the show opened with everyone waking up/eating breakfast, and various characters dropped in briefly throughout the day without necessarily appearing in all or most of the acts: Lucy only showed up mid-episode/midday for an ELQ board meeting (that was indirectly related to the mob war), early Emily talked about A Wrinkle in Time and her other favorite books, and Bobbie was in just one scene: doing a good deed for Emily's dying mother, Paige, out of friendship to Monica. In fact, there were a number of fairly extended scenes between friends: Monica/Paige, Mac/Felicia (who were broken up at this point and years away from a reconciliation), and Brenda/Robin. This episode also featured the full end credits, including non-contract players. Some soap marginalia: Larry Lau, presumably the same actor who had played Greg on AMC, was credited as a coroner (I'm at a loss as to what story at this time that would have involved). Also, "Sonny's guy" was played by Mike Sabitino. My guess is this wasn't the '90s soap hopper Michael Sabatino (and Crystal Chappell's husband), who probably would have merited a character with a name at that point in his daytime career, but I can't find any actor on IMDB who spelled their name that way. Most likely this was the Mike Sabatino with a number of '90s credits, including that summer's (in)famous Batman Forever.

Ah. Maybe. But they always had chemistry, it's just that Lois knows (or knew) better. Actually, has Lois had any substantive scenes with Michael? It just occurred to me that Sonny's adopted son and a Quartermaine heir running ELQ might seem to Lois like an unholy alliance between two forces she was always ambivalent about. It would make more sense if Lois had told Sonny about Nina because she wanted to thwart whatever Michael was up to in keeping that secret, to make sure her daughter didn't get caught up in it.

Oh, sorry, I thought you meant Lois's current involvement in the music business was through L&B. I guess that makes sense for the character.

The scene circa New Year's Day when Lois was egging Sonny on not to "forgive" CW's character was the most bizarre I've seen. Unless Lois has some history with Nina that went completely over my head, if Lois even cared one way or the other, she should have reminded Sonny how things turned out the last time he exiled a woman who "betrayed" him and asked him how many more chances he thinks he's going to get.

I don't even know how the music industry works these days, but I just assumed Apple, Amazon, et al, make most of the money BTS. In any event, I can only imagine the '90s would have turned out to be a lousy time to be founding a startup record company, even one that had signed the fictionalized version of Ricky Martin. I think it would be more interesting if Lois's company hadn't made it for real-world reasons, and that was still a sore spot for her, but she had nevertheless been able to parlay that experience into some industry that one or more other characters work in currently.

It seems like the first 35-40 years of Olivia's life—from what I remember reading online at the time she and Dante were introduced, and the exposition/recap she helpfully provided in the New Year's Eve episode—might have turned out differently if she had a BFF like OG Lois. When Olivia screamed at Lois that Sonny shooting Dante was the worst moment of her life, I had a flash of something Lois once said to Brenda: "Are you going to stand by your man until he bleeds to death like some stupid country western singer?" Agreed that Lois barely knows Jagger, if at all. It makes sense they might have met when Stone was dying,but given Brenda's role as Ned's accomplice in his double life at the time of the wedding, she wouldn't have brought Lois to the wedding if she thought Lois would know anybody there, let alone the groom. I also agree Lois would not be so overbearing, or at least if she were she would be trying to overcompensate for the Quartermaines' influence, not goading Tracy to spend yet more money on Brook Lynn's wedding. Even if the idea is that Lois has turned into her parents, which is maybe getting lost in translation because Rena has barely aged, Lois's mother was OK with the fact that Lois had eloped to a justice of the peace (with "Eddie"). I also can't believe Lois had so much more tact in her 20s than she does at this point in her life (Edward genuinely respected her business savvy, and now she's getting into screaming matches in people's places of business?). And Lois was never blindly loyal to Sonny. I was wondering that. In the grand scheme of things, the writing for Lois isn't even in the top 20 list of what this regime needs to try and fix, but her return was one of the few pleasant surprises when I tuned back in this year for Bobbie's memorial. (I already knew Lucy, Tracy, et al were featured semi regularly and looked amazing, but I also knew they were mostly rehashing scenes from the '80s and '90s. Whereas Lois at this point is almost a blank slate.) I'd selfishly love to see something good for her character.

Whoa. Yeah, when I tuned back in for Bobbie's memorial and recognized the actress playing Brook Lynn from (Valentini's) OLTL, I figured she would have plenty to do, and plenty for Lois to support at least. But the wedding-planning scene (with Tracy being the de facto Lila) was just bizarre. I think JE and RS are good together, even if the writing for their scenes is as superficial as they were in 1996. Have they even established what Lois now does for a living? Presumably her record company would have either made the transition to digital and she's so independently wealthy that she wouldn't need the Quartermaines' hospitality, or more likely she transitioned to another business but probably gained some impressive experience along the way. Couldn't she have some kind of business dealing with Tracy that adds some layers? That makes sense. From the clips I could find of Ned's amnesia by the time I realized Rena was back, it seemed like a stupid story, but at least it made sense for Lois to be there. Then again, there are so many prominent (GH and/or other) soap stars from the '90s on cast, with varying degrees of airtime.

I remember Lois was at Karen and Jagger's wedding, as Brenda's plus one. Incidentally, that may have been the last time Lois spent the night in the Quartermaine mansion itself before she moved in(?) a few months ago (one of many things I don't think rings true about how Lois is being written). I remember Brenda was living there at the time and invited Lois to stay over. I believe that was the first time Lois (knowingly) met any of the Qs, besides Ned. Did LLC share scenes with (any) Lois previously? Was it even stated explicitly when Olivia was first introduced that she and Lois had been childhood friends, or was that a retcon? It's hard to believe anyone would have cared enough to make that connection back then.

Every time ASJ says or does something that gets C-list media attention, I'm more ashamed that my adolescent self lusted after him in various states of undress. Beyond that, I could care less about him, let alone the character. Meanwhile, I've been keeping my eyes out for Lois's name in the episode summaries on Hulu ever since Bobbie's sendoff (which was the first I'd learned Rena Sofer had returned). I was beginning to think Lois had been written off without explanation, but apparently she'd been wandering around the Quartermaine mansion off-screen for about a month. This Jagger recast makes me question if the intention for all the living characters who were on the show in 1993 to join her? I love seeing Rena as Lois, but I don't love how they're writing the character. I'm also at a loss as to where she fits into the "main" stories. Ostensibly Lois is playing a supportive role in her daughter's story, but Brook Lynn seems to be backburnered herself now. Lois's most dramatic material in the past month with the Olivia character, who disappeared herself for most of January. And of course Ned remains MIA altogether. Am I missing something? All to say, the way they're wasting Rena's Lois doesn't bode well for bringing back another character from that era with fewer connections to the current canvas and a recast. Never mind, of course, that there is a new writing team taking over in a month...why on earth recast Jagger now?

Is the current GH writing team still primarily composed of Carlivati's OLTL hires, or have most of those followed him to DOOL? I can't remember the OLTL names at this point, but Korte's name was the only one I recognized from GH BITD the week of Bobbie's death.

I meant as part of the head writing team, but if I read she was back onboard in just about any capacity I'd be even more interested than I already am.

WOW...