Doesn't Stafford refuse to play psycho Phyllis ever again? I don't think they'll be going into that direction, though I do see more scheming for Phyllis, which doesn't mean she'll resort to her inner psychotic tendencies.

Phyllis is much more easily intergratable elsewhere in the cast than Nick and Sharon are. Phyllis has been intergrated with many different characters over the years, Nick and Sharon really haven't.

Most of Nick and Sharon's time on this show has been developed with each other, which means like 80% of their backstories somehow relate to one another, Phyllis doesn't have that problem.

I think Phyllis will keep her gray characteristics and after the Nick roadblock, she'll move elsewhere. They really can't afford to make her a psycho again, with Stafford refusing to play it or without writing the character off in the end.

I'm not privy to what Michelle Stafford does or does not agree to. If she has that kind of power, than TPTB or TIIC believe that she is indispensable.

Your other points are spot on and go along way towards pointing out how Nick and Sharon have been failed by the writers and not just LML. All the way back, those two have been established as having no other worth than their romance and inevitable infidelity. To me that does not make for good soap characters, because good soap characters can always move around canvas and generate interest wherever they go. Nothing needs to be forced, they are the story.

I'm not privy to what Michelle Stafford does or does not agree to. If she has that kind of power, than TPTB or TIIC believe that she is indispensable.

I believe it was Marla or someone else that quoted Stafford as saying she doesn't or refuses to play psycho Phyllis.

Frankly, if she wields that much approval of material, I'd fire her...

Your other points are spot on and go along way towards pointing out how Nick and Sharon have been failed by the writers and not just LML. All the way back, those two have been established as having no other worth than their romance and inevitable infidelity. To me that does not make for good soap characters, because good soap characters can always move around canvas and generate interest wherever they go. Nothing needs to be forced, they are the story.

I agree.

Partly why Nick and Sharon are so useless without one another was the way they were established and kept together for a decade. So much of their history is tied up in one another, that it's hard to move them away from one another. I don't know if that was Bill Bell's original intention or not, but the years of developing those characters together as opposed to as individuals is a failure, because they can't escape one another, and at this point with all the years given to them, it makes no sense to see their orbits NOT interacting. Though really, I question if anyone would accept two completely new characters being paired with Nick and Sharon, I bet most would hate them for the fact that those two possible love interests would be "newbies" alone. TPTB waited way too long to move Nick and Sharon apart.

Edited January 21, 200916 yr by Y&RWorldTurner

Frankly, if she wields that much approval of material, I'd fire her...

I agree. That goes for everyone on any soap from top to bottom. Actors need to learn to STFU and act.

But on the other hand i can respect when they disagree and go to bat for something they honestly believe is wrong for the char and will hurt them. But again, at the end of the day, actors ened to act.

I dont blame actors tho. TPTB let it happen - hell soemtimes even encourage it (hello Days & GH!)

I agree. That goes for everyone on any soap from top to bottom. Actors need to learn to STFU and act.

But on the other hand i can respect when they disagree and go to bat for something they honestly believe is wrong for the char and will hurt them. But again, at the end of the day, actors ened to act.

I dont blame actors tho. TPTB let it happen - hell soemtimes even encourage it (hello Days & GH!)

I don't have a disagreement with actors standing up to for their characters and questioning stupid writing. If Eric Braeden had of done that, we could have been spared having Sabrina and the miracle baby storyline. I lost a lot of respect for him when he played that one out, no questions asked. I just don't think that actors should have storyline control.

As for Nick and Sharon being useless without each other, how useful are they with each other?

I don't have a disagreement with actors standing up to for their characters and questioning stupid writing. If Eric Braeden had of done that, we could have been spared having Sabrina and the miracle baby storyline. I lost a lot of respect for him when he played that one out, no questions asked. I just don't think that actors should have storyline control.

As for Nick and Sharon being useless without each other, how useful are they with each other?

I actually gained respect for Braden by not refusing to play it. Bringing up an issue with a storyline sure, but again.. at the end of the day the writers write and the actors act and thats what needs to be done.

EXACTLY! they are not useful together. She is useless without him. But he without her can go on.

Fan base meltdown alert. I'm not a fan of either couple. I think Josh Morrow is the weak link. If pushed I'd have to admit that Y&R is better off with Sharon and Nick back together, but is shouldn't happen for another 5 years or so.

I am so disappointed in this...a raging snowstorm-soap cliche #32

Nah, recycling the best stories is cool. There is the karma aspect (Nick and Phyllis were stuck in a snowstorm motel), and the historical element (Jack and Jill had sex, and Lindsey Wells photographed it)....

...which is why, in my version of it, Adam happens to be free and walking by the cabin when the sex is occurring. And he happens to have a camera (e.g., his fancy cell phone). And a classic soap tale is reborn....

Maybe Adam doesn't use it, but instead, decides to pursue Sharon (since Nick remains committed to his marriage). And he holds on to that picture for months or years, until it finally suits his purposes...

Not original, but so much soapy fun.

Fan base meltdown alert. I'm not a fan of either couple. I think Josh Morrow is the weak link. If pushed I'd have to admit that Y&R is better off with Sharon and Nick back together, but is shouldn't happen for another 5 years or so.

In the early and mid-90s, I would have been right there with you. But somewhere along the way, Joshua matured into something much better. He doesn't get the credit he deserves for the sincerity and authenticity and well modulated emotion that I feel he brings to every scene.

The first time I thought there was hope for the boy was when Noah was born...and presumed dead briefly. The Nick-Sharon anguish was palpable. Then, of course, the whole brilliant Cassie-death arc (from which we are STILL feeling repercussions...talk about a great, meaningful death!) helped him come into his own. One of my favorite scenes of his was during the Nick-van-Winkle LML tale (the episode broken down by Barbara Bloom, if you can believe it!). The anguish he played when he REDISCOVERED that he had lost his wife and and his daughter and his family...well, it was breathtaking for me.

So, in my opinion, Morrow can no longer be accused of being a weak link.

Wow, great news. Yay!

The first time I thought there was hope for the boy was when Noah was born...and presumed dead briefly. The Nick-Sharon anguish was palpable. Then, of course, the whole brilliant Cassie-death arc (from which we are STILL feeling repercussions...talk about a great, meaningful death!) helped him come into his own. One of my favorite scenes of his was during the Nick-van-Winkle LML tale (the episode broken down by Barbara Bloom, if you can believe it!). The anguish he played when he REDISCOVERED that he had lost his wife and and his daughter and his family...well, it was breathtaking for me.

Not to get off topic, but I always liked Bloom's stuff on Port Charles, and I definitely remember (once I got over my shock of seeing Bloom's names in the credits as a breakdown writer) loving that episode with Nick, Mark. I really wish she'd go back to being a writer.

Fan base meltdown alert. I'm not a fan of either couple. I think Josh Morrow is the weak link. If pushed I'd have to admit that Y&R is better off with Sharon and Nick back together, but is shouldn't happen for another 5 years or so.

I agree with you here. I expect it to happen as you can't throw away that much history with two characters. But I would rather have it way down the line.

Good that's all I wanted, because let's face it, even if you hate Sharon and Nick, they're obviously end game. In the soap universe, you don't just throw away a decade long love affair, people connected for that long ALWAYS end up back together. I assume the "messy journey" means a lot of soapyness and they won't actually get together at all very soon, but it will be a long process. Hopefully, Phyllis can move on and perhaps find another man or have some hate sex with Jack. I assume she'll go crazy again soon, at least for a bit. LOL!

Phyllis just doesn't belong with the Newmans, she's like a stranger to everyone in that family outside of Nick.

Amen!

Karma is such a bitch Phyllis

What progress has Phyllis made though? The character did a complete 180 when she turned into a happy homemaker and lost the fire that made her so interesting in the first place. They've slowly been adding more fiery elements back to the character over the past few months, but that's not enough. Phyllis has been a severely damaged character, probably the one character most ruined by LML. It's going to take a lot more to repair her, and getting her away from Nick looks like a good option to me. Nick and Phyllis worked as a forbidden affair, not a happy couple. They really have no deep history or emotional bond, and thus they aren't interesting unless they're on the verge of breaking up. Nick and Sharon were never my cup of tea, but at least their relationship was developed. I bought the history between those two characters, and I see that they have an emotional bond. With Nick and Phyllis, it's always been about sex, I've yet to see the emotional bond between those two characters. It's best for them to go their separate ways. I don't want a couple that's purely based on sex, like Nick and Phyllis, what's really the use?

Yep!

Not to get off topic, but I always liked Bloom's stuff on Port Charles, and I definitely remember (once I got over my shock of seeing Bloom's names in the credits as a breakdown writer) loving that episode with Nick, Mark. I really wish she'd go back to being a writer.

Agreed. I liked Bloom's work with Karen Harris on PC. Never saw the episodes on Y&R she did breakdowns for.

And BTW, the best news I've heard THIS WEEK.

Edited January 21, 200916 yr by bellcurve

Is it only out of town air that gets [Nick & Sharon] acting this way?

Not necessarily. Remember the lip-lock in the bank vault?

I really wish [barbara Bloom would] go back to being a writer.

Praise for Babs Bloom? I ask you, how often does that happen?

I'm slightly more invested in Nick & Sharon, b/c, as Y&RWorldTurner pointed out, they share a unique, emotional bond. (As opposed to Nick & Phyllis, who share, what? A baby, and maybe a prescription for Valtrex.) Having said that, I, too, believe Nick to be the weak(er) link in both relationships; and if Nick & Sharon must reunite at all, then it should not happen right away.

So happy to hear that Nick & Sharon will reunite eventually. I am also so happy to see Nick & Phyllis on their way to be over. I can't stand Phyllis at all right now. Their relationship has always seem to be based on sex. So what if they have a daughter, Shick having a child didn't stop her from breaking up Nick's marriage. I always preferred her with Jack and if they don't end up together I am fine with that. I think out of the two couples I am more invested in Nick & Sharon.

I love Joshua Morrow's comments on this whole thing. It's going to rock and is long overdue.