Yeah, but we know Bradley won't invest in her for an extended period of time either.

Probably not. I hate all the unrealized potential the show has....

Another thing, I think this show's cast is way too f-cking huge. They could stand to fire a few people, especially some of the underdeveloped newbies and younger characters/actors they aren't invested in.

Then they need to hire a real storyteller that specializes in ensemble writing.

All this talk about changing headwriters and doing away with characters isn't going to fix anything. Why get rid of Lauren, when you can just write Tracey a decent story? In that case, LML made a good decision getting rid of Eileen Davidson because she wasn't writing for her. The problem is not Lauren, she's fine, so let's concentrate on ridding characters who are simply not working like Tyra. The biggest "accomplishment" MAB has done thus far is reinvigorating both Jill and Katherine. Now, she just needs to continue getting the show back on track.

Another thing, I think this show's cast is way too f-cking huge. They could stand to fire a few people, especially some of the underdeveloped newbies and younger characters/actors they aren't invested in.

Then they need to hire a real storyteller that specializes in ensemble writing.

Well, it's hard to tell when half of them are not being written for. I don't think the cast is huge at all, at one point we used to have a full deck of Winters, Newmans, Chancellors (okay just Kay really), Williams, plus supporting players. It's all in balancing, which seems to be non-existent these days.

If people like Maria's work & you don't it doesn't mean they've christened her Y&R's savior.

Apparently you don't read Nelson Branco's column.

All this talk about changing headwriters and doing away with characters isn't going to fix anything. Why get rid of Lauren, when you can just write Tracey a decent story? In that case, LML made a good decision getting rid of Eileen Davidson because she wasn't writing for her.

LML got rid of not only Ashley, but John, and eventually Billy too (though the actor sucked). She didn't like the whole Abbott clan, Lauren doesn't have the familial ties that Ashley has, nothing saying that is much, but Lauren is much more expendable IMO.

Also, they do not owe Tracey anything since she's recurring. Why not use, you know, your actual on contract cast before paying someone on recurring regularly? In this economy, recurring status doesn't make sense, and the show probably thinks it makes better business sense to not use Tracey much, since given her history with the show, she must cost a lot more than any regular recurring player.

On the one hand, I "get" the merry-go-round with Nick, Sharon and Phyllis; their kind of story, the perpetual love triangle, has been a part of Y&R almost since the beginning. OTOH, though, I feel like N/S/P isn't as intriguing as, say, Lance/Lorie/Leslie, because Nick and Sharon, at least, aren't as...dynamic. To write a love triangle that goes on for years and years, you need dynamic characters who can bear the weight of the constant turmoil. Nick and Sharon, at least, cannot -- and really? To me, they're kinda, sorta dragging Phyllis down.

By the way, Nelson Branco has a blind item that a SUPERSTAR from a West Coast soap (not GH) is being asked to go recurring. I automatically thought it was CLB but since he would not be considered a Superstar, I began wondering about MTS and her marriage to Paul. MTS's only story has been as Katherine's friend and Victor's irritant since last summer and Maria has made little investment in the Nikki and Paul romance, so it made me wonder if she may be the Superstar.

I wonder, too, if he isn't talking about MTS. I doubt Y&R would ever ask EB or even PB to go recurring. OTOH, what if he's talking about Susan Flannery (Stephanie, B&?

Well, it's hard to tell when half of them are not being written for. I don't think the cast is huge at all, at one point we used to have a full deck of Winters, Newmans, Chancellors (okay just Kay really), Williams, plus supporting players. It's all in balancing, which seems to be non-existent these days.

What are Tyra, Ana, Gloria, Jeffery, Jana, Eden, and even Amber and Daniel's real purpose on this show anymore? I think they could all be easily written out if the show has real budget issues.

Scale down, and then attempt to focus on the characters you have and that are more essential than others, IMO.

What if Billy & Adam teamed up to start a really trashy gossipy online tabloid? The kind of thing Rupert Murdoch likes to publish? Or how about Jill starts her own magazine, a Cosmo-type publication? I see Jill admiring someone like Helen Gurley Brown.

Actually, I was thinking Brooks Prentiss.

All this talk about changing headwriters and doing away with characters isn't going to fix anything. Why get rid of Lauren, when you can just write Tracey a decent story? In that case, LML made a good decision getting rid of Eileen Davidson because she wasn't writing for her. The problem is not Lauren, she's fine, so let's concentrate on ridding characters who are simply not working like Tyra. The biggest "accomplishment" MAB has done thus far is reinvigorating both Jill and Katherine. Now, she just needs to continue getting the show back on track.

Exactly. I don't see the need to get rid of talented vets especially when they don't cost the show that much. Lauren will likely never push story but it shouldn't be that hard to write her into a decent story. She owns a chain of department stores, has been a CEO in the fashion industry for twenty years, and is connected in someway with most characters on the show. She may not be a favorite of MAB, but she is a fan favorite when given story.

Yes, get rid of Tyra and Ana. Fans just don't care about them. Integrate Neil with other characters not just his family. I still think Mac was not needed at this time, so if Ford doesn't work out then write Mac off for awhile until the show is less crowded. Why is Raul coming back? Honestly, I would rather watch CLB and TEB play Michael and Lauren than watch CK and DG play Cane and Lily. Get rid of Jeffrey if you need to. And why keep adding characters when so many vets get little story? Just because they want to write for the new hot young star or MAB wants to add yet another character to her favorite Chancellor family? What's going to happen if GL gets cancelled and no one picks it up? Will MAB and CBS let go of nonfavored Y&R vets to get the hot actors from that show?

Edited May 10, 200916 yr by lmfan

Also, MAB has shown time and time again she cannot write for certain characters, and hasn't shown any real promise when it comes to them - are we supposed to wait for years for her to finally get those characters?

I think Lauren should divorce Michael and leave town with Fenn if they don't want to use her. I don't think the character is neeed or essential to the show anyway.

I think Michael should die, and I think it should be Gloria's fault. That oughta bring out the claws in Lauren.

I think Michael should die, and I think it should be Gloria's fault. That oughta bring out the claws in Lauren.

Then she can kill Gloria and go off to another state to grieve, if they don't want to use her.

I think Michael should die

I was thinking of the same thing too... but then, who will be Genoa City's lawyer?

I am the only one who thinks that trying to focus on Newman, Jabot and Chancellor may be a little too much? They can barely come up with things for one of the companies... and have we ever been told what Chancellor Industries actually does?

I've never seen CI as a "power player" in the business/corporate stories, primarily because, Victor and Katherine appear to be friends. To me, it's always been about Jabot vs. Newman - and even that is strange, since Jabot is exclusively a cosmetics company, while Newman is some mega-conglomerate (that just happens to have a Fragrance division).