3 hours ago, denzo30 said:

But it made sense because Gwen was the only Frame to return from the past (even though only Frame by marriage).  They needed a story on the feud between the Frames and the Corys and revealing Janice Frame was Evan's mother.  Also, it could be possible that after many years of Willis & Gwen going broke in Australia, that Gwen got angry and Willis filled her head with stories so she would hate Rachel.  This sh*t really does happen in real life.. Haha!!

Well, when you need to twist a character into a pretzel in order to make her fit a plot, that really does not make sense.  And actually, that 25th anniversary plot really would not have worked for Willis either.  Because Willis left Bay City after Janice was dead.  And he did not, at the time, blame Rachel for Janice's death.  In fact, Willis and Rachel were on good terms when he moved to Australia.  Still, the silly 25th anniversary plot would have made a Helluva' lot more sense for Willis (who was always a bit volatile), than it did for Gwen (typically calm and good natured).  And as has been stated -- the entire Gwen debacle in 1989 was caused by Leon Russom's refusal to return as Willis.    

Edited August 12Aug 12 by Tisy-Lish

I don't understand why Gwen or anyone needed to try to kill Rachel. The plot just seemed ridiculous. The revelations and dream sequences could have been achieved another way. That's what always annoyed me about Swajeski: she would have an ending in mind and she would twist characters or a story into a pretzel (as @Tisy-Lishpoints out) to make it happen. 

2 minutes ago, chrisml said:

I don't understand why Gwen or anyone needed to try to kill Rachel. The plot just seemed ridiculous. The revelations and dream sequences could have been achieved another way. That's what always annoyed me about Swajeski: she would have an ending in mind and she would twist characters or a story into a pretzel (as @Tisy-Lishpoints out) to make it happen. 

It has been a while but I remember it as an accident and not Gwen purposely trying to kill Rachel.

13 minutes ago, Tisy-Lish said:

Well, when you need to twist a character into a pretzel in order to make her fit a plot, that really does not make sense.  And actually, that 25th anniversary plot really would not have worked for Willis either.  Because Willis left Bay City after Janice was dead.  And he did not, at the time, blame Rachel for Janice's death.  In fact, Willis and Rachel were on good terms when he moved to Australia.  Still, the silly 25th anniversary plot would have made a Helluva' lot more sense for Willis (who was always a bit volatile), than it did for Gwen (typically calm and good natured).  And as has been stated -- the entire Gwen debacle in 1989 was caused by Leon Russom's refusal to return as Willis.    

While it was out of character for Gwen I do think it explained Evan's backstory and moved his story along. They also explained why Gwen and Willis ended up bitter and angry with Rachel.  There were much worse plots on the show over the years.

Edited August 12Aug 12 by Efulton

14 hours ago, chrisml said:

I don't understand why Gwen or anyone needed to try to kill Rachel. The plot just seemed ridiculous. The revelations and dream sequences could have been achieved another way. That's what always annoyed me about Swajeski: she would have an ending in mind and she would twist characters or a story into a pretzel (as @Tisy-Lishpoints out) to make it happen. 

Aside the Willis issue, to some degree they were also scrambling because of Douglass Watson's death. Granted I find it a bit hard to figure out whether they really had a lot of Mac story they had to put aside because everything to do with the Janice-based grudge applied to Rachel more directly. Maybe Mac only had speeches and the Frame pieces of the story remained intact.

Robert Delaney being kind to Iris was also a bizarre out-of-character moment.

8 minutes ago, Xanthe said:

Aside the Willis issue, to some degree they were also scrambling because of Douglass Watson's death. Granted I find it a bit hard to figure out whether they really had a lot of Mac story they had to put aside because everything to do with the Janice-based grudge applied to Rachel more directly. Maybe Mac only had speeches and the Frame pieces of the story remained intact.

Robert Delaney being kind to Iris was also a bizarre out-of-character moment.

The way the story plays out I could see that Iris was meant to save Rachel and maybe that was a way to get back into Mac's good graces. It still doesn't explain everything. Having seen what Swajeski's stories end up as, I wonder if they really had planned out the story. Or did they just have the beginnings? I remember the "Who shot Jake?" shooting story getting a lot of flack for being a bit of a dud and Marlena de la croix saying it felt like Swajeski just wanted to do the poker in heaven dream sequence and wrote a story around that. 

1 hour ago, chrisml said:

The way the story plays out I could see that Iris was meant to save Rachel and maybe that was a way to get back into Mac's good graces. It still doesn't explain everything. Having seen what Swajeski's stories end up as, I wonder if they really had planned out the story. Or did they just have the beginnings? I remember the "Who shot Jake?" shooting story getting a lot of flack for being a bit of a dud and Marlena de la croix saying it felt like Swajeski just wanted to do the poker in heaven dream sequence and wrote a story around that. 

A “dud”?  I enjoyed it. It also lead to Paulina and Jake getting together, amazing performances by Anne Heche & Tom Eplin and the returns of Kathleen & Carl.

15 minutes ago, Efulton said:

A “dud”?  I enjoyed it. It also lead to Paulina and Jake getting together, amazing performances by Anne Heche & Tom Eplin and the returns of Kathleen & Carl.

That was the response some of the soap journalists had at the time. Marlena DelaCroix wrote a whole column about how disappointing AW was and in particular, JAke's shooting storyline. I'm sure someone on this thread might have the column or it might be somewhere online. I think the acting from Duncan, Timmins, and Heche was first rate. I don't think I was watching consistently when Kathleen and Carl returned. With the recasts of Sam, Anna Holbrook going on maternity leave and the shooting of Jake, I lost interest in AW so drifted away from the show. 

My problem with the story is that Jake wasn't killed off but was instead made into an anti-hero/romantic lead who then got together with the sister of the woman he raped. I have no tolerance for that kind of b.s. 

30 minutes ago, chrisml said:

That was the response some of the soap journalists had at the time. Marlena DelaCroix wrote a whole column about how disappointing AW was and in particular, JAke's shooting storyline. I'm sure someone on this thread might have the column or it might be somewhere online. I think the acting from Duncan, Timmins, and Heche was first rate. I don't think I was watching consistently when Kathleen and Carl returned. With the recasts of Sam, Anna Holbrook going on maternity leave and the shooting of Jake, I lost interest in AW so drifted away from the show. 

My problem with the story is that Jake wasn't killed off but was instead made into an anti-hero/romantic lead who then got together with the sister of the woman he raped. I have no tolerance for that kind of b.s. 

I was able to accept Jake remaining alive but he should have been treated like an outcast by everyone.  Paulina would have the only one to eventually accept him which would put her at odds with everyone else. Jake and Vicky should NEVER have become a couple and Marley should NEVER have become obsessed with him.  So gross.

48 minutes ago, Efulton said:

I was able to accept Jake remaining alive but he should have been treated like an outcast by everyone.  Paulina would have the only one to eventually accept him which would put her at odds with everyone else. Jake and Vicky should NEVER have become a couple and Marley should NEVER have become obsessed with him.  So gross.

I didn't think Marley becoming obsessed with him was bad in of itself because she was clearly not in her right mind and they did even discuss the rape (I think the actors insisted), but they did a poor job with the aftermath by having him be such an [!@#$%^&*] to her rather than sympathizing.

Jake and Vicky definitely should have just stayed friends. 

4 hours ago, Xanthe said:

Robert Delaney being kind to Iris was also a bizarre out-of-character moment.

I agree.  And having Iris tell Robert, he had been her favorite former husband was ridiculous.  Robert was likely Iris's least favorite husband, considering how their marriage ended.  Her favorites were probably Alex and Brian.  Having Robert and Iris being cordial at the celebration was okay with me.  But they were a little too chummy, in my opinion.  

I'm sure the original plan was for Robert to have most of his scenes with Lenore, not Iris.  But Susan Sullivan chose not to return and play the role, so Lenore was removed from the plan. And without Lenore, who is Robert going to have scenes with?  Iris was an obvious choice.  It would have been great for Robert to have had a nice scene with Pat in which they both reminisced about Lenore. But that didn't happen.  

Edited August 12Aug 12 by Tisy-Lish

44 minutes ago, Tisy-Lish said:

I agree.  And having Iris tell Robert, he had been her favorite former husband was ridiculous.  Robert was likely Iris's least favorite husband, considering how their marriage ended.  Her favorites were probably Alex and Brian.  Having Robert and Iris being cordial at the celebration was okay with me.  But they were a little too chummy, in my opinion.  

I'm sure the original plan was for Robert to have most of his scenes with Lenore, not Iris.  But Susan Sullivan chose not to return and play the role, so Lenore was removed from the plan. And without Lenore, who is Robert going to have scenes with?  Iris was an obvious choice.  It would have been great for Robert to have had a nice scene with Pat in which they both reminisced about Lenore. But that didn't happen.  

They should have brought Clarice back. Maybe they could have brought her and Robert's son in for the teen scene. 

After learning the full extent of the Robert/Iris relationship, his warmth toward her was tough to believe, but I did appreciate Iris having someone in her corner for that night.

44 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

They should have brought Clarice back. Maybe they could have brought her and Robert's son in for the teen scene. 

Yes.  I've always thought the six most glaring omissions from the returning character list were Missy Matthews, Willis Frame, Lenore Delany, Sandy Cory, Clarice and Larry Ewing.  But at least TPTB tried to get Willis, Lenore, and Sandy to return.  

47 minutes ago, Tisy-Lish said:

Yes.  I've always thought the six most glaring omissions from the returning character list were Missy Matthews, Willis Frame, Lenore Delany, Sandy Cory, Clarice and Larry Ewing.  But at least TPTB tried to get Willis, Lenore, and Sandy to return.  

I suspect Clarice and Larry were intended to be in the 25th Anniversary episodes but instead were brought back for Mac’s funeral. This is just my speculation.

28 minutes ago, Efulton said:

I suspect Clarice and Larry were intended to be in the 25th Anniversary episodes but instead were brought back for Mac’s funeral. This is just my speculation.

Interesting thought. But I don't think Swajeski was wise enough to think that far ahead. My opinion is -- Clarice and Larry were just overlooked for the 25th.  Then a few months later, someone suggested their return for Mac's funeral.  And Swajeski said okay.  

By the way, one more invited actor for the 25th who declined -- Maeve Kinkead as Angie Perrini.  I'm confident Angie would have been thrown into Willis and Gwen's mess, had Kinkead agreed to return.  It is worth noting that at the time, Kinkead was under contract with P&G's Guiding Light, so I've always been a bit surprised she was not "encouraged" by P&G to participate in AW's 25th episodes.  But without Willis, I suppose Angie would have had little to do.