3 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Thanks again for these recaps @alwaysAMC there are still so many random moments I had forgotten, some hilarious (the show could be bonkers as hell in the late '90s). I loved Uncle Ken beating the hell out of Mick with his cane (offcamera). Roger Newman seemed to be having the time of his life in these appearances, all the more admirable because he'd been writing, not acting, for a long time.

I did remember this as being a very unexpected appearance by Meta, who hadn't been on in a while and would not be on again for a while. Mary Stuart was battling cancer at this time. I'd like to say the obscene amounts of money she printed for P&G led them to stand by her, but shame/backlash over how they treated Michael Zaslow may have been another issue. I remember thinking that Meta was probably wondering why she was involved in this batshit woman rolling all around Springfield amidst her crime coverups, but then Blake was an honorary Bauer (and so was one of her sons, until the show forgot all about that storyline).

I'd forgotten Dahlia was even on after Marcus left Springfield.

I think Laura Wright was pregnant at this time.

B&E tried to give storylines to black characters at all of their soaps. You could see the effort here too, with bringing in Vicky, bringing the Grants back, having a bit for Griffin. Sadly, I was not surprised that P&G or Paul Rauch shut that possibility down. (I also think Terrell Tilford, while likeable, was not the right choice for David - and it was a mistake to never bring Gilly back [by the time Amelia Marshall was written out of AMC in mid-1999 the story for the black characters was already pretty much knocked out anyway]).

I remember there was a casting call to recast Gilly, but I remember the show putting it on hold because they wanted the audience to get used to the new David before re-introducing Gilly.. and obviously things changed because viewers didn't accept this David at all.

I remember the original Vicky started out as Michael's assistant who was somewhat kept in the dark about his cloning plans and eventually it was revealed that she was a Spaulding wanting to get a piece of the pie that her mother had denied back in the 80s.

Just after that, her character vanished and then came back as a recast that always grinned and smiled all the time and didn't have the coldness of the original Vicky. I remember people thought the original Vicky was stiff and couldn't act.. but once the recast happened, people were wanting the original back on.

Yeah, their stories weren't always the greatest (except at Loving) but B&E always stood up for the Black canvas. Their brief AMC run had maybe 5-7 Black contract players, not all of them related lol.

I vaguely remember finding Vicky Spaulding stiff as hell myself. I always wanted to bring the character back with a good recast. Terrell Tilford has always been comical. I tried to support him as Rachel's love interest at OLTL in 2009 but he became best known for a memeable moment at the hospital - 'a brain is not a foot!'

Why would you recast Amelia Marshall? All they probably had to do was ask her back. Morons. Getting her back might've gone a long way to viewers accepting Tillford (who I'd forgotten about.).

I think AM was on AMC as Belinda by then.

8 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

I remember there was a casting call to recast Gilly, but I remember the show putting it on hold because they wanted the audience to get used to the new David before re-introducing Gilly.. and obviously things changed because viewers didn't accept this David at all.

I remember the original Vicky started out as Michael's assistant who was somewhat kept in the dark about his cloning plans and eventually it was revealed that she was a Spaulding wanting to get a piece of the pie that her mother had denied back in the 80s.

Just after that, her character vanished and then came back as a recast that always grinned and smiled all the time and didn't have the coldness of the original Vicky. I remember people thought the original Vicky was stiff and couldn't act.. but once the recast happened, people were wanting the original back on.

5 hours ago, Vee said:

Yeah, their stories weren't always the greatest (except at Loving) but B&E always stood up for the Black canvas. Their brief AMC run had maybe 5-7 Black contract players, not all of them related lol.

I vaguely remember finding Vicky Spaulding stiff as hell myself. I always wanted to bring the character back with a good recast. Terrell Tilford has always been comical. I tried to support him as Rachel's love interest at OLTL in 2009 but he became best known for a memeable moment at the hospital - 'a brain is not a foot!'

The first Vicky was very stiff. It sort of fit the part, but I wasn't shocked they recast. I remember being surprised when Victoria Platt was cast as I remembered her for her voodoo princess role in AMC's infamous Jamaica story (didn't they try to bring her to Pine Valley before thinking better of it?). They barely do anything with Platt. She just sort of hangs around until 2000 or 2001, in a triangle with David and a woman named Ruth that ran once a month.

Tilford wasn't great, but he would have been serviceable if they had used him. This wasn't exactly an era for leading men kicking ass on GL (that's one of the reasons Paul Anthony Stewart likely got a following so quickly).

I do remember him being rough on OLTL. When he said those lines about brains and feet wasn't he also running around the hospital like a headcase?

4 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

I do remember him being rough on OLTL. When he said those lines about brains and feet wasn't he also running around the hospital like a headcase?

Yes. It all got gif'ed and it's still hilarious. But here's some of it timestamped (in two different embeds). Featuring BTG's Daphnee Duplaix!

Thanks @Vee I am surprised I remembered as much as I did. That [!@#$%^&*] is still hilarious. Poor Daphnee.

Terrell was never this bad on GL. Then again, he never had anything to do.

Doug Marland talks about the Kelly/Morgan storyline

He is referring to the sexual involvement of Kelly and Morgan who fall in love and have sex though Morgan is seventeen and they are not married. About censorship, sometimes I'll argue violently against it. We had a big problem last year with the first Morgan-Kelly sex scene. They certainly got very uptight and weren't going to let it happen. Codes and Practices said they were not going to let them go to bed together. There is a year and a half story down the drain. Their feeling was that, since my projection had them marry a year and so many months later, wasn't I really saying to teenage girls—-17 or 18-year-old, girls--that if you have sex with this boy it means a happy ending? They marry a year from now ?No ,that's not what I am saying at all. There is a lot of interim story where she suffers a great deal. What I'm telling is that you can be physically ready for sex at a lot telling of ages for but the are you ready for it emotional responsibilities that go along with a sexual relationship? I said the moral of the story was she was not. She is going to go through a lot--she is not going to marry Kelly a year from now because she had sex with him this year. To me, there is a moral point view and a very good lesson for a lot of teenagers. They need to know that along with physical satisfaction goes an emotional responsibility and you have to be ready for it.

Suddenly, I feel like singing the "Facts of Life" theme song, lol.

I mentioned before that I was going for a revival script of Guiding Light, and I have to ask from a fan perspective, would anyone hate the idea of Michelle Bauer’s paternity being called into question, since Fletcher Reade was supposed to have had a vasectomy. But as we all know, he later had Meg, so that vasectomy is suspect.

Oh, yeah....that's really not what I got out of Kelly/Morgan. Granted I was that teen, and I probably didn't see either them having sex or most of Morgan's "suffering", which probably refers to her rape. Uhm, and how come no one at Standards and Practices seemed concerned about a grown ass man having sex with a 17 year old? A very immature 17 year old at that?

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by P.J.

2 minutes ago, SanCristobelsFinest said:

I mentioned before that I was going for a revival script of Guiding Light, and I have to ask from a fan perspective, would anyone hate the idea of Michelle Bauer’s paternity being called into question, since Fletcher Reade was supposed to have had a vasectomy. But as we all know, he later had Meg, so that vasectomy is suspect.

You mean a fan fic? I wouldn't be offended. Your work, your rules. If you believe in it, go for it.

2 hours ago, SanCristobelsFinest said:

I mentioned before that I was going for a revival script of Guiding Light, and I have to ask from a fan perspective, would anyone hate the idea of Michelle Bauer’s paternity being called into question, since Fletcher Reade was supposed to have had a vasectomy. But as we all know, he later had Meg, so that vasectomy is suspect.

That would be an interesting idea. I still think the show should have had a story about this subject.

2 hours ago, P.J. said:

Uhm, and how come no one at Standards and Practices seemed concerned about a grown ass man having sex with a 17 year old? A very immature 17 year old at that?

YES. THANK YOU.

Not only immature, but being lectured by that same grown ass man about how immature she was, before and after they had sex.

(Morgan's rape happened before they had sex. The "suffering" was Nola lying about being pregnant. Because that grown ass man was too stupid to keep track of who he had slept with when).

Marland even said in interviews that he created the story because he asked his teenaged niece what kind of story she would like. So, yes, he was selling the fantasy that an older boy (man) would fall in love with you, you could have sex with him, and then end up married. Every soap opera character suffers before they attain any kind of happiness, he doesn't deserve applause for that.

The funny thing is, they were locked into the Kelly/Morgan marriage, because the outdoor scenes had been taped way beforehand. Vigard said in The Locher Room interview that all the outdoor scenes at Laurel Falls were taped over a few days at the same location, including the wedding. She was fired (or quit, depending on who you ask) very soon after the wedding scenes aired. So when Marland was talking about a year and a half of story going down the drain, he was likely thinking of the pre-taped material already in the can. He had no choice but to write the marriage story. Which is too bad, because IMO it was a mistake to marry them off, the subsequent story was not good. It might have been a better thing if the nework/sponsors had pressured him to abandon it. Though he might have quit the show even earlier if they had done that.

2 hours ago, SanCristobelsFinest said:

I mentioned before that I was going for a revival script of Guiding Light, and I have to ask from a fan perspective, would anyone hate the idea of Michelle Bauer’s paternity being called into question, since Fletcher Reade was supposed to have had a vasectomy. But as we all know, he later had Meg, so that vasectomy is suspect.

As someone who has written and enjoyed reading fanfic by others (not soaps), my rule is this:

Stay true to the characters and the history of the show and you can do whatever the eff you want.

In this case, Fletcher fathered a child AFTER it was established he had had a vasectomy BEFORE Michelle was conceived. IMO, it is not only perfectly plausible to use that for a story, it's an excellent use of the show's history.

35 minutes ago, DeeVee said:

YES. THANK YOU.

Not only immature, but being lectured by that same grown ass man about how immature she was, before and after they had sex.

(Morgan's rape happened before they had sex. The "suffering" was Nola lying about being pregnant. Because that grown ass man was too stupid to keep track of who he had slept with when).

Marland even said in interviews that he created the story because he asked his teenaged niece what kind of story she would like. So, yes, he was selling the fantasy that an older boy (man) would fall in love with you, you could have sex with him, and then end up married. Every soap opera character suffers before they attain any kind of happiness, he doesn't deserve applause for that.

The funny thing is, they were locked into the Kelly/Morgan marriage, because the outdoor scenes had been taped way beforehand. Vigard said in The Locher Room interview that all the outdoor scenes at Laurel Falls were taped over a few days at the same location, including the wedding. She was fired (or quit, depending on who you ask) very soon after the wedding scenes aired. So when Marland was talking about a year and a half of story going down the drain, he was likely thinking of the pre-taped material already in the can. He had no choice but to write the marriage story. Which is too bad, because IMO it was a mistake to marry them off, the subsequent story was not good. It might have been a better thing if the nework/sponsors had pressured him to abandon it. Though he might have quit the show even earlier if they had done that.

i don't quite get the timing of Marland's remarks. Vigard was only in the role for about a year and a half. She and Jennifer arrived shortly before Vanessa in 1980. Kelly and Morgan are married in August of 81. So, obviously, Kelly and Morgan marrying was the goal. Not that it really matters.

The double standard re: Kelly is egregious, especially, as he's the one then turning around and screwing Nola. If there's a moral to the tale, it's Nola winding up pregnant, and having to grow up, and not making the mistake of marrying the patsy who she doesn't love and ruin both their lives.