I'll be passing on that one....

Same…CC must think GL is still on and that they are still a couple….LOL

I said it before and I'll say it again ... I never bought the Otalia pairing. I never bought Olivia, who LIVED for penis, all of a sudden to be a full blown lesbian. Bisexual? I could've bought it. Plus, I never found Otalia to be this great romance. They bored me for the last year. 

 

Jill Lorie Hurst did great things the last year but Otalia was NOT one of them.

 

I hate how people find this pairing to be revolutionary when it wasn't. The most they did was hold hands and pet each other on the regular. 

You know, even if I could ignore history and accept Olivia as a latent lesbian, I still couldn't buy her being in a relationship with Natalia.  I'd sooner buy her hooking up in the end with India von Halkein.

 They bored me for the last year. 

 

 

They bored me from day 1. They were ff material for me all the time.

You know, even if I could ignore history and accept Olivia as a latent lesbian, I still couldn't buy her being in a relationship with Natalia.  I'd sooner buy her hooking up in the end with India von Halkein.

Tragic that they would waste their time to pair a boring couple for attention/publicity instead of bringing back India which would have accomplished the publicity/attention angle. I was a big fan of hers and when I first hit the internet I realized how popular she really was.

You know, even if I could ignore history and accept Olivia as a latent lesbian, I still couldn't buy her being in a relationship with Natalia.  I'd sooner buy her hooking up in the end with India von Halkein.

 

True. 

 

However, I wouldn't buy India being a lesbian either as she was such a man-eater at the height of her days too. 

 

Honestly, (and I've said this before) but I hate insta-gay stories on TV. As a gay man, I typically find them to be poorly done as they choose characters I'd never believe to be gay. 

 

I could never believe Olivia being gay (like I said before) because she loved d-ck too much. Her first couple of years on the show, Olivia was f-cking every man with a pulse. Bisexual would've been fine. Full blown gay? Nope. 

 

Same with the rumors of them entertaining in the early 00s of making Holly gay. I wouldn't've believed it. 

 

I know that some people have their 'awakenings' later in life, but I just wouldn't believe it with many of the characters they chose. 

 

 

Edited May 18, 20169 yr by Nothin'ButAttitude

IMO the problem was that Natalie for me was a boring sap of a character and pairing her with annoying Olivia was just awful. By the time they were going to pair Olivia with Natalie I was so sick and tired with the Olivia character that any pairing would have been a failure for me.

IMO the problem was that Natalie for me was a boring sap of a character and pairing her with annoying Olivia was just awful. By the time they were going to pair Olivia with Natalie I was so sick and tired with the Olivia character that any pairing would have been a failure for me.

The issue with Olivia is that they lost the importance of the character around 06. Olivia worked best (IMO) as the town vixen/minx and in a power position. I felt once they took her out the Spauldings & Lewises orbits and slapped her in the orbit with basic Coopers, she became worthless. 

 

Olivia was glamorous and worldly to me. She should've never engaged in anything with Buzz or Frank. 

So not sure if this is well known, but I was browsing through an old NY Times paper online and it happened to be from Sep 9th 1968. I saw the tv listings and noticed Search and Light were not 30 minutes but still 15. The NY Times even had an advertisement right next to the listings advertising the change to 30 minutes that week, so I figured it might be a mistake. I checked through listings for the entire week and neither show was listed as 30 minutes until September 12th 1968 (Thursday) Add to that I checked a few other online newspapers to verify and they were all the same.

I had always read Sep 9th as the date, it seems it may have happened Sep 12th. Was this common knowledge? As online, most sources state Sep 9th 1968. Not a big deal but for historical soap accuracy I like these details.

Mon Sep 9th 1968

12:30 - 1pm Search for Tomorrow (30 minute episode, Guiding Light was pre-empted)

2:30 and 4pm Art Linklater's House Party aired 

Tues Sep 10th 1968

12:30 - 12:45 Search for Tomorrow

12:45 - 1pm Guiding Light

2:30 - 3pm Guiding Light (30 minute ep)

Wed Sep 11th 1968

12:30 - 12:45 Search for Tomorrow 

12:45 - 1pm Guiding Light

2:30 and 4pm Art Linklater's House Party

Thurs Sep 12th 1968

12:30 Search

2:30 Guiding Light

Both 30 Minutes from this point on

 

Is it possible this was a mistake or just happened in some parts and not others?

I will also post this exact post in the Search topic as well.

Edited May 19, 20169 yr by will81

Wasn't 1985 the beginning of the downfall of the show until about 88/89? 

 

Also, I never understood why they didn't bring Kyle back in later years to fight with Josh over Reva. Would've been a better choice than Jeffery. 

Wasn't 1985 the beginning of the downfall of the show until about 88/89? 

 

Also, I never understood why they didn't bring Kyle back in later years to fight with Josh over Reva. Would've been a better choice than Jeffery. 

Because, he didn't have all those fruitcakes..most of them middle aged housefraus, who were in love with the actor like they were Mr. Brad Cole! What good is an interesting use of history when you have fans who are crazily dedicated to an actor...not that they ever brought the ratings up.

 

Because, he didn't have all those fruitcakes..most of them middle aged housefraus, who were in love with the actor like they were Mr. Brad Cole! What good is an interesting use of history when you have fans who are crazily dedicated to an actor...not that they ever brought the ratings up.

I didn't mind Bradley Cole when he was Richard but Jeffrey never did 'it' for me. Jeffrey was too skeevy for my taste. 

 

Because, he didn't have all those fruitcakes..most of them middle aged housefraus, who were in love with the actor like they were Mr. Brad Cole! What good is an interesting use of history when you have fans who are crazily dedicated to an actor...not that they ever brought the ratings up.

 

I didn't mind Bradley Cole when he was Richard but Jeffrey never did 'it' for me. Jeffrey was too skeevy for my taste. 

How about when he was the supposed "stud," of SF and he screwed Beth on top the Spaulding Den Desk...(I can imagine what BevAlex would have to say about that..."Even BLAKE didn't stoop that low!" ) where Alan's coffee and muffins were waiting for him, and then we see a close up of Alan taking a big bite out of one....I have no idea what that was for but I HATED Jeffie from then on...(who could forget the Japanese restaraunt he did Beth in...GL under Conboy went retro Skinamax...

Wasn't 1985 the beginning of the downfall of the show until about 88/89? 

 

Also, I never understood why they didn't bring Kyle back in later years to fight with Josh over Reva. Would've been a better choice than Jeffery. 

I'd guess Larkin's appearance in later years - either that or the show just not remembering. 

 

I think many say 1984 was the downfall.

Wasn't 1985 the beginning of the downfall of the show until about 88/89? 

 

Also, I never understood why they didn't bring Kyle back in later years to fight with Josh over Reva. Would've been a better choice than Jeffery. 

 

I'd guess Larkin's appearance in later years - either that or the show just not remembering. 

 

I think many say 1984 was the downfall.

Yes, for me the signs of the apocalypse were there in 1983, but by 1984 was show was being decimated, and by 1985 it was basically in tatters. It only started to revive in 1989.