This doesn't make any sense, the fans wanted Cane exposed but the writers didn't? Cane WAS exposed as a fraud wasn't he? And wasn't it the writers who made this happen? And Phillip "saving" Cane? He didn't save Cane. Cane still ended up looking like a liar to those he was close to. The fans got what they wanted courtesy of the writers. As a result, I still say Phillip was not needed for any of this to happen. They could have and should have done something else.

I'm bored. Yawn.

It's futile to discuss, just enjoy it your own way.

I'm bored. Yawn.

It's futile to discuss, just enjoy it your own way.

DITTO!

I understand that Billy is angry with Cane because of the deception, but I couldn't get on board when he mentioned Delia. Billy didn't admit to Lane that he was Delia's father when he found out. He waited before Chloe's water broke to tell the truth. It really doesn't help that he seems more intrested in Mac than Delia.

Chance's stabbing should be used for bonding with Nina so we can see there is more to him than being Chloe's love intrest. Loved Paul talking about how Mary was way more overprotective than Nina. I hope we get some Nina-Phillip-Chance family scenes. Chloe bonds with the Chancellors more than she does her own mother.

Daniel and Amber: The love story between a porn addict and his enabler. A love story for the new millenium.

Again, LUDICROUS! They did not need Phillip to expose Cane. There were a myriad of ways to make Cane a fraud while letting Phillip remain six-feet-under. And Phillip certainly wasn't needed just so Chance can come home from Iraq.

It's not that they wanted to just expose Cane. They wanted to keep him as the romantic hero that was involved with Lily. He couldn't be that if he was the con artist who wanted to take away the Chancellor's money. Cane can be a fraud and a romantic hero if it was established that he was only helping Phillip and it was Phillip's idea and not his. Some fans have enjoyed this change in Cane and others have not. Just because it didn't work for some fans doesn't mean that the writers didn't have that intention.

I don't think Chance had anything to do with Phillip being back from the dead. If anything Chance was used to re-introduce Phillip. If it weren't for the possibility of him having Huntington's Disease and that screenplay that was so important that the show no longer mentions it.

Chloe bonds with the Chancellors more than she does her own mother.

She's not a social climbing skank she's just misunderstood.

I understand that Billy is angry with Cane because of the deception, but I couldn't get on board when he mentioned Delia. Billy didn't admit to Lane that he was Delia's father when he found out. He waited before Chloe's water broke to tell the truth. It really doesn't help that he seems more intrested in Mac than Delia.

Chance's stabbing should be used for bonding with Nina so we can see there is more to him than being Chloe's love intrest. Loved Paul talking about how Mary was way more overprotective than Nina. I hope we get some Nina-Phillip-Chance family scenes. Chloe bonds with the Chancellors more than she does her own mother.

Daniel and Amber: The love story between a porn addict and his enabler. A love story for the new millenium.

It's not that they wanted to just expose Cane. They wanted to keep him as the romantic hero that was involved with Lily. He couldn't be that if he was the con artist who wanted to take away the Chancellor's money. Cane can be a fraud and a romantic hero if it was established that he was only helping Phillip and it was Phillip's idea and not his. Some fans have enjoyed this change in Cane and others have not. Just because it didn't work for some fans doesn't mean that the writers didn't have that intention.

I don't think Chance had anything to do with Phillip being back from the dead. If anything Chance was used to re-introduce Phillip. If it weren't for the possibility of him having Huntington's Disease and that screenplay that was so important that the show no longer mentions it.

Maybe this would've been more acceptable to me if the gay angle wasn't used the way it was. It was used as just a cheap plot point. I would rather it have been some other reason why Phillip faked his death and sent Cane as his replacement. As for the Huntington's disease and screenplay? So much for that, there's no trace of either of those plot points. And I still can't believe the rather nauseating exit that they have planned for TB. They brought him back and mis-used him terribly. Still, the writers' intentions, whatever they were, were PISS-POOR!!!!

Edited November 12, 200916 yr by Vanguardian

Dear God in heaven this show is so boring and pointless now in the aftermath of all that trash. This takes me back to the Spring of 2002 when to watch the show to take a waking nap.

What was going on in spring 2002?

What was going on in spring 2002?

No Cane.

a.) Can't you look it up yourself Mr. "I Need PROOOOOOOF"? and

b.) That article has been quoted many, many times on this board and you have probably recited the quote like a prayer it 2X as much as it as been quoted and linked to. Why would you need to see it again?! To twist it so you can have the "evidence" you need to say, "A HA! I am right."

I did try to find it, but I couldn't. As I wrote in the message you quoted, I definitely remember her saying things like this...but I'm interested in her exact phrasing. I was hoping someone had the link so I could see that.

Are you talking about the Branco interview with her from December? I clicked on a few links but can't get to it for some reason. I know there was another in May.

I did try to find it, but I couldn't. As I wrote in the message you quoted, I definitely remember her saying things like this...but I'm interested in her exact phrasing. I was hoping someone had the link so I could see that.

Is this what you wanted?

MAB: We have a very respectful relationship with the network. But this is my show and my vision.

Spring 2002:

--The bridge in Africa collapses on Malcolm and Neil and Alex go on a wild goose chase.

--Kelly Kruger as Mac in that horrid Ralph/Amanda backstory

--Paul/Isabella pairing was a snoozefest.

--Nick sleeps with Grace again and again.

There was some decent spots but a lot of it was boring rubbish especially after the roller coaster that 2001 was.

Are you talking about the Branco interview with her from December? I clicked on a few links but can't get to it for some reason. I know there was another in May.

I can't find the "my show, my vision" quote everyone claims.

The closest I came was this:

http://tvguide.ca/Soaps/Features/Articles/081217_mariaarenabell_entertaineroftheyear_NB.htm

MAB: To be honest, it’s just a great relationship. My focus here? It’s as a writer and a storyteller. It’s important as a writer to ensure your story is taken to the screen to its absolute highest height. Since Paul’s been here, the material has been fulfilled. Really, my job is to write the show. In daytime, especially these days, having creative control is important. You need to be able and free to tell the stories you want to tell — in the way you want to tell them. If you have a vision and the passion, people will come along with you for the ride. Viewers need to trust the creative heads in control of their soap — period.

The closest that we seem to come to the infamous quote is this next section.

TVG: Y&R is your vision, but Emmy winner Hogan Sheffer has aided you. The former As The World Turns and Days of our Lives writer is clearly happy to be penning a show that respects his talent. What’s it like working with Hoagie?

MAB: Omigod — working with Hogan has been a great deal of fun, as you can imagine. Although I’m the primary head writer and storyteller on the show, I have been lucky to have him on our team because he brings a fun sensibility to the stories he writes. He knows how to lay out a storyline. Hogan’s one of the funniest people on the planet. And Scott Hamner offers this incredible sense of integrity in his writing. Our show is really cohesive. In other words, we’re paddling in the same direction. We’re all in this together. They all defer to my vision, and yet, because we share the same goal, we have all professionally jelled rather beautifully. As you know, you can’t run a soap opera if there are too many cooks in the kitchen — especially when it comes to story. Yes, soap opera is a collaborative medium, but there must always be one vision. With so many characters, you do need a lot of great writers to help you fulfill that vision. It’s a balancing act. The nice thing is… I have a team that is completely behind me. And Scott really deserves equal credit along with Hogan.

I can't find the "my show, my vision" quote everyone claims.

The closest I came was this:

http://tvguide.ca/So...ftheyear_NB.htm

I just found it for you.

Look above.

Spring 2002:

--The bridge in Africa collapses on Malcolm and Neil and Alex go on a wild goose chase.

--Kelly Kruger as Mac in that horrid Ralph/Amanda backstory

--Paul/Isabella pairing was a snoozefest.

--Nick sleeps with Grace again and again.

There was some decent spots but a lot of it was boring rubbish especially after the roller coaster that 2001 was.

Thanks. I remember some of this. I guess this was what led up to the unintentionally hilarious Neil alcoholism storyline.

This was during Lauralee Bell's long maternity leave that phased her out of the show wasn't it?