Members DeeeDee Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 Amelia was on Passions when Gilly should have been married to Alan Michael. Ugh. *cough*LesliKay*cough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 And that story was ended for Lucy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 1: Mackenzie 2: Jill getting half ownership of the Chancellor estate. That was the single most delicious SL EVER. And the repercussions have caused conflict ever since. Kay Alden is a QUEEN to me. I loved her stint, and I wanted her to stay. FOREVER. But no matter who they put in there, your'e not gonna please everybody. If Bill Bell hadn't retired before the internet board became prevalent, everyone would be talkin smack about him. But then, I think the writers are the least important part of the equation. the acting and production are what MAKES this show, always has. You think if it was MARIA who came came up with "Brad In a Cage" that she'd be praised? Hell, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted February 1, 2010 Author Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 I didn't get it that way, but you're probably right. Who'll know, Carl, who'll know... Both have reached certain undesirable levels... Ew!!! Awful. By the way... People need to study Y&R HW history and see what was solo Alden and what was Alden and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 JFP's pet project, Sonia Satra. I wonder if Nancy Curlee stayed if they would have went through with Gilly and Alan-Michael. It wasn't until she left did JFP want Lucy and Alan-Michael to be some great big love story. I know CBS and P&G wouldn't let Curlee and company pair David and Bridget, so they remained as just best friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 I'm going by my memory... wasn't Mackenzie introduced in 1998? Alden was solo 1998-2002, I know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DeeeDee Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 UGH. Didn't JFP hire Kevin Mambo after Monti left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 I think Mambo was hired by Michael Laibson. I think JFP hired Russell Curry as the David recast though, but at the very end of her GL stint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lmfan Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 I think it would be foolish to cut off everyone except members of the three core families. There is too much inbreeding already. There is dead weight in all the families, so instead of getting rid of beloved and talented vets like Tracey Bregman and Christian Le Blanc, you can thin out some from all the families. We don't need all the members of the Chancellor family presently on screen. So before dumping a whole family, get rid of other characters that aren't working. I can tell you there are people like me, long time viewers who will leave if you just have the Newmans, Abbotts and Chancellors on the show. Some of those characters are frontburner too much, and I am getting sick of them being in every story. If you cut some of the other vets (not in the three core families) then we will only see them and that is tiring. Do we have too many characters? Yes, but you need to selectively remove characters. We have too many Chancellors and psuedo Chancellors. I could care less about Abby, Chance, Mac even though they are considered legacy character. Cane and Lily could leave tomorrow and I could care less because the actors and the coupling bore me. I care very much about Lauren and Michael even though they aren't in one of the core families. I have watched Lauren since the 80s and Michael since the 90s and I am invested in them. I am not invested in most of these newer additions LML have brought back. They are not interesting characters to me and the actors are not entertaining me. Leave Michael, Lauren, Kevin and Jana for the Baldwins. Fen is needed because he is not a core family member when they SORAS him in a few years. Everyone else can go. Goodbye Chance, Mac, Lily and Cane. Bring Lily back recasted as a young educated single woman in a year when things fall apart with Cane. Send Adam off the canvas for a year or two, ala Michael, and bring him back so he can be redeemed after this baby switching/gaslighting story comes out. Goodbye Daniel and Amber for now. She can go back to B&B and Graz only signed for a year anyway. Noah is only recurring now and is off for weeks at a time and Abby is played by an talentless young actress. Goodbye and bring her back if you want when they find a good actress and need a teen summer storyline in a few months. See, you just thinned out a bunch of characters without destroying a whole family and still have younger character to build on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphanguy74 Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 Ok, I looked it up to double check, and Mac was introduced in February 1999, so my memory was off by two months. It's a fact that Kay took over HW duties alone in 1998, and I HAVE the episode where Jill serves Kay with the court papers to sue for the estate, New Year's eve, 1998. So how was the examples i cited NOT Kay solo? am I missing something here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DeeeDee Posted February 1, 2010 Members Share Posted February 1, 2010 Starting with The Baldwin Fishers. Everyone else besides Cane & Emily are core. Why not? There are just as many long time viewers who survived the RappaDavidson Baldwin Fisher infestation. *cough*MichaelGloriaKevin*cough* Promoting a tertiary 40+ couple at the expense of legacy characters? No thanks. Some would consider The RappaDavidsons Baldwin Fishers new additions. Kevin & Jana must go. Ditching almost all Y&R's present legacy characters to get screentime for a milquetoast tertiary couple? No way. Those families don't need to be "thinned out". They like Michael/Lauren need to be written for. Y&R's problem isn't too many characters it's TPTB's focus on the WRONG ones doing the real damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted February 2, 2010 Members Share Posted February 2, 2010 Mackenzie was a viable addition. The retcon of her addition was actually plausible, and I liked that whole Kay-in-a-shelter arc. Jill getting half the house...I HATED it. I always HATED it. It is the ultimate contrivance, worthy of the current regimes. For the most part, I don't even think they have used Jill/Kay occupying the same space very well. I thought having Jill and Kay join together to battle Nina was a far more interesting way of accomplishing something similar. I find Jill not having a space of her own...that she defines...actually weakens her. Dickson's over-the-top hotel suite did a better job of defining Jill, I think, than her bedding at Kay's--a place where she hasn't even had any influence on decor or styling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted February 2, 2010 Members Share Posted February 2, 2010 I don't think it was an either/or. Jill was already a diminished character by the time Alden took over as headwriter. Her recent storylines up to then amounted to a red herring in Victor's shooting, telling Nina she needed to lose weight to keep a man, and briefly dating the extremely dull Keith Dennison. I have always preferred Jill in her own element and I know there were drawbacks to joining her up with Katherine again, but they were no longer writing for Jill on her own, and I don't think they were ever going to again. The problem now is no one at the show cares about her even as a part of Katherine's life. They just don't care. Jill, Nikki, and so many others are afterthoughts. They are only useful if they can prop up a story, like this garbage with Lauren enabling Daisy. I am at the point now where it's difficult to even think of who is or is not a core character because the show has damaged or marginalized so many people. I don't really care if Victoria and Nick and Billy and lately, even Nikki or Jack all vanish, because they have little of value to say or do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DeeeDee Posted February 2, 2010 Members Share Posted February 2, 2010 Jill, Katherine, Nikki, Neil, Paul, Jack, Sharon, Victoria, Lauren, Michael, JT, Devon & even Victor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted February 2, 2010 Members Share Posted February 2, 2010 So who is NOT an afterthought right now? I guess: - Adam - Billy - Tucker - Lily - Daisy I mean those are the folks more or less driving story--everyone else reacts. But I'm not even sure if Billy belongs on the list...he seems more reactive to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.