Considering no one's talked about Grace in forever, it kinda is.

Not really.

Considering being "talked about" didn't keep Maria from using DINA effortlessly at Katherine's funeral or Nina, Olivia & Traci the past couple of years.

They've all moved on past her

Which explains why Gloria is still in TOWN. Married. Again. And Rich. With a new business.

Dina, Nina, Olivia and Traci are all connected to major families ont eh show. As long as their family is in town, they will always have a reason to visit. Grace has no family.

What point?

You don't know what you're talking about.

This is ABC where characters have to randomly be referenced before they're utilized.

Actually this is CBS, we are discussing

Again.

If you KNEW the show and/or the character you would already know.

Nice reach though.

Isnt that the point of a question?

Nope.

You're the one arguing against using established characters from Y&R's history (something Maria has done with some success) without addressing useless characters that are currently on the canvas that have much less connections & history.

Im all for using established characters as long as their is a need for them to come back on the canvas.

Actually no.

Connected to Sharon yes.

Triangle with Sharon no.

And Grace had a life OUTSIDE of Sharon.

Again if you knew the character and/or the show you would know that.

So she didnt return any of those times to hook up with Nick, hurt Sharon or get revenge? her subsequent returns had nothing to do with Sharon?

Victoria, Nikki, Victor, Jack, Ashley, Jill, Cricket, Paul, Michael & Giggly Heffa.

Thank you, for finally answering the question

No.

It doesn't.

Not the least of which is that the man in question STOLE Sharon's child.

Secondly outside of Nick Grace never slept with any of Sharon's men.

and what about Cameron? Wasnt she romantically linked to him as well?

Again.

Since do "ties" & "connections" matter all of the sudden?

By your logic CANE a character who is currently ON the canvas has to have established characters horribly warped & history retconned/twisted to keep his ass on the show is a "viable" character when established characters that can easily be brought back (as Maria has done) are "not talked about"/"been moved past".

no thats your logic. I have never argued for Cane to be on the show. You are the one arguing about getting rid of characters with no ties or connection, yet you seem to be all about finding a place for Skye, who has none. You keep going on about getting rid of Kevin and Gloria when like it or not, they've been around for years and have formed connections. Your own rules are inconsistent and seem to only apply to those you hate, while ignoring those you like

Impossible.

You'd have to actually know what you were talking about first.

Eh no.

Have SOME idea of what you're attempting to discuss before you lamely attempt to flame dear.

Theres no flame here. You are the one that went on the defense and attack bc you didnt like hearing someone not in support of having Grace around

Edited August 7, 201015 yr by Cheap21

As long as their family is in town, they will always have a reason to visit.

No they don't.

Families move on & change all the time.

Actually this is CBS, we are discussing

It was meant to say this ISN'T ABC where characters have to constantly be referenced (especially right before they're brought back) to be viable.

Isnt that the point of a question?

You didn't question.

You made an assertion.

One which was answered WITH support that you couldn't defend.

Then instead of admitting you aren't that familiar with the show or the character you weakly attempted to troll.

Im all for using established characters as long as their is a need for them to come back on the canvas.

Again.

There are much less established CURRENTLY on the canvas for you to even begin to try to make an argument against why established characters with a lot of ties & history shouldn't be brought back.

So she didnt return any of those times to hook up with Nick, hurt Sharon or get revenge?

And?

Just because previous writers used the character that way doesn't mean that is ALL to the character.

And again this isn't ABC it's Y&R.

It isn't like bringing Gloria back on AMC or Karen Wolek on OLTL where the majority of the people they interacted with are gone.

Thank you, for finally answering the question

And yet you have no defense.

Typical.

and what about Cameron? Wasnt she romantically linked to him as well?

What about him?

Grace didn't go after him because he was with Sharon.

no thats your logic.

No.

It's definitely yours.

I have never argued for Cane to be on the show.

Yes you did.

Anytime you argue against bring back established characters with the excuse that there needs to be a "reason" for them to BE brought back (even if they have plenty of current ties & existing history) when characters with much less ties/history need absolutely NO reason to be on the canvas you're definitely making an argument to the contrary.

You are the one arguing about getting rid of characters with no ties or connection

No.

I'm arguing for using established characters, in character, where they make sense instead of warping existing characters/the entire show to push agendas.

yet you seem to be all about finding a place for Skye

Skye as written I have no use for.

None.

Skye as originally written would be a welcome addition.

But an intelligent, independent woman on Maria/Hamner/Hogan/Rauch's Y&R?

Not a chance.

You keep going on about getting rid of Kevin and Gloria when like it or not, they've been around for years and have formed connections.

The RappaDavidsons were around for years & built on the backs of established characters by making them act WAY OOC (Hello Nora) & horribly warped the entire show in the process.

And the "connections" that those characters formed are meaningless at best.

Kevin, Jana, Gloria & Jeff could ALL easily be written out tomorrow & it would make absolutely NO difference to Y&R.

The only characters out of that particular family that have any staying power are Michael & Lauren.

To say nothing of Adrian, Plum, Cane, Amber, Ryder, Daisy, Eden & all the rest of the useless characters Maria/LML forced on Y&R's longtime audience.

Your own rules are inconsistent and seem to only apply to those you hate, while ignoring those you like

No dear.

I'm very consistent about Y&R (especially when vets and/or the entire show are sacrificed for extraneous characters) & always have been.

Theres no flame here.

There certainly aren't.

At least not that weak stuff you tried to pass off as flaming.

You are the one that went on the defense and attack bc you didnt like hearing someone not in support of having Grace around

Defense? Please.

You were & are the one flailing cause you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about nor can you refute points made with facts.

Again.

Just admit you aren't that familiar with the show and/or the characters instead of trying to make illogical assertions you aren't equipped to support.

Edited August 7, 201015 yr by DeeeDee

No they don't.

Families move on & change all the time. Again you don't know the character nor her ties so you're flailing.

The characters you mentioned, Dina, Traci, Olivia...werent they brought back various times for their family connections which they still have in town? Again at the very least, as long as there's an Abbot or Winters in town, they will always have a reason to visit. Ditto for members of the Newmans, Williams, etc....

It was meant to say this ISN'T ABC where characters have to constantly be referenced (especially right before they're brought back) to be viable.

Unfortunately Y&R is a shell of its former self and becoming more and more like a ABC soap as time goes by

Isnt that the point of a question?

You didn't question.

You made an assertion.

One which was answered WITH support that you couldn't defend.

Then instead of admitting you aren't that familiar with the show or the character you weakly attempted to troll.

If someone ends a sentence with a question mark (?), thats a sign that they are asking a question. Thats exactly what I did. You said I know nothing about Grace, so I asked a question about her, which you were so kind to answer later on. Thanks for that.

Again.

There are much less established CURRENTLY on the canvas for you to even begin to try to make an argument against why established characters with a lot of ties & history shouldn't be brought back

Sigh....we're getting nowhere with this. We'll have to agree to siagree. Next

And?

Just because previous writers used the character that way doesn't mean that is ALL to the character.

And again this isn't ABC it's Y&R.

It isn't like bringing Gloria back on AMC or Karen Wolek on OLTL where the majority of the people they interacted with are gone.

And it was only mentioned bc you made it seem as if her returns were never about Sharon, when they kinda were.

And yet you have no defense.

Typical.

bc there's nothing to defend. I asked a question, it got answered....there's nothing more to say on that matter. Not everything needs to be thrown back with a snarky response. I dont get why you keep trying to pick at something here.

What about him?

Grace didn't go after him because he was with Sharon.

You wrote: "Secondly outside of Nick Grace never slept with any of Sharon's men." Cameron was broguht up as thats clearly is an incorrect statement. I dont know as litle as you think I do about the character

No.

It's definitely yours.

Yes you did.

Anytime you argue against bring back established characters with the excuse that there needs to be a "reason" for them to BE brought back (even if they have plenty of current ties & existing history) when characters with much less ties/history need absolutely NO reason to be on the canvas you're definitely making an argument to the contrary.

again assuming. In case I wasnt clear. I DO NOT SUPPORT CANE ASHBY (or whatever he's calling himself these days) ON Y&R. I cant get any direct about this than that

No.

I'm arguing for using established characters, in character, where they make sense instead of warping existing characters/the entire show to push agendas.

Skye as written I have no use for.

None.

Skye as originally written would be a welcome addition.

But an intelligent, independent woman on Maria/Hamner/Hogan/Rauch's Y&R?

Not a chance.

and why would you expect Grace to be treated any differently?

The RappaDavidsons were around for years & built on the backs of established characters by making them act WAY OOC (Hello Nora) & horribly warped the entire show in the process.

And the "connections" that those characters formed are meaningless at best.

Kevin, Jana, Gloria & Jeff could ALL easily be written out tomorrow & it would make absolutely NO difference to Y&R.

The only characters out of that particular family that have any staying power are Michael & Lauren.

To say nothing of Adrian, Plum, Cane, Amber, Ryder, Daisy, Eden & all the rest of the useless characters Maria/LML forced on Y&R's longtime audience.

We can at least agree that the Fishers have long outstayed their welcome.

There certainly aren't.

At least not that weak stuff you tried to pass off as flaming.

Thats refreshing to know, bc Im not attempting to pass anything off as flame

Defense? Please.

You were & are the one flailing cause you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about nor can you refute points made with facts.

Again.

Just admit you aren't that familiar with the show and/or the characters instead of trying to make illogical assertions you aren't equipped to support.

Haha, funny. I'm not the one over here getting all worked up over a simple character. LOL....really its not that serious. Im sure if they had brought Maura on as Grace, we'd be reading posts and threads in anger about how she's being written OOC, and being ruined for agendas and is an overall mess. Wait, I'm sure we'll get that for Diane

they brought back various times for their family connections which they still have in town?

Sometimes they were & sometimes they weren't.

Like Dina for Katherine's funeral.

She didn't show up for her children & grandchildren.

She showed up for Katherine.

Again at the very least, as long as there's an Abbot or Winters in town, they will always have a reason to visit. Ditto for members of the Newmans, Williams, etc....

And again other established characters like Diane & Grace (amongst others) return without being related to core families.

Unfortunately Y&R is a shell of its former self and becoming more and more like a ABC soap as time goes by

Yep.

But you can't always apply ABC's (or Daytime in general's) formulas with Y&R.

Y&R is weird in that for all the concessions it makes to some of ABC/Daytime's formulas it's still its very own animal in a lot of ways.

If someone ends a sentence with a question mark (?), thats a sign that they are asking a question.

Not when the "question" is posed as a statement.

You said I know nothing about Grace, so I asked a question about her, which you were so kind to answer later on. Thanks for that.

And it was only mentioned bc you made it seem as if her returns were never about Sharon, when they kinda were.

Only one of her previous returns was directly about Sharon (and even that is arguable).

They did INVOLVE Sharon but they were mainly about NICK & even still that doesn't mean that that's all the character exists for or the only ties the character has/had.

It just means that those were the only ties that HW at that time chose to utilize & both times she did return she interacted with more than just Nick and/or Sharon.

bc there's nothing to defend.

Because whether you realize it or not you made the assertion that established characters need reasons when less established ones don't.

However just cause Grace was used primarily in Nick/Sharon stories on her return doesn't mean that that's the only reason to bring her back nor would they be the only characters she could/would interact with if Y&R did.

Plus that age range on Y&R is desperately in need of more characters beyond the overworked (Sharon), underwhelming (AH's Victoria), MIA (Cricket), ill concieved (Sofia), inconsistent (Nina) & overexposed (Giggly Heffa) & one with established history played by a talented actress like Maura is much more palatable than a new character with horrible writing played by Maura or an established but miscast character played by Maura.

I dont get why you keep trying to pick at something here.

Oh honey.

Stop the innocent act.

Cameron was broguht up as thats clearly is an incorrect statement.

No it's not.

You asserted that Grace went after Sharon's men which outside of Nick is not true.

Grace was with Cameron independent of Sharon.

I dont know as litle as you think I do about the character

...So apparently you do.

again assuming. In case I wasnt clear.

I DO NOT SUPPORT CANE ASHBY (or whatever he's calling himself these days) ON Y&R. I cant get any direct about this than that

You do when you make the case (again whether you realize it or not) for him to be on canvas while other established characters "need reason".

Grace could easily be utilized in ways that are in character & make much more sense than the awesome idea of bringing Phillip back from the dead to free pass Cane.

and why would you expect Grace to be treated any differently?

I never defended keeping Skye (as she is now) on the show.

She can't leave fast enough.

But that's not even about Grace.

The quality of the writing sucks but Maura stands a much better shot playing an age appropriate character in an age range that is desperately in need of strengthening than one where she would be one amongst many (Lauren, Nikki, Jill, Ashley,

We can at least agree that the Fishers have long outstayed their welcome.

Yep.

I was done with them when JVA left.

I'm not the one over here getting all worked up over a simple character.

Now who's making assumptions?

You made assertions which were refuted. With facts.

End of story.

really its not that serious.

Apparently it is. For you.

Im sure if they had brought Maura on as Grace, we'd be reading posts and threads in anger about how she's being written OOC, and being ruined for agendas and is an overall mess.

Probably.

But at least as Grace Maura would be cast appropriately & have the chance at interacting with characters closer to her age instead of being miscast as a character that's basically become a plot device & is defended by fans who's only concern is shoehorning a popular actress onto Y&R's canvas.

Who the HELL is Chompers?

The point isn't whether Maura looks 40 (and like most people, admittedly, there are days on ATWT she looks hard in makeup, and there are days she looks younger...ironic that there's talk of sun damage, when for years she was the whitest girl in soapdom)...the point is she doesn't look 50+ years old, which is what Diane should be. Bergman looks good for 57. Stafford looks good for 45. But put Maura in a scene with Victor, and there's no way anyone's gonna buy that. And even though I love Doug Davidson, there's no way Maura's gonna look like his contemporary either.

But thank God TIIC spared me sticking her in scenes with (hopefully anyway) Josh Morrow or Sharon Case. BLECH. I just hope they keep her pretty clear of Christian LeBlanc. I don't even watch the show and I hate everything the Baldwin/Fishers stand for.

and who the hell is Giggly Heffa??

LOLOL

Chompers is Billy & Giggly Heffa is Phyllis.

Edited August 8, 201015 yr by DeeeDee

Definitely taking a wait and see on this. I mean it's 95% fail due to the writers, but, Maura is love. Honestly though, I was really surprised when I read this and I'm not automatically going to hate it, even though my better judgment says I should.

Lollers @ the implosion of this thread.

Skye is pretty generic and could have easily been replaced with Grace in the sme position.

When was it Grace went to Harvard Business School?

The previous Diane, who aired during the Patty mess, didn't look anywhere near 50 years old so, with the correct makeup, Maura will be fine. Granted, if I were her, I'd be a little bit pissed that the show chose me to play a character this old. Y&R is a mess, however, it is still the best mess with the highest production values and the highest ratings on daytime. I'm hardly watching the show these days, nothings grabs me; however, I'm sure NuDiane will be a mixer who shakes things up.

LOLOL

Chompers is Billy & Giggly Heffa is Phyllis.

LMAO- I can definitely see how Billy is Chompers got the nickname Chompers, but how did Phyllis become Giggly Heffa?

LMAO- I can definitely see how Billy is Chompers got the nickname Chompers, but how did Phyllis become Giggly Heffa?

I think Drucilla referred to her as a "Giggly Heffa" in a scene once. Also, since Phyllis has been with Nick, all she ever does is laugh, giggle, and play the heroine.

The previous Diane, who aired during the Patty mess, didn't look anywhere near 50 years old

...She's 47.

I like Maura but Diane Jenkins??????

Hmmmm. I'm taking bets- Diane vs Nikki or Diane vs Jill?

This has let's bring Maura on as a rival for "The Stafford" written all over it.