I think I've figured out John's REAL identity: he's Sir Launcelot.

1 hour ago, carolineg said:

I think it's just a John thing because most of his love interests he was rescuing from some situation when they first meet.  

If DAYS were (still) a show that had any depth at all, it would use that quality to say something very profound about men like John.  Namely, they enjoy "rescuing" their women, but once they're no longer in danger, they grow restless.

Unfortunately, DAYS hasn't been that kind of show for a very long while.

50 minutes ago, Khan said:

I think I've figured out John's REAL identity: he's Sir Launcelot.

If DAYS were (still) a show that had any depth at all, it would use that quality to say something very profound about men like John.  Namely, they enjoy "rescuing" their women, but once they're no longer in danger, they grow restless.

Unfortunately, DAYS hasn't been that kind of show for a very long while.

I think RoJohn used to have that depth and it may have been implied about him.  When Deidre Hall left every single RoJohn love interest was some sort of damsel in distress and he was rescuing them from bad situations.  I recently saw a scene on twitter where Sami tells Marlena about all the women John was with when she was a kid and she sort of says that exact thing about him being restless once they were saved.   

But let's be honest does John really have an identity these days outside of being a hero and in love with Marlena?  I can tell you a lot about Marlena and her characteristics but John not so much.  I love John and Drake but John really hasn't been a complex character since he got back together with Marlena.  I am not complaining and this an entirely different topic, but John's character only does things in reaction to Marlena.  He does very little on his own.

So I've been watching the 1984 episodes and Doug and Julie's exit seems so abrupt and rushed. They were talking about the cruise they were going on, and that was it. No big final scene with Hope? Or Tom and Alice? Was there some BTS trouble between Days and the Hayes' at the time?

Edited January 29, 20223 yr by AbcNbc247

I seem to recall the Hayeses saying they were unceremoniously dumped at the time, maybe in a WLS interview.

It was ageist Brian Frons' doing. TPTB wanted them to go on recurring, and they declined. 

I found the WLS interview, and they pretty much say that it was Margaret DePriest's doing. They went to her and objected to the way they were being portrayed in Bo and Hope's story, and as a result, MD said that she couldn't write for them anymore. 

Still think it could have been a better exit though. I really have to read their autobiography. 

The mandate at days at the time was to write for the younger characters.

Days asked them to renegotiate their contract for fewer appearances (less money) and there was no guarantee of story.

 

Frons definitely played a role, but DePriest got mad at them after they asked for a meeting to discuss the manner in which Doug and Julie were being written (especially Doug).  Bill didn't like the way Doug was always angry at Hope, and didn't think it was in character.  DePriest told him that he didn't know anything about raising children (despite him raising five children of his own).  DePriest told them she would no longer write for them.  They ad-libbed their last lines in their final scenes in 1984.   They've said they probably should have let everything blow over and waited it out until there was another regime change.  Funny that Susan was considered "old" at 40. 

Edited January 30, 20223 yr by jam6242

6 minutes ago, jam6242 said:

Frons definitely played a role, but DePriest got mad at them after they asked for a meeting to discuss the manner in which Doug and Julie were being written (especially Doug).  Bill didn't like the way Doug was always angry at Hope, and didn't think it was in character.  DePriest told him that he didn't know anything about raising children (despite him raising five children of his own).  DePriest told them she would no longer write for them.  They ad-libbed their last lines in their final scenes in 1984.   They've said they probably should have let everything blow over and waited it out until there was another regime change.  Funny that Susan was considered "old" at 40. 

That sounds out of bounds on her part. I can see why they left. Honestly I don't think I have ever enjoyed much of anything I have seen of her work on any soap. 

5 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

That sounds out of bounds on her part. I can see why they left. Honestly I don't think I have ever enjoyed much of anything I have seen of her work on any soap. 

I haven't either, including on Another World and The Doctors.

28 minutes ago, jam6242 said:

Frons definitely played a role, but DePriest got mad at them after they asked for a meeting to discuss the manner in which Doug and Julie were being written (especially Doug).  Bill didn't like the way Doug was always angry at Hope, and didn't think it was in character.  DePriest told him that he didn't know anything about raising children (despite him raising five children of his own).  DePriest told them she would no longer write for them.  They ad-libbed their last lines in their final scenes in 1984.   They've said they probably should have let everything blow over and waited it out until there was another regime change.  Funny that Susan was considered "old" at 40. 

The show did Susan dirty as far as that.  Her child being aged, Hope being aged, Doug being older...Julie does read older.  A lot of it is 80's styling but when I realized she is only 4 years older than Deidre Hall my mind was blown.  I am not saying SSH looks bad, but she seems like an entirely different generation than Marlena, Roman, John et all and she's not much older.  The show at that time also made Doug/Julie seem like old, crotchety parents who wouldn't let 'their' daughter have fun.  They easily could have let it all blow over, but they weren't wrong about what they were saying.  I can only imagine how disrespectful that felt to the Hayes after carrying the show for years.

1 hour ago, jam6242 said:

Frons definitely played a role, but DePriest got mad at them after they asked for a meeting to discuss the manner in which Doug and Julie were being written (especially Doug).  Bill didn't like the way Doug was always angry at Hope, and didn't think it was in character.  DePriest told him that he didn't know anything about raising children (despite him raising five children of his own).  DePriest told them she would no longer write for them.  They ad-libbed their last lines in their final scenes in 1984.   They've said they probably should have let everything blow over and waited it out until there was another regime change.  Funny that Susan was considered "old" at 40. 

And in one felled swoop dropped the late Jed Allan, Suzanne Rogers (who was dealing with her early diagnosis with myasthenia gravis), and the late Lanna Saunders, too. Foolishness.

7 minutes ago, slick jones said:

And in one felled swoop dropped the late Jed Allan, Suzanne Rogers (who was dealing with her early diagnosis with myasthenia gravis), and the late Lanna Saunders, too. Foolishness.

Yeah, and Jed didn't get a farewell scene either. Can't remember re Suzanne and Lanna.   I was more into the CBS soaps around this time anyway, so I was happy that Susan turned up on Y&R. Missed Bill, of course.

1 hour ago, carolineg said:

The show did Susan dirty as far as that.  Her child being aged, Hope being aged, Doug being older...Julie does read older.  A lot of it is 80's styling but when I realized she is only 4 years older than Deidre Hall my mind was blown.  I am not saying SSH looks bad, but she seems like an entirely different generation than Marlena, Roman, John et all and she's not much older.  The show at that time also made Doug/Julie seem like old, crotchety parents who wouldn't let 'their' daughter have fun.  They easily could have let it all blow over, but they weren't wrong about what they were saying.  I can only imagine how disrespectful that felt to the Hayes after carrying the show for years.

Being married to a man 18 years older than her probably makes her seem older too.  They had her paired with a younger man on YR, and tried that when she returned to Days in 1990, but it didn't go anywhere.

11 minutes ago, jam6242 said:

Yeah, and Jed didn't get a farewell scene either. Can't remember re Suzanne and Lanna.   I was more into the CBS soaps around this time anyway, so I was happy that Susan turned up on Y&R. Missed Bill, of course.

Being married to a man 18 years older than her probably makes her seem older too.  They had her paired with a younger man on YR, and tried that when she returned to Days in 1990, but it didn't go anywhere.

Yeah, I guess Doug does age her, but it is a shame because you feel like you missed out on things Doug/Julie could have done during those years. But the show did change a lot in tone over those years so maybe not.  It's also weird they never got their own child.  Anyhow, I am not sure Days couldn't have backtracked on her aging a bit the way the kept Laura, Marlena, Kate, even Maggie vaguely in their 40's and 50's for years.

 Julie was aged when she became mother to an adult son and grandmother in her 30's . In some 70's shots she looks like Helen Wagner!

Overall,Susan did retain a youthful look and was looking good in her 90-93 stint.

I know she is in her late 70's  now-but with the floral overjackets, slacks, clompy sandals, chunky necklaces and cropped grey hair she does present as a granny.

Suzanne Rogers has a much more stylish look and isn't much younger.