I have to say that I really like this twist. Good use of history and the possibility of Hope and John being EJ's parents is shocking, but not that far out of left field considering that both Hope and John being so hazy on so many years of their lives.

The problem with it is that Hope has been onscreen from birth til 1987, "died" in 1990, and returning in 1994, spending 90-94 as "Princess Gina." John, meanwhile, showed up in 1986 as "The Pawn" and has been onscreen. So their "hazy years" do not coincide and therefore, it's not possible that could have conceived EJ.

And if the writers were planning on using "subway sex" as the time of conception, well, that's impossible too. EJ was born well before that, not to mention that Zack was born during what would have been the timeline for Hope to have had "Subway Sex Offspring."

So none of this is even remotely possible (including John & Hope being legally married) and therefore it makes a mess of history, not good use of it.

Edited February 7, 201213 yr by juniorz1

That wasn't even a disrespectful remark. It was merely a point on how even onscreen history does not matter on Days.

Thank you! The show has had so many retconns, children SORASed out of order, flat out ignoring history to suit the plot, etc...that this doesnt phase me as much.

Cheap no it doesn't I was just asking a question, because their was a portion of time that I didnt watch Days and tuned back into AMC?? I only started watching Days again upon AMC's cancellation. Therefore, I was trying to fill in some of the missing pieces. Lately, when I post a question you come back with what is apparently a condesending, smart remark...which is not appreciated or necessary, since I was asking some questions, making statements or thoughts about certain shows/topics. I pride myself in getting along with everyone at this board and the few other message boards I visit,but I will not tolerate or put up with any blatant disrespect online, especially when I was asking a generic question. I do NOT even put up with the disrespect at work from my employees and colleagues. If I am disrespectful to someone, then by all means I would expect them to be disrespectful back and I would expect to get called out on it.

I have been a soap fan for various years since I was about 2 years old and I will be 37 in June. Much of this was thanks in part to my late paternal grandmother. I do not admit or claim to admit that I know everything about every show, past or present. Therefore, I ask questions when I can't remember a certain aspect, character, time of events, etc. I am an educated, professional female (with a masters degree), mother, daughter and soap fan. I would appreciate if you didn't speak down to me from here on out on this board. Thank you.

Wow, no offense, but I think you went overboard and took things the wrong way. I didnt even realize that apparently we had an "issue" with each other till you just mentioned it. Whatever the case (which I was not aware of before), you misinterpreted my post and it wasnt meant to be snarky, disrespect or a blatant putdown directed solely at you. I really dont see how my post could be turned into that when that wasnt the intention but whatever. Im big enough to just move on and be more mindful when it comes to reading and/or responding back to your posts

The problem with it is that Hope has been onscreen from birth til 1987, "died" in 1990, and returning in 1994, spending 90-94 as "Princess Gina." John, meanwhile, showed up in 1986 as "The Pawn" and has been onscreen. So their "hazy years" do not coincide and therefore, it's not possible that could have conceived EJ.

And if the writers were planning on using "subway sex" as the time of conception, well, that's impossible too. EJ was born well before that, not to mention that Zack was born during what would have been the timeline for Hope to have had "Subway Sex Offspring."

So none of this is even remotely possible (including John & Hope being legally married) and therefore it makes a mess of history, not good use of it.

Hope doesnt have to give birth in order to be a mother nor do two people have to have sex to be coparents. Just saying...

Edited February 7, 201213 yr by Cheap21

I can't believe Days viewers are bringing up timelines. EJ IS OLDER THAN EVERY SUPERCOUPLE CHILD BORN BEFORE HIM ONSCREEN.

Edited February 8, 201213 yr by Antoyne

I can't believe Days viewers are bringing up timelines. EJ IS OLDER THAN EVERY SUPERCOUPLE CHILD BORN BEFORE HIM ONSCREEN.

True...Wasn't Will born before him or am I wrong??

True...Wasn't Will born before him or am I wrong??

LOL...I never even realized that. Will was born in 1995. EJ was born 2 years later in 1997 but somehow ended up being his stepfather about a decade later. Sami was born in 1984 yet the two are treated as being the same age

Edited February 8, 201213 yr by Cheap21

LOL...I never even realized that. Will was born in 1995. EJ was born 2 years later in 1997 but somehow ended up being his stepfather about a decade later

Yup...EJ turned out to be Will's sugar daddy.....lol....I thought I was right about that...lol....EJ looks like he could be in his 40s while Will is still 20 or so.....lol

So the EJ and Sami romance makes it even weirder...lol

Is Sami a sugar mama...lol??

Not to mention Phillip, Shawn, Belle, Brady, Abby, Stephanie etc...

Not to mention Phillip, Shawn, Belle, Brady, Abby, Stephanie etc...

LMAO... not to mention Philip and Will born the same year lol.

And didn't Kate and Roman have Cassie and Rex together without conceiving via sex. They could do that with Hope and John but honestly I don't want it to be an existing character on screen. New character please. Its just so cheesy to me when out of nowhere a younger character with no or minimal familial ties is suddenly someone's child. The Daniel/Maggie stuff still pisses me off.

LMAO... not to mention Philip and Will born the same year lol.

And didn't Kate and Roman have Cassie and Rex together without conceiving via sex.

even more contrived is that Marlena gave birth to their kids. Like really? Retcon of a retcon

Edited February 8, 201213 yr by Cheap21

Hope doesnt have to give birth in order to be a mother nor do two people have to have sex to be coparents. Just saying...

That's true but there's never been a time in their existence that both characters have been offscreen simultaneously, so it makes it kinda hard to buy that they did anything in any way that resulted in their child being born.

I can't believe Days viewers are bringing up timelines. EJ IS OLDER THAN EVERY SUPERCOUPLE CHILD BORN BEFORE HIM ONSCREEN.

It's not about timelines- it's about long-time characters that we have watched grow up/appear with our own eyes. Hope has been on DAYS since birth- EJ disappeared all but immediately after birth. It's MUCH easier to play with the timeline of a character who spent their entire life offscreen than to play with one who has spent their entire life onscreen.

Sorry, but I'm more apt to buy EJ as an adult than I am messing with anything in Hope's history.

Hell, JENNIFER would make a better candidate for this storyline because there WERE times that neither Jenn or John were on canvas. Meanwhile, either Hope or John has ALWAYS been on the show since Hope was born in the 70s!!!!

LMAO... not to mention Philip and Will born the same year lol.

And didn't Kate and Roman have Cassie and Rex together without conceiving via sex. They could do that with Hope and John but honestly I don't want it to be an existing character on screen. New character please. Its just so cheesy to me when out of nowhere a younger character with no or minimal familial ties is suddenly someone's child. The Daniel/Maggie stuff still pisses me off.

They can't. Again, Kate & Roman spent many years simultaneously off canvas so it could be done with them and a slew of other characters. It just so happens that John & Hope AREN'T two of them and everyone seems to know it.

Even though EJ was rapidly SORASed, we the viewers still saw him born in 1997, and neither John nor Hope were in their computer chip modes. As for the marriage, it would make more sense if John were secretly married to the real Princess Gina, not Hope.

Actually, the way I've been taking it is if any of this were true, then EJ isn't really EJ and at some point (maybe right before Stefano got his hands on him) was switched with another.

Either way, I'm not buying the John/Hope theory. If anything, I still think EJ could be Maggie's son and Daniel could be EJ.