1. Adam IS one of Erica's leftovers. He married Erica first, he was obsessed with her, AND because their divorce was never legal, his marriage to Brooke wasn't valid either. If you really wanted Brooke with someone who had never slept with Erica, then be bitter that she didn't marry Edmund. THAT was a wasted opportunity right there.

2. I am so sick of the whole "I've waited X years for this to happen. I deserve this" attitude from fans. I've seen it from fandom after fandom, and it drives me insane. You don't deserve anything. You aren't entitled to anything. Your wants are no more valid or important than any other viewer's. But while we're on the subject, Brooke and Adam have been on-again/off-again since the late 80s. They've had far more time together than a lot of soap couples out there. Get over it.

3. The entire 'supercouple' thing makes me want to gag. Do you know what happens when you have a real supercouple (and for the record, I don't think Brooke and Adam are one, despite your insistence)? The fans bitch and moan and whine and complain and write letters and call and email and say they'll refuse to watch unless X & Y stay together, and it ends up killing most storyline options because the audience gets bored watching their once favorite couple living a normal married life. Then after a while, they end up being a ridiculous caricature of a relationship where all they do it get together and break up again (Tad & Dixie, Erica and Jack, Ryan and Greenlee, and prior to this reboot, I would have said Kendall and Zach), and the end result is that two once good characters are now a hot mess.

+1. I know this has been said over and over, but it's too bad Brooke & Edmund didn't reunite back when Erica was married to Dimitri so they would all be living at Wildwind together.

I did like Brooke & Adam back in the day, but the only 2 supercouples I considered her in were with Tom and Edmund.

I also don't think Brooke/Dimitri will be a long-term pairing but I hope there's a triangle with Adam that plays out onscreen.

And honestly, IDK why someone has to have a connection to be on the show. Dimitri had no family and nothing to tie him to the canvas beyond finding Natalie in a well, and he ended up being on the show for a decade. When David Hayward was introduced to AMC, his sole connection to the show was that he dated Allie Doyle in med school and wanted her back. We ended up getting his mother, brothers and cousins on the show, and he's considered a core character. Not everyone has to have family to stick around.

Thank you. I'm beyond tired of the "everyone has to be connected by blood" fetish. That's what turned these shows into an inbred, incestuous mess. Not to mention that it's cheap, lazy, unimaginative writing.

Thank you. I'm beyond tired of the "everyone has to be connected by blood" fetish. That's what turned these shows into an inbred, incestuous mess. Not to mention that it's cheap, lazy, unimaginative writing.

All My Children is based on family oriented themes. There are very few friendships in Daytime soaps now.

The character of Dimitri is a Ginger Smith fave so she wanted him on the show. Dimitri is a floater/arc specific character and is not needed for the long run of things.

All My Children is a family generational type Soap and that was made clear from day one.

+1. I know this has been said over and over, but it's too bad Brooke & Edmund didn't reunite back when Erica was married to Dimitri so they would all be living at Wildwind together.

I did like Brooke & Adam back in the day, but the only 2 supercouples I considered her in were with Tom and Edmund.

I also don't think Brooke/Dimitri will be a long-term pairing but I hope there's a triangle with Adam that plays out onscreen.

I am not for any Brooke/Dimitri pairing. A triangle with Adam would never work for most dedicated longtime fans.

PP is looking for the 18-49 age demo so Brooke, Adam, Dimitri have aged out of this key demo PP is trying to attract.

I'm aware. And look how much story that has brought the show. The writers won't be able to resist another go-around.

The new writing team is going to have to be careful to not revisit past storylines without showing forward progress with the show, overall. If a writer keeps going backwards to look for storylines, then there is no forward creativity in writing current age/characters in relations to the general storylines existing. Grasping for characters trying to save a show never works in the long term of it.

Adam/DC or no Adam/DC, Brooke's entire purpose on AMC 2.0 (as presently constituted) is as the Chandler gatekeeper and the de facto Chandler matriarch. Dimitri's entire purpose on AMC 2.0 (as presently constituted) is as a Chandler employee and Brooke's talk-to about JR and all things Chandler. Pairing Brooke/Dimitri would effectively eliminate her ties to Adam and the Chandlers and would leave the two of them with very little purpose to serve on the show (as presently constituted).

They have no children on the show. They have no relatives on the show. The Chandler kids wouldn't want to be mothered by Brooke. Zach is Bianca's male talk-to as far as Miranda is concerned and Bianca hasn't seen or heard from Dimitri in years. They wouldn't be able to fight JR/Colby for control of the company because Adam would revoke the PoA and Brooke has no legal claim to the company or Adam's money because they're not married.

JMO, though.

I agree with you on the Brooke/Dimitri pairing being useless and with little purpose.

1. Adam IS one of Erica's leftovers. He married Erica first, he was obsessed with her, AND because their divorce was never legal, his marriage to Brooke wasn't valid either. If you really wanted Brooke with someone who had never slept with Erica, then be bitter that she didn't marry Edmund. THAT was a wasted opportunity right there.

2. I am so sick of the whole "I've waited X years for this to happen. I deserve this" attitude from fans. I've seen it from fandom after fandom, and it drives me insane. You don't deserve anything. You aren't entitled to anything. Your wants are no more valid or important than any other viewer's. But while we're on the subject, Brooke and Adam have been on-again/off-again since the late 80s. They've had far more time together than a lot of soap couples out there. Get over it.

3. The entire 'supercouple' thing makes me want to gag. Do you know what happens when you have a real supercouple (and for the record, I don't think Brooke and Adam are one, despite your insistence)? The fans bitch and moan and whine and complain and write letters and call and email and say they'll refuse to watch unless X & Y stay together, and it ends up killing most storyline options because the audience gets bored watching their once favorite couple living a normal married life. Then after a while, they end up being a ridiculous caricature of a relationship where all they do it get together and break up again (Tad & Dixie, Erica and Jack, Ryan and Greenlee, and prior to this reboot, I would have said Kendall and Zach), and the end result is that two once good characters are now a hot mess.

Dedicated and loyal lifetime fans of AMC DO wait a long time for their favorite couplings to happen. They have a 30-40 year investment with the show. If it were not for them, there would be NO AMC, period. They have kept the show on air and fought valiantly to get the show back. They deserve quality and continuity with consistency in the book of AMC created and brought to life by Agnes Nixon.

The SuperCouple is a longtime fact and reality of Daytime Soap Opera history, Luke and Laura/Angie and Jesse. These couples are what attracts audiences and brings in the ratings. There is high value in SuperCoupling. There are couples who stay together and are the pillars/rocks of the communities in which they live in. That provides balance to a Soap Opera amidst all the chaotic things around them. It is that consistency that makes the show viable. Audiences never get bored with their favorite couple/SuperCouple since they will follow them and enjoy them in all their daily lives with tensions/frictions, disagreements, life's ups and downs, that go with living a life. (and sometimes help to keep a show on the air when a show gets into a slump). There is plenty of storyline options for SuperCouples, in the lives of their children/grandchildren, with their colleagues at work, in the community, during times of trials and tribulations, in sicknesses and health, etc. Yes, fans will write in and complain and in significant numbers too because there is that investment in SuperCouples that keeps them coming back to the show to watch. SuperCouples are an asset to a show, hence ratings increases.

The truth is NO FAN is going to get everything he/she wants out of a show. The company/Executive Producers/Writing teams call all shots. They will make decisions based on what is in their own visions, their own directions they need to take with a show, sometimes disappointing fans at times. PP is looking for the 18-49 key age demo and some of the vets are aged out of that key demo. But the vets are needed for balance, history, continuity, and for storylines surrounding the younger cast they support. I hope the new writing team will do their homework, research the history of the show, drive story in a forward progressive manner, and be consistent with character specific stories/arc stories. I don't want the new writing team to rewrite the history inaccurately or outrageously too. Going too far can backfire.

I think the super-couple mantra worked wonders in the 1980s/1990s, but I think starting with the 2000s.. the super-couple thing started to work against the shows instead of helping them. Soaps haven't totally adapted and evolved.. hence why they were dropping like flies.

Favorite Couple/Super Couple - whateves!!!

I have watched "All My Children" since I was a child, but fell for the show when Adam fell (hard) for Brooke. I know the show has had other great courtships, but for me, Adam and Brooke's was one of the best - possibly because it was the first time that Adam actually fell in love - not just the obsession that he had with Erica. The audience finally saw the heart of Adam Chandler. Brooke also became part of a great pairing, but because she was so opposite of Adam, we also saw the beginnings of a very independent Brooke English - not just a housewife (nothing against housewife, but Brooke's version wasn't very appealing with her always trying to appease Tom).

That said, if the show chooses to pursue a Brooke/Dimitri romantic relationship, I will just have to go along for the ride. My hope is it is just a device to cause friction in the struggle for control of Chandler, and give Adam/Brooke story, but if it isn't because DC wants to remain mainly retired, then so be it. I'm just happy that there is even a possibility of angst for a couple who is clearly no longer in their twenties!

I think the super-couple mantra worked wonders in the 1980s/1990s, but I think starting with the 2000s.. the super-couple thing started to work against the shows instead of helping them. Soaps haven't totally adapted and evolved.. hence why they were dropping like flies.

Part of the problem with the "supercouple" label is that the people who use it now use it wrong. Part of the recipe for supercouples is that they break up every now and then then find their way back to each to each other. But now, nobody wants their supercouple to do anything but lay in bed and tell each other how perfectly happy they are. A supercouple that doesn't have any drama becomes wallpaper.

Also the concept is just outdated. Supercouples come from the Harlequin Romance model of soaps. I'm not interested in that. Two people fated/destined to be together forever...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Spare me that teenage mess. Especially when you're talking about grown ass women like Brooke, Angie or Dixie. People change. Even loving couples fall out of sync with each other. If Adam isn't around why should Brooke have to cloister herself in the Chandler mansion like a nun? If Jesse is going to keep acting like Grade A !@#$%^&*] up over and over again why should Angie be forced to forgive him over and over again? And maybe the reason Dixie keeps dying is because it's the only way she can get a break from Tad.

I love Brooke/Adam but I also loved Brooke/Tom and Brooke/Edmund. I'm more than willing to see what happens with Brooke/Dimitri.

Dedicated and loyal lifetime fans of AMC DO wait a long time for their favorite couplings to happen. They have a 30-40 year investment with the show. If it were not for them, there would be NO AMC, period. They have kept the show on air and fought valiantly to get the show back. They deserve quality and continuity with consistency in the book of AMC created and brought to life by Agnes Nixon.

I am not for any Brooke/Dimitri pairing. A triangle with Adam would never work for most dedicated longtime fans.

Kind of tired of the notion that if you haven't been watching 30-40 years, your views on the show are somehow less important or insightful or that you don't understand the history or what makes for quality AMC. I've been watching for almost 20 years (4/5 of my life) and consider myself a loyal longtime fan. Its possible to be in that younger demo that PP wants but also have serious history with the show and appreciation for classic characters. The fact that we're getting Brooke & Dimitri, as friends, business associates, or something more plus Billy Clyde Tuggle and Opal on this reboot as opposed to Rylee & Zendall makes me want to stand up and cheer every episode. At the same time, I love Miranda and AJ and Colby.

I would welcome an Adam/Brooke/Dimitri triangle because its a story opportunity for characters I loved when I started watching. In my dreams, I would bring back Gloria Marsh who was also married to both them. But if Brooke/Adam get married, it will be a great 2 eps with really nice history but then they'll either be offscreen or occasional talk-tos for JR, Colby and AJ. So I think Brooke/Adam fans who are crying out against Dimitri might be shooting themselves in the foot here. But of course, I respect that opinion- we all have our couples we like.

That said, if the show chooses to pursue a Brooke/Dimitri romantic relationship, I will just have to go along for the ride. My hope is it is just a device to cause friction in the struggle for control of Chandler, and give Adam/Brooke story, but if it isn't because DC wants to remain mainly retired, then so be it. I'm just happy that there is even a possibility of angst for a couple who is clearly no longer in their twenties!

Couldn't have said it better.

Edited June 13, 201312 yr by greens_dupres

Kind of tired of the notion that if you haven't been watching 30-40 years, your views on the show are somehow less important or insightful or that you don't understand the history or what makes for quality AMC.

That's another reason I'm leery of nostalgia returns and making everyone part of the "core." It makes the shows insular and harder for people to get into. It chokes off potential entry points for new audience members and turns the show into a country club that only certain "real" fans can truly enjoy.

Kind of tired of the notion that if you haven't been watching 30-40 years, your views on the show are somehow less important or insightful or that you don't understand the history or what makes for quality AMC. I've been watching for almost 20 years (4/5 of my life) and consider myself a loyal longtime fan. Its possible to be in that younger demo that PP wants but also have serious history with the show and appreciation for classic characters. The fact that we're getting Brooke & Dimitri, as friends, business associates, or something more plus Billy Clyde Tuggle and Opal on this reboot as opposed to Rylee & Zendall makes me want to stand up and cheer every episode. At the same time, I love Miranda and AJ and Colby.

I would welcome an Adam/Brooke/Dimitri triangle because its a story opportunity for characters I loved when I started watching. In my dreams, I would bring back Gloria Marsh who was also married to both them. But if Brooke/Adam get married, it will be a great 2 eps with really nice history but then they'll either be offscreen or occasional talk-tos for JR, Colby and AJ. So I think Brooke/Adam fans who are crying out against Dimitri might be shooting themselves in the foot here. But of course, I respect that opinion- we all have our couples we like.

I love your whole post, but I highlighted my favorite part!

I know I can be as guilty as anyone of pointing out the differences between the golden era of early 1980s AMC and what came after, but you have a valid point. I don't think the show really lost its essence until the Frons era.

I don't think Brooke/Dimitri will happen either - it is a plot device...

I also think being tied to Celia is no great shakes - hopefully the show will 86 the character (because she has no ties that have been revealed yet) when production resumes.

My point about having ties is all to do with how the show functions now - smaller cast, shorter show and less room for characters (out of the target demo age range) who are not part of a story/comic relief (ie BCT) and/or who do not have a valid tie to one of the younger characters - who the show is now revolving around.

JMO, though

I haven't seen you in the longest! Murph! Jannie board it's been a long [!@#$%^&*] time!

I agree w/ all of this about Brooke and Dimitri, this has to be to set up JR and Colby taking control and I agree Petey and Colby offspring has to happen. For the next generation to continue. What I want w/ Celia is that they turn her into a young Crazy Annie but falls for AJ not Petey. Gets jealous Colby taking Petey, hangs w/ AJ, gets jealous a guy like him is w/ her friend and turns on her. What do you think about the MiMo and AJ combo, I'm not feeling it like everyone else is.

Edited June 13, 201312 yr by Clear Drama

Rob Wilson ‏@MrRobertScott21h

Overwhelmed w/ all the love and support from you #allmychildren fans today! A little extra heat than normalSO...who's UP for round 2?! ✌

Edited June 13, 201312 yr by John

Dedicated and loyal lifetime fans of AMC DO wait a long time for their favorite couplings to happen. They have a 30-40 year investment with the show. If it were not for them, there would be NO AMC, period. They have kept the show on air and fought valiantly to get the show back. They deserve quality and continuity with consistency in the book of AMC created and brought to life by Agnes Nixon.

The SuperCouple is a longtime fact and reality of Daytime Soap Opera history, Luke and Laura/Angie and Jesse. These couples are what attracts audiences and brings in the ratings. There is high value in SuperCoupling. There are couples who stay together and are the pillars/rocks of the communities in which they live in. That provides balance to a Soap Opera amidst all the chaotic things around them. It is that consistency that makes the show viable. Audiences never get bored with their favorite couple/SuperCouple since they will follow them and enjoy them in all their daily lives with tensions/frictions, disagreements, life's ups and downs, that go with living a life. (and sometimes help to keep a show on the air when a show gets into a slump). There is plenty of storyline options for SuperCouples, in the lives of their children/grandchildren, with their colleagues at work, in the community, during times of trials and tribulations, in sicknesses and health, etc. Yes, fans will write in and complain and in significant numbers too because there is that investment in SuperCouples that keeps them coming back to the show to watch. SuperCouples are an asset to a show, hence ratings increases.

The truth is NO FAN is going to get everything he/she wants out of a show. The company/Executive Producers/Writing teams call all shots. They will make decisions based on what is in their own visions, their own directions they need to take with a show, sometimes disappointing fans at times. PP is looking for the 18-49 key age demo and some of the vets are aged out of that key demo. But the vets are needed for balance, history, continuity, and for storylines surrounding the younger cast they support. I hope the new writing team will do their homework, research the history of the show, drive story in a forward progressive manner, and be consistent with character specific stories/arc stories. I don't want the new writing team to rewrite the history inaccurately or outrageously too. Going too far can backfire.

None of that matters. Ellebelle has spoken. We must adhere to what she's 'sick of' and doesn't want to read about any longer. The fact that I could GAFF about what she's sick or not sick of doesn't seem to compute.

And speaking of - I'm sick of people who are seemingly too intelligent to 'tolerate' my views on a soap and think they're oh so clever by responding with 'I need to get a life.' If you're that intelligent and oh so above us mere life lacking people what are you doing posting daily on a soap opera messageboard? And more frequently than I am, I might add - project much Eric? Oh and the one that wants to marry him. Can you please and then take a LONG honeymoon together. A trip for the two of you would be a vacation for me as well. Win win.

Now I like what I like. I will express my views on what like and when I'm not happy about hacks screwing with it. If you don't care for what I post scroll. Or just place me on ignore. Very simple.