The Young and The Restless Shocker: - Actress Leaving

[DRW50]

Of the vets? I'm only talking about vets, not some of the newer characters.

Nikki, Victor, Sharon (I have mixed feelings about her but I would keep her if Adam and Nick were both gone), Traci, Michael, Lauren, Jill, Paul.

I'd bring Traci back with a foster child. I'd bring back Scotty to give Lauren some new material. I'd put Michael into more of a scheming, manipulating role, but not too dark. I'd bring Brock back and maybe put him with Jill and throw them into some stories with younger characters.

I'd bring back Amy and Tyrone and write out the Winters, although I'd be happy if Olivia and Nate came back.

[Ann_SS]

Actually, J.T. was more a young Brad, than Paul. This is why he did not need Paul to stick around to him mentor as you suggested.

I simply do not share your total negative characterization of Jack and Nick nor would I write off these characters because I actually think that they have a place in the show.I think that both Jack and Nick can be turned around with good writing that focuses more on their families, than their love lives. I think that both they have rich histories and can have strong relationships with their children if the writing it there.

I do think that some vets should go, but agree that agism impacts women more than men.

[DRW50]

I mostly see JT as Paul because they were both bad boys who reformed after making some costly mistakes, they were both PIs, etc. They both went from grey to good (Brad was always grey to me).

I guess I have a brick wall with Jack. I really try to see what his stories would be, but I mostly associate the Abbotts of the last fiftee years with shaming, judgment, defeat, and that Kool-Aid Man who won't go the [!@#$%^&*] away. Perhaps if I was not as biased, I would be able to give Jack a chance, as, a long time ago, Bergman was one of my favorite soap actors.

Nick - I think there's plenty of material there with another actor, but it's just tough for me to buy Morrow as anything beyond the frat boy.

Nick, Victoria and Adam were all rich characters who had actor/writing issues that all meshed together like something left out in the sun too long. Now I see them all as burdens to the show.

Not that my opinion matters anyway, as none of these people are going anywhere, but IMO the strongest way to immediate improvement is cutting some of this with the Newman siblings and bringing in new characters with fresh stories and ideas. I'd say bring in Victor's brother with some kids of his own and have Victor deal with them. You could have Noah, Summer, etc. dealing with them too.

[frequentsoapfan]

I would transition the Winters out too. Well maybe Liv and Lil Nate come come back but Neil, Devon, Lily, and Cane by extension can all go. Screw the backlash they just long outlived their experation date.

Out of the Newmans I'd keep Nick,Noah, and Abby. Nikki and Victor can reoccur. Victoria and Adam can leave for a long time.

Unlike the Newmans I think the Abbotts are pretty viable.

I really prefer Lauren childless. Scotty was a bore played by an annoying actor and Fenn is a terror.

[JackPeyton]

I think Y&R has done a good job introducing new characters. I really, really like Dylan, Avery, Leslie. I like Tyler, Carmine. I really like the way the show has mixed them up with some of the vets as well. Chelsea is a character who has also really grown on me.

Ive been watching again for about two months, and while Lauren and Nick's stories brought me back (they are my favorite Y&R characters) I find myself staying for Leslie, Dylan and Avery.

[full hearts]

I have mixed feelings. I can't say I'm overly invested in the newbies, but it's refreshing seeing some new faces.

I'd wish they do more with Noah. They cast a new love interest for Tyler.

[Ann_SS]

I don't think that this is the "real" question at all all. Like this and your subsequent posts, you are basically picking and choosing who should stay and go based on you who like. For example, Billy is there because.he is an Abbott. He needs better writing, Victoria needs recasting. However, they should not simply be dumped because you don't think that they are useful.

I think the real question when it comes to vets or the current established characters is what ties do they have to the canvas, how much story potential do they have remaining, and how can they be seamless integrated with the newer fresher characters? For example, you want to bring back Brock for JIll, but the truth there is no place for him. Having Jill recurring is a good idea provided she actually acts like a support to Billy, her son and not this random stranger Cane. There is a place for vets like Jill, Victor, and Nikki who have children on the show. They do not need huge personal stories that suck of copious amounts of airtime as the actors and their fans demand. They have had their day. It is time to share the airtime with the newer characters.

[DRW50]

My opinion isn't based on who I like. I despise Victor and everything Victor stands for. Yet I've repeatedly said I think he should stay.

If I don't think a character is useful, I'm basing this on their story material over the years, and their role on the canvas. Billy is an Abbott - is this meaningful in any way beyond his last name? He has little to no relationship with anyone in his family. For years he was ashamed of most of them. His stories have generally involved drinking, forgettable business ventures, and babies. None of this seems to have any serious tie to other characters or an impact on current story. He's had, what, two children? If they disappeared tomorrow would anyone notice?

Victoria hasn't had a real purpose in story in over a decade. That isn't just Amelia Heinle. This is one of the reasons Heather Tom left the show. Let's say they recast Victoria with a dynamite actress. Would pining for a baby and pouting at her family (which is all Sony seems to want Victoria to do, since this has been consistent through three or four regimes now) add to the canvas? Does Victoria have interesting relationships with anyone in her family?

There's a place for Brock because he's the perfect talk-to character, the light in the window, which the show needs. People from different stories would be able to go to him for sensible advice and support. He wouldn't need a big story. He never has. He could open the shelter, or turn the mansion into a place to help people.

[Ann_SS]

Characters with strong ties to the core families should not be written out because they have been poorly used and written by previous regimes. Rather they should get better writing (and be recast where necessary) to strengthen the characters and give them purpose. The problem with Y&R is the lack of cohesive writing for families who were traditionally the backbone of the romances and business stories.

I don't agree that Y&R needs a "talk-to character" or some wise person for everyone to go to. This and a permanent homeless shelter on Y&R would be so out of character and a waste of a set. All writing has to do is focus on building back up the families and friendships and those confidant relationships will emerge organically.

[JackPeyton]

Characters shouldnt stay on just because they are part of a family or a vet. A character like Billy is of no big loss to the show, and while that can be blamed on recasts and bad writing, cant that be said about most characters - part of a family or not? I personally love it when soaps bring on new characters with no ties to any families because it adds something fresh and creates new dynamics.

Newbies, new families - they are needed. Of course, vets are as well. The two are equally important to soaps. You cant have a newbie overload, but I dont think 3-5 out of 40 characters is an overload like some do. Again, going back to Y&Rs newer characters, Carmine, Leslie, Dylan and Avery have provided a lot of new dynamics and story for vets like Lauren, Michael, Neil, Sharon, Nick and Phyliss among many others. Id gladly cut Billy, Victoria and others to keep any of those five newbies.

[DRW50]

I think Y&R at its best had talk-to characters, people who cared, but weren't saps or pushovers. People like Liz Foster, or Hope, or Douglas. When you have a bunch of characters running around as generic quasi-sociopaths, with no real ability to hear other voices or perspectives, it takes away some of the humanity. I never cared about Victor half as much after Douglas was gone.

I wouldn't use a homeless shelter as a permanent set, but I think it's more useful than yet another cheap-looking restaurant or a health club.

The problem is that many people stay on the show solely because of ties to a core family, not because they ever get good writing, sometimes not because they ever know how to properly recast. Take a character like Ashley, who was supposed to be a major asset to the canvas because she was an Abbott, or because she once had good stories. The show had no idea what to do with her for ten or twenty years. No amount of recasts, bringing the original actress back, three, four different writing and production teams, managed to make it work.

When I hear people talk about Billy in a positive way it's usually about how much they love Billy Miller and isn't he adorable and won't he be a big star. That tells me there's not very much interest in the character himself, who went from being a drunken deadbeat philanderer with an eye on the modern style, to a husband and father who has inexplicably stayed married to the dullest woman around, and who inexplicably loved 1955-style sitcoms. Considering how often Miller has left for primetime work, there's no way of knowing how long he'll be around, and there seems to be no real attempt made to strengthen the character enough to where it could thrive once Miller is gone.

The same seems to be the case for Adam. People talk about how wild and hot and funny and shocking Michael Muhney is. The character seems to be an afterthought.

I don't think the show can work based on which actors gets the most hype. That's one of the main things that sunk Phyllis. And that's why I see no real purpose for a character like Billy at the moment. I feel like people are mostly just interested, if they are at all, based on some distant memories of "killer Miller" from 2009 or 2010.

Bill Bell never relied on the idea of characters being important because of their last name. He knew when to get rid of faded glories. No one today seems to be as willing to do this. In the case of the Abbotts and Newmans, the show has spent so many years utterly dismantling these families that I'm not sure what can repair them. I don't believe that most of the Abbotts even like each other half the time. And in the case of the Newmans, the actors in the family are, for the most part, so bland and lazy that it will be a huge effort to get them to even try.

[JackPeyton]

I think the newmans a actually a really strong family unit. Victor, Nikki, Victoria, Nick, Noah, Summer and by extension Sharon may have issues and may not all be played by master soap actors, but as a collective unit it's pretty strong. I'd love to see Nikki make everyone come to a family dinner or something.

The abbots, Tho - that's another story.

[Ann_SS]

If you were responding to me, then I don't see where we disagree. My point all along is that no one has to be cut. There is no need to cull the canvas. Rather the vets and established characters need to accept that they cannot stay in front burner stories and that many of them have to transition into supporting roles so that the newer characters can be featured and get airtime. This uproar from MS, EB, etc. and their fans is ridiculous. Y&R needs to give younger fresher faces some room to grow and establish themselves.

BTW, I will never agree about Dylan. I think he is the weakest link of all the new characters. He gets too much airtime and that story with Chelsea passing the baby as him for no understandable reason is ridiculous.

[DeeeDee]

If Kevin had raped Cassie or Colleen he never would have.

[DeeeDee]