Jump to content

DAYS: EJ NOT Recast


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Albatross Cane! 

 

EDIT: it seems this may be wishful thinking/a campaign on Goddard's part based on a predictions article. F&cker made it sound like a done deal.

 

That being said, it wouldn't necessarily be the worst recast.

 

 

Edited by YRBB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Webmaster

Calm down, people. This is so far NOT true. The tweet Daniel shared included an image from Soaps.com where they posted their PREDICTIONS for 2021. Could be true. Could possibly not be true. But it's not true now:

 

https://soaps.sheknows.com/gallery/soaps-2021-predictions-general-hospital-bold-beautiful/goddard-sweeney-cane-sami-ej/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

The link you cited is a "gallery" of random photos and ideas. Some are predictions and some are supposed to be silly/fake.
 

Here is the "article" that goes with it:

https://soaps.sheknows.com/soaps/news/588016/soaps-2021-what-will-happen-next-spoilers/


And the "article" has these disclaimers:

 

Begin quote:

"2021 Predictions for All Four Soaps: Our Wildest Dreams and Greatest Fears for the Year to Come"

 

predictions-mashup

 

we’ve decided to play armchair headwriter and offer up teases for what we think is coming down the pike on not only General Hospital and Days of Our Lives but The Young and the Restless and The Bold and the Beautiful.

 

Sometimes, we’ve just read the writing on the wall and reprinted it;

other times, we’ve gone so far out on a limb that we’ll be surprised if it doesn’t snap beneath the weight of us.

 

But we digress. What you are about to read are our predictions.

We in no way, shape or form know that these things are going to happen.

We just have a hunch, a feeling.

End quote.

 

So we were supposed to read the "article" with its disclaimers first, then click on the "gallery".  Which is silly because anyone might click on the gallery first and never see what they wrote about it.

 

 

--

When Daniel Goddard tweeted the screencap, he put a wink in the text of his tweet.

 

He deleted the tweet?  Ha!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

See I think casting him is a good idea. He’s a good actor and the role of EJ could fit him better than Cane who was poorly written. With that said, once again he’s acting a fool which is making him undesirable to be cast. He did that constantly at Y&R micromanaging his role and now he’s trying to trick people into thinking he’s EJ? Why not see the suggestion and call your agent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy