2 minutes ago, Taoboi said:

Same. I would need so form of pushback. And of course, comeuppance in some form.

 

And oh God, yes. People were talking about Giggly Heffa for DECADES to pay for the hit and run. So when the hit and run came back in play (complete with promos/tv spots), I remember people actually being excited. Heck I was excited. For her to get off, yeeeah smh. 

Not only did she get off, the writing was so slanted they actually tried to paint Christine in the wrong for even daring to pursue this.

19 minutes ago, Paul Raven said:

Texas and Santa Barbara come to mind.

 

I ended up loving Santa Barbara back in the day. For a few years there it was some of the best writing on television, in general. But, that first year was ROUGH. I recently watched the first few months on YouTube. The show was all over the place.

Do we have any idea why the show cast such a young actress to play Peaches? It just doesn't make sense unless they plan on using her again as a younger character for some reason.

Just now, 1974mdp said:

Do we have any idea why the show cast such a young actress to play Peaches? It just doesn't make sense unless they plan on using her again as a younger character for some reason.

You know who would have been a great age appropriate Peaches- Petronia Paley (Quinn, AW and Vivian, GL)

2 hours ago, wonderwoman1951 said:

back in the day, that was called ‘taking the character in a new direction.’

but it usually happened after the original actor had been off the canvas for while. why they decided to recast in the middle of a storyline will forever by a mystery. 

this is the first soap i’ve ever watched from the very beginning. i know it’s been years, but does anyone recall another soap having these kinds of growing pains?

Every single one of them

It might be a stretch by the actress playing Peaches may have taken a chance at auditioning and convinced casting to let her play an older role. Or she auditioned for something else previously and didn't get it, but casting liked her enough to call her back for another part.

1 minute ago, ReddFoxx said:

Or she auditioned for something else previously and didn't get it, but casting liked her enough to call her back for another part.

Maybe she auditioned for Samantha...

3 minutes ago, Paul Raven said:

Maybe she auditioned for Samantha...

You guys are killing me 😂. I may need to get my eyes fixed cause Samantha actress doesn’t bother me at all. 

I like Samantha and the actress is beautiful and talented, but when they have that poor woman pull her hair back it's like she drank from the wrong cup in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. This is not a Bianca Lawson situation, she can't play sixteen forever.

Edited August 19Aug 19 by Vee

This Vernon is Leslie’s dad theory seems to be completely made up from online with literally zero proof except that soaps do paternity stories.

18 minutes ago, Antoyne said:

This Vernon is Leslie’s dad theory seems to be completely made up from online with literally zero proof except that soaps do paternity stories.

The type of writing that BTG must avoid.

3 hours ago, Antoyne said:

Not only did she get off, the writing was so slanted they actually tried to paint Christine in the wrong for even daring to pursue this.

So wrong for that. 

3 hours ago, Antoyne said:

I may need to get my eyes fixed cause Samantha actress doesn’t bother me at all. 

You're not alone.  

1 hour ago, Antoyne said:

This Vernon is Leslie’s dad theory seems to be completely made up from online with literally zero proof except that soaps do paternity stories.

I think just like Eva's cover story when she first got around the Haves...which got a name check in today's episode...it's already been set up to be NOT Vernon and any hints in that direction are red herrings. The clues are in plain sight (like that cover story) are pointing to it being Dante Green. 

9 hours ago, wonderwoman1951 said:

back in the day, that was called ‘taking the character in a new direction.’

but it usually happened after the original actor had been off the canvas for while. why they decided to recast in the middle of a storyline will forever by a mystery. 

this is the first soap i’ve ever watched from the very beginning. i know it’s been years, but does anyone recall another soap having these kinds of growing pains?

This is my first time seeing a soap from the very beginning as well. I tend to believe that the soaps of the past did have their share of growing pains from the very start, but here's also the deal in my opinion, along with those growing pains there was patience on the other side of it. Audience patience, specifically. People were far more willing to stand by and support these soaps as they attempted to grow. That level of patience no longer exists here in 2025. I have to question whether MVJ and her team even realizes this? Please MVJ and crew read this: TODAY'S AUDIENCE IS NOT YESTERDAY'S AUDIENCE. It's either sink or swim, IMMEDIATELY!

9 hours ago, BoldRestless said:

I thought this at first, but I think they addressed it adequately today. Last week it seemed like they were saying the money has been sitting there for 50 years or however old Leslie is, which was bugging me because Barbara's family was poor and needed the money at the time. Today Peaches (is this her actual name?) said the money actually did pass through to Barbara's heirs, and it has now reached the last person in the line, Barbara's sister who I guess died childless, so Leslie is the only heir. So the family did receive and, presumably, spent the money, but whatever interest it earned plus Anita replenishing the funds every six months means there's still plenty left (but maybe it's enough to be comfortable but not mega rich, we'll see where they go with that). 

 

 

 

Indeed they did.