I haven't crunched the numbers but they were both frat boy rapists in the 90s, Howarth's was actually a few years earlier, so it seems to work. 

I'm all for recasts, villains and back from the dead characters but Matt Clark? If ever there was a character not worthy of bringing back from the dead, it is a serial rapist. They could've given Howarth so many great past characters to play and they do this? I'm stunned he accepted and disgusted with the show. 

Just now, Chris B said:

I'm all for recasts, villains and back from the dead characters but Matt Clark? If ever there was a character not worthy of bringing back from the dead, it is a serial rapist. They could've given Howarth so many great past characters to play and they do this? I'm stunned he accepted and disgusted with the show. 

And his death could not have been more permanent and onscreen. I imagine Howarth took the job because it’s a paycheck for an actor in his 50’s.

19 minutes ago, Chris B said:

I'm all for recasts, villains and back from the dead characters but Matt Clark? If ever there was a character not worthy of bringing back from the dead, it is a serial rapist. They could've given Howarth so many great past characters to play and they do this? I'm stunned he accepted and disgusted with the show. 

+ 1

 

18 minutes ago, Antoyne said:

And his death could not have been more permanent and onscreen. I imagine Howarth took the job because it’s a paycheck for an actor in his 50’s.

Yep.

Billy Flynn and now Roger Howarth. The chance to provide some fresh characters to interact with the vets and Josh saddles them with a recast and back from the dead.

25 minutes ago, Paul Raven said:

Billy Flynn and now Roger Howarth. The chance to provide some fresh characters to interact with the vets and Josh saddles them with a recast and back from the dead.

That would require creativity.

4 hours ago, Antoyne said:

And his death could not have been more permanent and onscreen. I imagine Howarth took the job because it’s a paycheck for an actor in his 50’s.

It has to be because I know he had deep issues with playing Todd and women screaming asking him to rape them. 

3 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

Billy Flynn and now Roger Howarth. The chance to provide some fresh characters to interact with the vets and Josh saddles them with a recast and back from the dead.

The insane thing is that there are legacy characters that make sense for all of these people coming in.

5 minutes ago, Chris B said:

It has to be because I know he had deep issues with playing Todd and women screaming asking him to rape them. 

Exactly.

It's a shame Harrison didn't get any full-size candy bars for Halloween.

3 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

Billy Flynn and now Roger Howarth. The chance to provide some fresh characters to interact with the vets and Josh saddles them with a recast and back from the dead.

THIS.

 

3 hours ago, Antoyne said:

That would require creativity.

Yep. Pretty much.

 

26 minutes ago, Chris B said:

The insane thing is that there are legacy characters that make sense for all of these people coming in.

So much this!!! I know this board has been waiting the Prentiss back for decades and there's an easy way to do it with these actors. Instead, let's snatch storylines from promising newcomers and do a soap trope that was not the go-to for this show for decades.

20 minutes ago, Taoboi said:

So much this!!! I know this board has been waiting the Prentiss back for decades and there's an easy way to do it with these actors. Instead, let's snatch storylines from promising newcomers and do a soap trope that was not the go-to for this show for decades.

The weird thing about this is that they've brought back Lorie and Leslie multiple times and even created a long lost Brooks/Abbott child who fathered Theo, when that could've easily been Brooks son. Not only that, but the Brooks family had a media empire and they've done endless stories in that realm the past 20 years.

These stories write themselves. I have no idea how JG always manages to find the most absurd stories to tell.

4 hours ago, Chris B said:

The weird thing about this is that they've brought back Lorie and Leslie multiple times and even created a long lost Brooks/Abbott child who fathered Theo, when that could've easily been Brooks son. Not only that, but the Brooks family had a media empire and they've done endless stories in that realm the past 20 years.

These stories write themselves. I have no idea how JG always manages to find the most absurd stories to tell.

Because he’s completely unchecked and the Y&R faithful literally will not stop watching despite the number 1 show being the literal worst.

13 hours ago, Chris B said:

The weird thing about this is that they've brought back Lorie and Leslie multiple times and even created a long lost Brooks/Abbott child who fathered Theo, when that could've easily been Brooks son. Not only that, but the Brooks family had a media empire and they've done endless stories in that realm the past 20 years.

These stories write themselves. I have no idea how JG always manages to find the most absurd stories to tell.

So much of it could have written itself so I really don't get it. 

Y&R CDN Episode 

Spoiler

I’m so confused by this episode because in Victoria and Claire’s scenes together it’s morning (daylight out) and Victoria even acknowledges that it’s early, and yet the other L.A scenes of Nick and Sharon at the night club it’s clearly the same night. I get maybe we are supposed to understand these scenes occurred at two different times but I really don’t like that. 

Sharon & Nick are trying to track down Matt Clark and the ending of the episode does definitely suggest that Sienna is not aware of Mitch’s true identity so I guess that leaves the Sienna character open to be redeemed and become a regular on the canvas (and maybe that’s the plan?) I don’t know. I do like Sienna though, and I hope she sticks around even when/if JG does get the boot which is hopefully going to be soon. Depending on how this storyline evolves I may or may not continue watching. I don’t know how it can’t end up being completely stupid though. It’s kind of like the Dumas thing. It was destined to fail right from the beginning. 

Jack and Kyle having a night cap was cute and I love their relationship as father and son. Again though, the way the scenes were put together was odd because in one scene Claire is texting Kyle asking if he’s still up and in the scenes with Jack and Kyle, he says she hasn’t texting him back yet. Claire’s scenes clearly take place late at night originally but as the episode progresses it becomes morning for Claire & Victoria but no one else? Mmmmmk. 

 

10-31

 

Not both B&B and Y&R having Friday cliffhangers. lol.

 

That said...I wasn't bored. However, it wasn't great writing either. There were some moments I did like though. Michael Graz in those boxer briefs. Billy vs Adam and Billy getting his lick back. I always love Victor vs Jack so the last scene of the week was a highlight.

 

I just can't help watching the Y&R L. A. scenes and thinking of Sally Sussman's story arc there. And how both L. A. are literally (pun unintended) night and day. Her story was sunny and breezy. And this place just looked dark. I did like seeing all the extras at the bar. Outside of wardrobe switching JM's pants (thank you  ), it was different for sure. I didn't like the runaround in story having to do with Noah's accident, but it did lead to that cliffhanger so I guess that's something.

 

Sorry about your man @slick jones. 😜 But that bubble was bubbling in his scene with that girl you don't like.  

 

And I shouldn't have even doubt. I love TB as Sienna. Tamara has always been good at a character with an edge to them vs whiny heroine so yep.