What they should be doing is generational promotion, and they've not done that. And then try and revisit the 1990s/2000s teen scene with the next generation of Legacy characters (and newbies without a connection to the Abbott/Newman families). There is no reason for Faith Newman, Charlie & Mattie Ashby, or even Moses Winters to not be on-canvas. Zero. That's where the next generation should have been but that opportunity has kind of come and gone for it to truly do what it should have done. There is a way to reset the canvas, but it has to be done in a way that not only makes sense but also does not alienate audiences altogether.

9 minutes ago, Vee said:

You are never going to (and should never) get rid of Victor.

Oh, I agree! I'm not suggesting that Y&R could or should get rid of EB/Victor. The day he does go (whether of his own volition, or because he's gone to that luxurious penthouse office suite in the sky) will be the day Y&R's ratings are kick-dropped into the toilet; and that will be because everyone who came after Kay Alden and David Shaughnessy did zilch to keep Victor's clan from going to seed or prepare the rest of the show for the day when there wouldn't be an Eric Braeden or Victor Newman to kick around anymore.

The summer reality house for Glo by Jabot (in the Abbott poolhouse?) was great. I know we've asked for Glo by Jabot teens again but all the show has done is a periodic reunion of the original actors/characters, now much older, visiting town for a day. That's NOT what we wanted.
Gotta be specific, we want dynamic fun teens on the show.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by janea4old

Just now, janea4old said:

Gotta be specific, we want dynamic fun teens on the show.

YES. I also want Y&R to get back to its' roots and create characters who envy rich families like the Abbotts and Newmans and crave that kind of life for themselves. Letting Y&R be about the rich and super-rich was fine in the '80's and '90's, but times have changed (again). Economic inequalities have made people in this country very aware once more of "us" and "them."

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by Khan

3 hours ago, Vee said:

I mean, I wouldn't hate that vs. an ongoing serial. A TV movie is another animal and Lifetime isn't going to let him write crazy DID/rape stories.

But let's see how @Khan @DRW50 @EricMontreal22 and @Darn feel!

I could make a lot of comments, I'm tempted to do so given his track record, but we've been waiting years for any version of this to happen so I guess it wouldn't be fair of me to lambaste him when there's a good chance it's never going to happen. I'm not sure whether I would prefer this or that "dark" reboot Kelly and Mark were trying with SMG (or whatever the details were).

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by DRW50

I’m just listening to “the chat” podcast about JG’s firing and it’s being implied that a certain leading lady “who does her scenes and goes home” went to the higher ups to complain about a storyline direction which should have had more focus on her but hasn’t.

That to me screams Sharon Case. The quality in her acting within the last year has gone down significantly and she would have every right to be pissed at how this Matt Clark story is being told. That is her rapist for crying out loud and there’s been no focus on her very much at all. Now they’re trying to turn him into an actual viable character who wants to go on dates with Phyllis?

Somewhat surprising to hear because SC is not usually the type to complain about anything. All her coworkers have always said she’s a team player and does her job and doesn’t try to ruffle any feathers but maybe this was truly too much even for her to tolerate!

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by Ryanc2

57 minutes ago, Khan said:

YES. I also want Y&R to get back to its' roots and create characters who envy rich families like the Abbotts and Newmans and crave that kind of life for themselves. Letting Y&R be about the rich and super-rich was fine in the '80's and '90's, but times have changed (again). Economic inequalities have made people in this country very aware once more of "us" and "them."

Exactly. Almost everyone on the show is super rich which takes out a huge opportunity for story and conflict. Where are the people who are trying to claw their way up in life?

That...and the complete lack on "Young" in the "Young and the Restless" has been an issue for a long time.

Trying to make RH play another rapist turned leading man was just another bad decision in a long line of them.

it’s too bad Y&R doesn’t have a Robert Calhoun-type producer to hire to refocus the show and bring it back to basics like Calhoun did at both ATWT (even before Marland joined him) and GL (even before Reva left and Curlee/Demorest were promoted to HW).

In some ways, Y&R’s rut over the past 20 or so years is akin to that painful rut ATWT was in for much of the late 70’s/early 80’s.

1 hour ago, Ryanc2 said:

I’m just listening to “the chat” podcast about JG’s firing and it’s being implied that a certain leading lady “who does her scenes and goes home” went to the higher ups to complain about a storyline direction which should have had more focus on her but hasn’t.

That to me screams Sharon Case. The quality in her acting within the last year has gone down significantly and she would have every right to be pissed at how this Matt Clark story is being told. That is her rapist for crying out loud and there’s been no focus on her very much at all. Now they’re trying to turn him into an actual viable character who wants to go on dates with Phyllis?

Somewhat surprising to hear because SC is not usually the type to complain about anything. All her coworkers have always said she’s a team player and does her job and doesn’t try to ruffle any feathers but maybe this was truly too much even for her to tolerate!

I wouldn't be surprised if this were true. Sharon Case has always been talked about as someone who doesn't complain but pretty extreme. I can't believe it's 2026 and a soap is still doing the whole "redeem a rapist" trope. Nobody said Roger Howarth had to play Matt Clark. Nobody even wanted to or needed to see that character again. He is one of those villains that had nothing redeemable about himself. They could've made him Dylan, Brooks or just a new character.

It doesn't even make sense to want to give yourself a character with that much baggage.

I'm just amazed Sharon Case still knows she's on TV.

21 minutes ago, Vee said:

I'm just amazed Sharon Case still knows she's on TV.

I get the sense she is not connected to the material. For an actress who’s been historically known for her stellar emotional scenes, it now feels forced and beyond fake and I think that’s a result of the writing being so bad she just can’t even fake it anymore.

I’ve noticed this with a lot of other actors too though. PB who is often very present in his scenes (and still an amazing actor), but at times looks like he wants to laugh in a scene and same with EB. They look all look exhausted as well like they can’t wait to be done shooting this crap!

In the crossover interviews (thread) the Y&R actors seemed impressed and invigorated by the professionalism at BTG.

6 minutes ago, Ryanc2 said:

I get the sense she is not connected to the material.

A kinder euphemism than I would (and have, in this thread) chosen, but yes!

47 minutes ago, Chris B said:

I wouldn't be surprised if this were true. Sharon Case has always been talked about as someone who doesn't complain but pretty extreme. I can't believe it's 2026 and a soap is still doing the whole "redeem a rapist" trope. Nobody said Roger Howarth had to play Matt Clark. Nobody even wanted to or needed to see that character again. He is one of those villains that had nothing redeemable about himself. They could've made him Dylan, Brooks or just a new character.

It doesn't even make sense to want to give yourself a character with that much baggage.

It's lazy writing. He brings on a new character under the auspices of someone with a built-in history. Did that with Tucker, Matt, Cane, Amy, and probably others I'm forgetting. It's complete dreck but it makes sense on a show that has no sets and no action.

24 minutes ago, Ryanc2 said:

I get the sense she is not connected to the material. For an actress who’s been historically known for her stellar emotional scenes, it now feels forced and beyond fake and I think that’s a result of the writing being so bad she just can’t even fake it anymore.

Which is a sad because she was a standard.

19 minutes ago, janea4old said:

In the crossover interviews (thread) the Y&R actors seemed impressed and invigorated by the professionalism at BTG.

Yeah, I saw the jokes about how clear it was they didn't want to go back to their own show. lol. And I made the comment that, just like on B&B crossover, they always look dressed/styled better than on their own shows, too.