A lot of shows use past history to provide new story, or manipulate the past to establish something we now see onscreen-eg a child we never knew about. Sometimes it works and other times the past described directly contradicts what past viewers witnessed.

What do you think were retcons that you bought and what made you want to throw a brick at the TV??

Worst for me

Y&R

Katherine had a child that she gave up. She thought it was Jill but ended up being Tucker. Meanwhile Jill found out she was Lauren's sister. So many leaps of logic needed to buy into that mess.

Nikki and Paul had a child together-Dylan, Nikki got pregnant while in the Cult. But onscreen Nikki never got pregnant and was not away long enough to have a child, Plus like Katherine, throughout her life she never once mentioned it.

Brock had a daughter. This one worked because Brock was acknowledged to have had a 'wild' past before returning to GC as a celibate godly man. It gave Katherine more story and natural conflict with Jill, giving that rivalry new steam.

7 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

A lot of shows use past history to provide new story, or manipulate the past to establish something we now see onscreen-eg a child we never knew about. Sometimes it works and other times the past described directly contradicts what past viewers witnessed.

What do you think were retcons that you bought and what made you want to throw a brick at the TV??

Worst for me

Y&R

Katherine had a child that she gave up. She thought it was Jill but ended up being Tucker. Meanwhile Jill found out she was Lauren's sister. So many leaps of logic needed to buy into that mess.

Nikki and Paul had a child together-Dylan, Nikki got pregnant while in the Cult. But onscreen Nikki never got pregnant and was not away long enough to have a child, Plus like Katherine, throughout her life she never once mentioned it.

Brock had a daughter. This one worked because Brock was acknowledged to have had a 'wild' past before returning to GC as a celibate godly man. It gave Katherine more story and natural conflict with Jill, giving that rivalry new steam.

A few off the top of my head.

Dallas

Worst

Jock Ewing suddenly having a first wife really never amounted to anything. It was pretty much used as a plot device before Miss Ellie's had the mastectomy.

Pamela not being Digger's daughter. Never really amounted to much. Destroyed the backstory of a Barnes marrying a Ewing. Pam could have found out Rebecca was alive without all that.

I liked the fact that Ray was revealed as a Ewing, but it never amounted to much. Again it was a plot device and used as a way to keep Steve Kanaly from leaving the program. It also added a gross factor that Ray and Lucy (his his now niece) were hooking up in the early days.

B&B

Worst

The destruction of the Storm Logan. Totally out of character from the one introduced in 1987 played by Ethan Wayne.

There's one retcon I didn't buy and never will buy, and her name is Kendall Hart.

9 hours ago, Paul Raven said:

A lot of shows use past history to provide new story, or manipulate the past to establish something we now see onscreen-eg a child we never knew about. Sometimes it works and other times the past described directly contradicts what past viewers witnessed.

What do you think were retcons that you bought and what made you want to throw a brick at the TV??

Worst for me

Y&R

Katherine had a child that she gave up. She thought it was Jill but ended up being Tucker. Meanwhile Jill found out she was Lauren's sister. So many leaps of logic needed to buy into that mess.

Nikki and Paul had a child together-Dylan, Nikki got pregnant while in the Cult. But onscreen Nikki never got pregnant and was not away long enough to have a child, Plus like Katherine, throughout her life she never once mentioned it.

Brock had a daughter. This one worked because Brock was acknowledged to have had a 'wild' past before returning to GC as a celibate godly man. It gave Katherine more story and natural conflict with Jill, giving that rivalry new steam.

Your examples are spot on! With Brock we also had the virtue of him being gone for stretches at a time, so Mac fit in easily.

Best- Laura had Nikolas while held by the Cassadines. The Lesley being alive part of the retcon was not as seamless, but ultimately I was happy to have Lesley back so I just went with it. But in 1983 Laura doesn’t just go right to Luke. I know the real world reasons were to draw out the audience tension. But the retcon worked too, that she just wanted to see him after thinking he was dead. That she thought she could get away with it and then it all blew up in her face. Laura is haunted and on edge a lot in those 1983 scenes, and adding the blame for Lesley’s accident on Helena, then shortly getting pregnant and Frank Smith gunning for them, it made sense why she just gave up at the time. Plus Laura does that, she disassociates when faced with trauma.

Another best- Tina is Victor’s daughter/Victor was horrible. It’s very much because of when I started watching the show, but Andrea Evan’s Tina fighting for her part of the estate with Viki and Dorian is OLTL for me. I’m sure people that watched from the beginning hated what became of Victor. But I found it fascinating. I also liked the reveal about Viki and her alters being from childhood SA. Robin Strasser deciding that Dorian was still the one that killed him works for me too with all the other changes.

Worst- Victor Lord is alive and then dead again in a handful of episodes. Nothing about this was good. I love Dorian later saying if that was even him. Also Frank Smith was alive again and dead in like 3 episodes just to repeate a Luke & Laura adventure. As Tony Geary said, Frank was already old the first time around. Round three was just silly.

Honorable mention to one that is both silly and ended up being good? Even Nancy Curlee said the story that brought Roger Back on GL was silly. But what they gained afterwards by having him back kind of made the silly worth it in the end I think.

B&B

Worst

Ridge not being Eric's son.

Erica's "un-abortion" on AMC.

Worst:

When Neighbours wanted to give yet more long-lost children to Paul Robinson, they brought in Leo and David Tanaka.

As Neighbours was so obsessed with its own history in its final decade, they decided that they were a product of a fling with Kim Taylor, who had been on the show for several months in its first year.

Kim was a very innocent girl who was dating Paul's brother, Scott. There was some brief story at the time about how far she and Scott were going to go and Kim rebelling against her mother. Kim runs away, and months later, tells Scott that she is pregnant (not with his child as they never had sex). The Robinson family help her reunite with her mother.

Per the retcon, Paul and Kim met at a party and they had sex. She never told him he was the father because of his reputation.

In order for this retcon to work, you have to believe that Paul, who at this time was a genuinely decent person, would sleep with his brother's vulnerable, virgin girlfriend. This took away from Kim's original storyline. It made him look utterly disgusting, and the whole thing was completely unnecessary - Scott never returned for any of this, and Kim was only back briefly.

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by DRW50

ATWT

Best - Holden's memory is back. I respect what Doug Marland was going for in saying Holden's memory should never return. Unfortunately, the onscreen result was an already cold character becoming completely unlikeable. Bringing his memory back was a quick fix and Holden was a warmer person. Was it disrespectful? Possibly. I just didn't care in this instance.

Sam, Neal and Royce. While I don't think the Royce story hit the way it could have, for several reasons, overall giving Lucinda long-lost siblings was still worth the choice and didn't hurt her past. Mary Kay Adams was luminous as Neal, and Brooke Alexander was extremely charming as Samantha. The whole con story and falling in love with Kirk was one of the best parts of 1994 and 1995.

Worst - Lucinda and James clearly met onscreen in 1986. Suddenly, they were long-ago lovers and Lucinda had given birth to his child. As if this wasn't bad enough, the show soon claimed that the baby had died at birth and the son Lucinda thought had come into her life was a con. So the whole thing was not only a slap in the face to viewers, but one that had zero purpose. Why????

There are many others I could list, but one I'm still stuck on is giving Emily and Larry a child for no apparent story reason.

B&B

Bill Spencer originally only had 1 daughter "Caroline". Then twin Karen enters the picture. It was nice to have Joanna Johnson back, but they never really did anything with that concerning her winding up with Ridge as the end game.

Then Bill Jr. comes out of nowhere. I never really bought the character. It was just a way to keep Diamont around. Then viewers got stuck now for decades Liam played by the smug Scott Clifton. For some reason he rubs me the wrong way. It's one of those situations where an actor keeps a job because some viewers think he's pretty to look at. AKA...The Halo Effect.

For another story I'm still not sure what the purpose was, GL's Maryanne Carruthers retcon with Billy, Ed, Josh, Buzz. I think I would break chat GPT trying to figure out all the continuity errors.

It's not something which outrages me, but for GH, Cody being the child of Mac and Dominique when, as many fans here have mentioned, there is literally no way this could have happened.