'The Young and the Restless' bids farewell to Kelly Sullivan's Sage

If you ask any given soap fan on Twitter, yesterday was probably a good one: Sage (Kelly Sullivan) was killed off of The Young and the Restless.

And when I say Sage was killed off, I mean that literally. After discovering that her son with husband Nick (Joshua Morrow) had in fact been alive, stolen and given to Sharon (Sharon Case) in place of a child she miscarried, Sage confronted Sharon and after she refused to give Sully (actually Christian) to her, Sage fled to tell Nick and everyone else the truth only to drop her cell phone after leaving Nick a message while driving. She bent over to pick it up, lost control of the wheel, crashed and ultimately died of her injuries. Before taking her last breath, Sharon caught up to her and called the police; Sage asked to hold Christian, which Sharon reluctantly let her, only for Sage to die a few moments later.

Everyone is thrilled Sage was killed off because, in all honesty, she did have her moments of being mind numbingly whiny, annoying and crazy (#SageIsDeadParty actually trended on Twitter during Friday's episode of Y&R). Normally, I would be jumping for joy along with every other Y&R fan, but for some strange reason, I'm not.

I both liked and hated Sage. I really liked her when she first started back at the end of 2014, when she helped Adam (Justin Hartley) return to town and assume the identity of Gabriel Bingham, who Sage knew. She had all this potential and mystery, yet the writers through that out the window when they chose to pair her with Nick. Nick had also just come off of being a total prick to Sharon (known to most during that time and still now as Dickolas), so I wasn't too keen on that pairing let alone anything to do with Nick. Not only that, Sage became a completely basic, see-through character that most struggled to care about. Soon after, she became pregnant after sleeping with both Nick and Adam and became pregnant, during which she went completely nuts and developed this irrational fear that Nick's business tycoon father Victor (Eric Braeden) was going to steal her unborn child. Let's just say that from then on, the storyline given to Sullivan did not target her strengths as an actress and didn't exactly make viewers like her any more than they already did, if applicable. The child's paternity was left up in the air and Sage even taunted Nick during an argument that the child was Adam's, but revealed that a paternity test proved the child was Nick's.

By the fall of 2015, Sage gave birth to a premature son (who was delivered by Adam in the park) and wasn't anymore sane during that time. Then, she and Nick are given word that their son died on Halloween night while they were attending a party, but the child was actually stolen by Sharon's doctor at Fairview psychiatric hospital, Dr. Anderson. Sharon had miscarried her own child but was drugged so heavily by Dr. Anderson that she believed herself to still be pregnant, so when she was presented with a baby boy, she had no reason to question it. Not only that, after Christian had "died", Adam revealed to wife Chelsea (Melissa Claire Egan) that he had manipulated the child's paternity test results; he "was" actually Christian's father and manipulated the test because there was too much at stake for him at the time, being Gabriel and all. Patty Williams (Stacy Haiduk) figured out what had actually been conspired and ended up killing Dr. Anderson in self-defense, who was going to tranquilize her during a confrontation. Patty fell mildly catatonic thereafter and did not reveal what had transpired between her and Dr. Anderson until Sharon went to visit her in her new institution, where she helped Sharon realize that she was never pregnant. A DNA test later proved that "Sully" is not her son; meanwhile, Sage had been questioning the nurse that helped Dr. Anderson steal the baby that night (and who was also the nurse that informed her and Nick that their son had died) and had lots of evidence against her. The nurse ultimately cracked and told Sage everything, leading to the fatal confrontation between her and Sharon.

Sage was not the best of characters, and the storyline given to Sullivan certainly did not target her strengths as an actress. I, for one, thought she was amazing as Kate/Connie on General Hospital, who suffered from dissociative identity disorder (DID), and thought she was doing a pretty descent job as Sage when she first started, but it all went downhill from there. That only leads me to the conclusion that it had to be the material. Just like Cady McClain's ill-fated turn as Kelly Andrews on Y&R from 2014 to early last year; I never watched her on All My Children, where several people told me she was a "great actress", but she was absolutely abysmal on Y&R. I wouldn't describe Sullivan as all-bad, but it certainly wasn't all-good during her run at Y&R. Sage had a tendency to annoy the hell out of me at times and then at others I didn't mind her. The months leading up to her death, I didn't mind her. She wasn't great, but she certainly wasn't godawful, in my opinion. I feel like if they had killed her off this time last year, when she was pregnant, irrational and crazy, I would have proudly taken part in the #SageIsDeadParty. but I just wasn't 100% hating her right now. But, will I miss Sage? Probably not.

That being said, if the writers had killed off Avery (Jessica Collins) at the height of when everyone hated her (which was, like, all the time), I would have gladly taken part in the #AveryIsDeadParty, but I was sadly denied one. Catch The Young and the Restless weekdays on CBS.

We Need to Talk About Who Should Replace Michael Strahan on 'Live! with Kelly and Michael'

After Michael Strahan announced that he would be leaving Live! with Kelly and Michael in order to join Good Morning America full-time (and the ridiculous controversy that ensued after that was completely concocted by the media; I won't even get into that because I just think it's all so ridiculously stupid), everyone has been 'a-buzzing about who should fill his vacant seat next to longtime female co-host, Kelly Ripa.

Some say Ripa's husband Mark Conseulos would make a good co-host, but I find that to be a very boring choice. They're already married, so I'm sure they see enough of each other at home, plus Conseulos isn't exactly that well-known (in fact I had to quickly Google his name after seeing him on a list of potential new co-hosts to check if that was indeed the name of her husband). I mean, I'm not saying Conseulos would be a terrible co-host; I haven't seen him on the show in quite a long time, but I just think that would be a very meh choice.

Among a few other names thrown out there that include Mario Lopez (please God, no), the only two that seemed to resonate with me in the slightest were Neil Patrick Harris and Anderson Cooper, both of whom have significant television experience, are well-known enough to draw in a new set of viewers and are entertaining to watch.

I love Neil Patrick Harris, we all do, but I just don't see him committing to a daytime morning talk show. He's definitely funny and lively enough to bring some color back to Live, but I feel like he would have better things to be committing to than a daytime morning talk show. But, who knows. It could happen. Anything can happen. I never would've predicted that a former NFL player (who continued to cover NFL events while at Live) would be the one who would be chosen as Ripa's permanent co-host, but he was.

The better choice, however, would be Anderson Cooper, in my opinion. Why do I think this? Well, he too is funny and lively who always has something pertinent to say. He also had his own syndicated daytime talk show, Anderson, that I loved and thought had the potential to become the next Oprah, but it was unfortunately cancelled after only 2 seasons. So he's both funny and lively AND already has had his own daytime talk show, so daytime TV viewers already have an appreciation for him (and I love for him, I hope). Not to mention that he has hosted his own news show, Anderson Cooper 360, on CNN since 2003. Cooper being the one to take the seat next to Ripa would also be perfect timing, considering his contract with CNN reportedly expires this November. He did, however, do both Anderson and 360 at the same time, so it could also be feasible for him to do both Live and 360, but who knows.

Strahan was initially supposed to depart in the summer, allowing for time afterward to bring in guest co-hosts to screen test with Ripa like they did in 2011 when Regis Philbin retired from the show (Philbin left in November 2011 and Strahan only became the permanent co-host in September 2012, so they spent quite a bit of time choosing a replacement), but he is reportedly now leaving Live on May 13, allowing for quite a bit of time to find a replacement. Or, as I'm hoping it goes down, gives them enough time to realize that Live! with Kelly and Anderson is the right way to go.

Live! with Kelly and Michael airs weekday mornings, check your local listings.

Book Reviews: 'Read Bottom Up' by Neel Shah & Skye Chatham and 'Franny and Zooey' by J.D. Salinger

1. Read Bottom Up, by Neel Shah & Skye Chatham
This is a really cute contemporary novel. It's short, it's sweet and is extremely easy to read; it's written entirely in emails and text messages and the art in the book is really well done. It was also a really quick read, one of those books where you sit down to read and end up reading close to 100 pages because maybe there wasn't a lot of words on some pages. A cute story about what it's like to date in the iPhone age. Honestly, when I first started Read Bottom Up I hated the two main characters, Elliot and Madeline, for a bunch of different reasons, but the only one that seems to come to mind now is how much of a fuckboy Elliot is. For those unfamiliar with the slang term, fuckboy has many different definitions, and it seems everyone has a different idea of what it is and who they are. To me, a fuckboy is someone who someone dates only for the sex; they are a shitty boyfriend in absolutely every other regard. Most publications define a fuckboy as slang for a womanizer; someone who has no intent on having a real relationship with someone. Elliot is 110% a fuckboy, and I think it was intended that way. It's not that he doesn't want to pursue a relationship with Madeline, it's that he doesn't even comprehend that there are some girls who need effort to be put in a relationship on both sides. As Elliot's friend David remarks, Madeline is not his type of girl because he usually dates girls from Tinder who treat him badly because they, like him, are only interested in him for sex, and Elliot starts to realize this after dating Madeline. Overall, I think Read Bottom Up wanted to explore the science behind the idea of the fuckboy, because it really nailed what it means to be a womanizer and how and why a lot of simple relationships, like Elliot and Madeline's, don't work out.  Madeline isn't exactly a great character either, but I also think that was done on purpose to show that they both have baggage. My favorite parts of the book included the supporting characters, David and Madeline's friend Emily, who are a thousand times better than their best friends. I also don't really know how accurate the correspondence was between David and Elliot, because I've honestly never seen or heard two straight men discuss their relationships the way they do. But, at the end of the day, Read Bottom Up is a short and sweet book that anyone who has ever over-analyzed a text will enjoy. 4/5 stars.

2. Franny and Zooey, by J.D. Salinger
I had wanted to read this book ever since I read actress Lauren Graham's contemporary literary debut Someday, Someday, Maybe, whose main character is named Franny and was named after the Franny in Franny and Zooey. I'd also never read a J.D. Salinger book before; I was told by countless people that The Catcher in the Rye is one of those classics that will bore you to tears, so I steered clear of it, but at the same time, I knew Salinger is one of the most well-known authors of his time and I just felt the need to read one of his books, so I chose Franny and Zooey. Honestly, I had no idea that the Zooey in the title is a male character; I had assumed that it was a female name for a female character, but apparently not. The book is split up into two parts, one called Franny and one called Zooey. I really enjoyed the Franny part; Salinger's descriptions were so well written that I could so clearly visualize the scene in my head. It was really good. Then came the Zooey part, which encompassed the majority of the book, which sees the Franny and Zooey characters, brother and sister, interacting. The story itself is nice, but I found the Zooey part dragged along and I was often bored while trudging through it. It was okay, but not great. At least I can say that I've read a J.D. Salinger novel now. 3/5 stars.

Why David Rose of 'Schitt's Creek' is Easily One of The Best Characters on Television

Schitt's Creek, the Canadian sitcom which recently wrapped its second season on CBC, has become quite the strong comedy. And if you've watched only one episode, you'll know that most of that strength comes from the beautiful David Rose, portrayed by Daniel Levy.

For those who are unfamiliar with Schitt's Creek (now I'm giving you a reason not to be, just by the way, go watch it; like, right now), the comedy follows the eccentric Rose family after they've been robbed of all their material possessions. The only thing left to their name happens to be a small town called Schitt's Creek, which patriarch Johnny Rose (Eugene Levy), a business mogul, once bought as a joke. The rest of the Rose family consists of his wife Moira (Catherine O'Hara), a former soap opera star, and their grown, pampered children, David and Alexis (Annie Murphy). The main thing that makes Schitt's Creek so funny is not only the solid writing and performances but the fact that the comedic situations simply arise by the character's personalities. The comedic value comes only from that; the situations are not thrust upon them for that effect, the comedy comes simply from their environment. 

But, honestly, the main reason I love the series so much is David. He is a high-maintenance, slightly incompetent rich boy (well, former rich boy) who still struggles to comprehend life outside of the high life of New York City, but you love him for it anyway. Not only that, David is one of the only bisexual characters I've seen portrayed in such an oblivious, realistic way. When the series first started, I thought to myself that David must be gay, just based on his mannerisms, impeccably unique style and just his sass (all of which made me fall in love with him instantly), but halfway through the first season, we find out that David has had boyfriends and girlfriends, and no one seems to have a problem with that. And they shouldn't, right? It's 2016, after all, but the fact that I not only thought that David was simply gay but that I didn't even consider for a second that he might be bi shows how much television is lacking in realistic bisexual characters. David has great chemistry with sarcastic, done-with-your-shit motel manager Stevie (Emily Hampshire), and I would totally be okay with them becoming more than friends somewhere down the line, if that's the way they chose to write it (they almost went there in season 1, and it was pretty amazing). Also, I also kind of enjoy that they didn't still don't really address David's sexuality blatantly. It's his business, and we're all sick to death of painful coming-out stories, no matter how powerful. To hell with heteronormativity. On to bigger and stronger things.

Bisexuals are easily the most misunderstood of the LGBT, and I applaud Levy for portraying (and writing) David in a way that not only makes us love him for his sass, but also for making him bisexual. Because, honestly, David can date a guy or a girl and we'd all be okay with it because, if you watch Schitt's Creek, you know he's at least 75-80% of the reason you watch each week. C'mon. Don't lie.

Now I really don't want to have to wait for 2017 for season 3... Sigh.

We've all been there, David. We've all been there.