The Young and the Restless: is Damian really dead?
Just like that, another character from The Young and the Restless was allegedly murdered. In the episode airing on July 14, Damian (Jermaine Rivers) was not only poisoned, but he was also stabbed.
When the episode picks up on July 15, Cane (Billy Flynn) insists to Phyllis (Michelle Stafford) that Damian is dead and there is no sense in trying to get him medical attention. Additionally, Cane takes Chance (Conner Floyd) to see the dead body and asks the Genoa City cop to lead a murder investigation in France to determine who the murderer is (again, not sure how Chance has jurisdiction to do anything official in Europe, but we digress). Furthermore, Cane's assistant, Carter (Vincent Stalba), and another one of Cane's staffers move Damian's body with a sheet over it.
Placing the metaphorical nail in this Damian coffin is the fact that Rivers himself took to X (formerly Twitter) to confirm the character was indeed gone.
Even with all of that being said, we still believe there's a chance that Damian isn't dead and will be back at some point. First, there's something about the way in which this murder went down that doesn't sit right with us.
It started out as a one-on-one conversation between Damian and Cane over a bottle of liquor. Damian outpaced Cane in drinking from his glass and immediately fell ill due to a poison. Cane claimed to be fine initially, but began feeling ill right before Damian got worse and was eventually stabbed by some mystery person. Then, again in the episode on July 15, after Cane walks away to grab Chance and bring him to the scene of the crime, the bottle containing the poison disappears, along with the murder weapon.
Also, Cane is insistent that Chance not bring local authorities to help with the investigation and doesn't want the coroner called, but would rather like Damian's body stashed in a freezer on the property.
Our theory here is that Cane orchestrated this whole ordeal with Carter's help in a big scheme to win back Lily (Christel Khalil). Cane desperately wants to reunite with his ex, and Damian stood in the way of that. Since we don't believe he's a cold-blooded murderer, we think it's possible he faked Damian's death with Carter's help, and will actually wind up hiding Damian somewhere, keeping him prisoner.
Let's also not forget that Cane drank the poisoned drink suspiciously slow, as if he knew it was deadly and knew how much to digest to give the appearance of him being sick. Therefore, also making him a "victim" in this scenario.
On another note, going back to Rivers' statement. If you watch the clip, you'll notice he says, 'Yeah, that's what it is, at least for now." To us, that sounds like he's leaving room for the possibility that he's not done portraying Damian, but rather just done for the time being.
Lastly, from a storyline perspective, Damian dying prematurely stunts the storylines with Nate (Sean Dominic) and Lily, in our opinion. It would be nice to see Damian's relationship with his newly-found brother continue to develop and his romance with Lily continue to blossom.
So will Damian make a soapy return from the dead soon? Heck, we certainly hope so.
New episodes of The Young and the Restless air weekdays on CBS. Episodes become available to stream on Paramount Plus the next day.
Solve the daily Crossword
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Microsoft CEO consoles employees by saying recent layoffs are down to 'the enigma of success in an industry that has no franchise value'
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. This month began with some stark news for Microsoft employees: The business was doing better than ever before, and that somehow means layoffs. Around 9,000 employees were laid-off globally, studios were closed, games were cancelled, and then to rub salt in the wound some Microsoft exec with terminal LinkedIn brain suggested that those affected use AI to console themselves. Judging by the latest bizarre missive from Microsoft chairman and CEO Satya Nadella, that very executive is probably in line for a promotion. There's executive leadership verbiage, and then there's Nadella in full flow, an endless spewer with terrifying levels of executive power and a cheery disregard for the economic realities of the little people. Ahem. In a new blog titled "Recommitting to our why, what and how" Nadella takes off, first of all bravely addressing the question of why Microsoft has just fired so many folks. "I want to speak to what's been weighing heavily on me, and what I know many of you are thinking about: the recent job eliminations," writes Nadella. Then it's on to the "seeming incongruence" of the fact that "by every objective measure, Microsoft is thriving—our market performance, strategic positioning, and growth all point up and to the right [...] And yet, at the same time, we've undergone layoffs." Get ready because, in the annals of executive bullshit, this is a beauty. "This is the enigma of success in an industry that has no franchise value," writes Nadella. "Progress isn't linear. It's dynamic, sometimes dissonant, and always demanding. But it's also a new opportunity for us to shape, lead through, and have greater impact than ever before." I'm not sure exactly what Nadella means by "franchise value" but neither's he, and that's the point. Is the suggestion that big tech can fail overnight with a bad product? Because Microsoft's history and de facto monopoly certainly suggests otherwise! There's more nonsense about "creating new categories with new business models and a new production function" and, naturally, a reference to "this new paradigm." Then we get into the titular "why, what, and how" of Microsoft's "mission" and surprise surprise people: it's AI! "What does empowerment look like in the era of AI?" Nadella wonders. "It's about building tools that empower everyone to create their own tools. That's the shift we are driving—from a software factory to an intelligence engine empowering every person and organization to build whatever they need to achieve." There's some nonsense about AI changing everything because "that's the empowerment our mission enables, creating local surplus in every company, community, and country." Local surplus? What, of laid-off workers? Is that the future Satya? The guy's language really makes my head hurt at points, but I can say one thing—Copilot couldn't come up with this: "We will reimagine every layer of the tech stack for AI—infrastructure, to the app platform, to apps and agents. The key is to get the platform primitives right for these new workloads and for the next order of magnitude of scale. Our differentiation will come from how we bring these layers together to deliver end-to-end experiences and products, with the core ethos of a platform company that fosters ecosystem opportunity broadly. Getting both the product and platform right for the AI wave is our North Star!" The LinkedIn nerds are gonna love this line: "Growth mindset has served us well over the last decade—the everyday practice of being a learn-it-all, not a know-it-all." This is good, apparently, and "it might feel messy at times, but transformation always is." Nadella claims that where AI is now "reminds me of the early '90s, when PCs and productivity software became standard in every home and every desk!" Don't ask why. "What we've learned over the past five decades is that success is not about longevity," says Nadella. "It's about relevance. Our future won't be defined by what we've built before, but by what we empower others to build now." It seems to me that the main thing Microsoft is empowering people to build is the latest version of their CV, but I digress. Nadella's unique mode of expression aside, this is mostly just another tone-deaf missive from a corporation that truly seems to specialise in them. Perhaps the most concrete take-away from all of this though is that "we will reimagine every layer of the tech stack for AI—infrastructure, to the app platform, to apps and agents." AI may not do everything the boosters say, in other words: but it's here to stay anyway and, if you think it's been obtrusive up to now, you really haven't seen anything yet.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
My Donkey Kong Bananza playthrough is being haunted by the remains of numerous iconic enemies and allies from classics like Donkey Kong Country
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Donkey Kong Bananza has seemingly confirmed the demise of many beloved characters in the Donkey Kong Country series thanks to the in-game fossils. Donkey Kong Bananza seems to be playing things very loose with the timeline, thanks to the inclusion of Pauline as a young girl, despite her being kidnapped by Donkey Kong's grandfather, who features in-game as an old ape. But now that players have their hands on it, there's another huge implication for the lore, that being that some of Donkey Kong's greatest allies are dead. Donkey Kong Bananza features several types of collectibles, with fossils serving as the currency for the in-game style shop. You find Fossils in each layer of the world, with the main layers having three different types in terms of rarity. While these start as typical fossils like dinosaurs and ammonites, they quickly get sinister. The Forest Layer is where the game starts taking no prisoners, as you'll quickly find the remains of the DKC enemy Gnawty, which I suppose is not a huge deal, considering DK himself dispatched a lot of them in the old days, but I took it pretty hard, to tell the truth. But then that Layer's medium fossil is Professor Chops, the glasses-wearing pig who helps the kongs out at every checkpoint in DKC Returns and Tropical Freeze (although a Reddit post was quick to say "he won't be missed"). Finally, the giant fossil found on this layer is perhaps the most devastating, as it reveals the massive remains of DKC2's animal buddy, Squitter the Spider, complete with his trainers. This continues throughout the game as the Tempest Layer features the remains of one of the most beloved friends, Enguarde the Swordfish, alongside the likes of the Banana birds. Not only is it truly devastating to know that some of DK's closest allies are gone, but his finding their remains only makes things that much worse... although trading their remains for new fits has some moral implications I'm not sure I want to think about. Nintendo is probably regretting those Switch 2 mouse controls as players flock to Donkey Kong Bananza's artist mode to create penises and other cursed sculptures.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
I beat Donkey Kong Bananza feeling 100% confident about Pauline's true identity, but now I'm deep in a rabbithole of fan theories and I don't know what to believe anymore
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Ever since the full reveal of Donkey Kong Bananza, we've had one big question: why is Pauline a child? I played the game ahead of launch for our Donkey Kong Bananza review, and I finished it feeling very confident that I understood the nature of Pauline's identity. But now that the game's actually out and the DK fandom at large has started to finish it, a tidal wave of new fan theories has got me questioning everything. Obviously, this means we're about to talk major spoilers for Donkey Kong Bananza, so if you haven't yet finished the game – and you care about preserving the surprises the plot has in store – this is your cue to go smash some more bananas. Prior to the launch of Bananza, we – that is, Nintendo fans who care about the Mario and Donkey Kong lore – understood Pauline to be the same kidnapped woman, often known as Lady, from the original arcade Donkey Kong game. That Donkey Kong would morph into Cranky Kong, grandfather of the DK we've been familiar with since the Donkey Kong Country series. How, then, could a 13-year-old Pauline team up with the current Donkey Kong, occasionally meeting up with a very well-aged Cranky Kong, in Bananza? Well, throughout the game, you'll hear young Pauline make reference to her grandma. During scenes where she naps with DK, Pauline will talk about how her grandmother's love of music inspired her. "Ah," I thought to myself, "obviously this young Pauline must be the granddaughter of the original Lady, just as DK is the grandson of Cranky Kong!" Young Pauline picked up her love of music from OG Pauline, and her post-game quest to put on a big performance in New Donk City was born out of love for her grandma, whose musical talents were displayed with Jump Up, Super Star in Super Mario Odyssey. Aw, so sweet. After reading far too many posts on the Donkey Kong subreddit, I am forced to conclude that I was a damn fool, holding beliefs so absurd, I may as well have been claiming that the Mushroom Kingdom is flat. Everyone seems willing to acknowledge that OG Donkey Kong's distressed damsel, Lady, is a separate character from our modern Pauline, but there's another possibility, and one that's quickly taken hold in the fandom. Young Pauline isn't a separate character from modern, adult Pauline – she's Lady from the original DK, who's separate from any modern incarnation. Donkey Kong Bananza is not a sequel to Super Mario Odyssey, but rather a prequel, telling the story of how that Pauline rose to prominence as the musical mayor of New Donk City. That would make the entire Donkey Kong series, from Donkey Kong Country through DK64 and even Bananza, a prequel to the entire Super Mario series. It would also mean that Jumpman, the arcade protagonist we've believed to be Mario this entire time, isn't actually Mario at all. Modern Donkey Kong, Pauline, and Mario would, in fact, be the descendants of Cranky Kong, Lady, and Jumpman. While parts of this fandom theory started making me question myself, the idea that Jumpman and Mario are separate characters is where it breaks down for me, and I find myself returning to the original theory I felt was obvious while playing Bananza for myself. Jumpman and Lady are simply the old versions of Mario and Pauline. Young Pauline, as we meet her in Donkey Kong Bananza, is the granddaughter of the Pauline we've always known. It's clean. It's simple. It doesn't require retconning every single Donkey Kong and Mario game of the past 40 years to make the timeline work. And yet… suddenly I'm thinking of Donkey Kong Jr., the arcade sequel where Jumpman clearly, obviously dies at the end. Could it be true then, that our modern Mario is a different character? What of the continued confusion over whether Cranky is actually DK's father or grandfather? Is it possible that there's some other factor we're not considering? Or is it possible that there is no answer, and Nintendo's simply spent decades building up all this lore without a plan for what to do with it in the end? I'm laughing at myself a bit now, but with the amount of love Bananza has shown for the DK games that have come before, I can't help but wonder how the devs themselves would answer. You know what I do understand? Bananas. Here's where to find Bananas in Donkey Kong Bananza.
