Jump to content

Y&R: February 2017 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 793
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

Exactly, but unfortunately, soaps have done a piss poor job with AA characters of means. Back in the day, HWs only devote time to poor black characters being rescued by white characters. Now, black characters really serve as counselors to their white counterparts. Sally didn't have to mention Devon being a billionaire to let us know he lacks direction which is why many fear Sal will strip him of his cash. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Contemporary soap operas could've fixed their incredibly one-dimensional characterizations years ago, had they decided to diversify their writer's rooms. I'm not just speaking of ethnicity but age, socio-economic background, etc.

 

Yesterday someone brought up Jeanne Cooper, mistakenly thinking I was shading her (I wasn't, it was Judith Chapman) but it got me thinking:

When was the last time a soap created a character that you could love (or even like/root for) and then dislike in almost equal measure?

 

Let me explain:

Sometimes even when you felt for Katherine, when she was in the depths of her alcholism, you also rued the venomous remarks and psychological cruelty she could inflict on others, while she was still in the depths of her alcoholism.

Early Victor Newman was also another such character that you could like then dislike almost simultaneously, it often seemed.

When I think of other characters like early Nina Webster, 80s Lauren Fenmore-they were variations on this type of character. Even Drucilla Barber, when it came to her early relationship to Olivia (which was steeped in sibling rivalry) vs. her early relationship with Nathan.

 

Those of use who watched 80s/early 90s ATWT know Lucinda Walsh the the very personification of such a character. You could love her one moment, then hate her the very next moment, then feel concerned for her-- sometimes all in the same scene!

 

Today's soap writers just don't seem to know how to do this kind of complexity and it's just one example of how the characterizations and writing in general, for these shows has suffered as a result.

JMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I was hoping Devon's desire to educate his GC Buzz audience would provide some purpose but that hasn't been the case. It's easier for Sally to write motivation being success and money for those that aren't born into Newman and abbot families. Look at how she's just started writing Cane. That's familiar to her. His motivations are clear. She's used making Kay proud for Devon but that's very vague and is hard to put into actions that allows him to drive story unlike paper and power chasing with cane.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The stuff with Cane is terrible. It's also OOC because Cane was born rich.

 

From the time he was initially introduced through the Phillip reveal the character was a 'regular working stiff' but once Colin and Genevieve were introduced all of that was forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Which still has nothing to do with Colin's stealing from Jill. Devon is no where near this story in any way.

 

Wealthy people losing their money, or company ,is a frequent storyline for the rich people at the head of their families. It would be unusual if it never happened to Devon, but I doubt he would simply give it all away. I would imagine they'd make more of a story out of it.

 

I don't see the big worry. Devon has a second, and even bigger, fortune coming since he's Tucker's only heir. His loss of fortune story would be a freebie. A huge story with only temporary consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm sick of soap scenes where all the characters do is tell each other how great they are. Nick and Chelsea do that daily.

 

Chelsea: Nick, you are an amazing father. 

Nick: You know, Chelsea, I'm glad you're in my life.

 

Rinse, repeat.

 

Also Chelsea was showing off her bartending skills like that sh!t was cute but wasn't she a barkeep while rampantly accusing dudes of rape? Get out of here with that nonsense.

 

Or scenes where the characters just talk about each other qualities. ALL of Billy's scenes lately are this. "Billy, you're incorrigible! Grow up, Billy! You're so childish Billy! You slept with Phyllis/cheated on Victoria/are just too much, Billy!". It is boring.

 

 

That was me and I thought it was pretty obvious that I was trying to shade Judith Chapman for being a blight on this show right now. In a way it's fascinating that this show has given all the big plot moves to a 60+ year old character with barely there ties to the canvas. It almost feels like a story they wanted to tell 10 years ago.

 

The show isn't unwatchable, it's just not good. It's not actively ruining characters but that's far removed from compelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy