FrenchBug82

1 minute ago, Vee said:

I don't think Bergman would raise hell or threaten to quit if they brought back Keemo or Keemo's kids today. I do think his vocal ranting about it over the years has dissuaded a show and network which has been disinterested as is.

That is a really interesting take and that rings a lot more true than the rumors to me. Plus there probably wasn't a lot of hunger to revisit Keemo in the first place so that was a convenient position for everyone to take.

14 minutes ago, Broderick said:

 I can understand why Peter Bergman disliked the original storyline (it was sappy as hell, and the actor who played Keemo was practically as old as Peter Bergman). 

I will say that I never took PB's dislike of the original story to be about race or even just about the specifics of the story - the dullness of Luann and the miscast of Keemo
My understanding was that he thought the story was out of character for young Jack as he had been established under Terry Lester - which was fair enough of a point. The irresponsible party boy had actually gone to Vietnam and wanted to settle down with a local woman?
The armchair psychologist would speculate that it almost felt like an attempt to change the character to fit him - which subsequent writing for Jack proved correct - and he resented it because in itself that felt like a veiled criticism of his failure to capture TL's roguishness. Which, again: accurate.
But he has more than made the character his own by now so it feels weird that he'd still cling to such a dumb grievance thirty years later.

Vee's theory feels right in that way.

2 hours ago, rlj said:

There was no assumption needed, Taylor and Eric were in a full blown romance, they lived together, It was right before Taylor left town after she exposed Brill! Taylor has bedded ALL the Forrester Men except Eric's brother!

 I was being charitable because I don't recall them ever having a love scene but yes, of course, I always took it that they did sleep together.

1 hour ago, AbcNbc247 said:

Hmmmm... sounds like Brooke and Taylor are a lot more alike than Thomas and Steffy think they are 

Taylor has slept with MORE relatives of Ridge's than Brooke did - both slept with Eric but Brooke "only" did two of Ridge's brothers.
Taylor slept with all three (Rick)!!! 

29 minutes ago, pdm1974 said:

PB should be thrilled if they're expanding the Abbott family in any way at this point...and it would be great to actually see more diversity. 

I never understood the whole PB-vetoes-mentions-of-Keemo gossip. I can understand why he hated the original story but it is canon now so he should be happy there is that entire line of potential family members and stories for him just hanging out there.

Thomas and Brooke *thought* they had done the nasty because of the poisoned berries or something and then they were playing with that chemistry in the aftermath of their secret-kepping but I think it was clarified they actually hadn't done anything.
 

Taylor once kissed Eric in the 90s and decided it was too weird because that was the Saint Taylor era and she was written as a contrast to Brooke.
HOWEVER after her return, during her wild 2000s, she actively dated Eric for a while. It was never made explicit whether they slept with each other but they were dating so the assumption would be they did.

4 hours ago, Kane said:

She was, but she either got cut out of the will or was only left a small amount. Her being in need of money was why she became Palmer's nurse.

That's not how I remember it. She was left wealthy after he died.
Alex wanting to rewrite his will after finding out about Jeremy and Natalie but dying before he got to do it was a plot point. And so she was rich.

From my quick research her money problems stemmed from part of the estate being given in trust to Timmy after it was found out he was Alex's instead of Jeremy's. 

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

I thought that showed how little opinion TK has of Esther, that he assumes she will be all  over a man right after her great love has died.

I agree. TK is an a**.  But it did help me get less irritated at the unsubtle pining they then wrote for Marty.
And, yes, Esther need a storyline that completely unrelated to a man.
By which, to be clear if Shortie writers are reading this, I do NOT mean she should also turn bi. 

Also, fact Francesca left without the other surgeons - Drew in particular - getting a chance to react to the Samira affair is yet another bizarre creative decision, like spending two weeks setting up a battle for Amelie's custody... before having Tom's mom telling him after one episode that her goal was the money and the whole thing being dropped just like that.

They have a bit of Bold and Beautiful disease whereby they have lots of good ideas but they do nothing satisfying with them.

5 hours ago, Melroser said:

"Earth-shattering" defined by writers is often a lot less earth-shattering than they think, unfortunately. 

Yes. Which is why I am mocking how much they are amping this one up because they'd better deliver something good.
 

5 hours ago, Faulkner said:

This show is very frustrating because it could be so much better. The ingredients are right there and so obvious.

That's why I said in the "Wasted Potential" thread that to me 80% of B&B stories qualify. The ideas are generally pretty sound; but then they write them in such a stupid counterproductive ways...

13 hours ago, AMCOLTLLover said:

I kinda like Marty! But to make him a rebound men for Esther is stupid lmao Curtis died just a few weeks ago.

esther is the new TK. Every partner dies. Maybe that Marty dies too

As much as TK is and was an a** I kinda liked that they lampshaded it by having him tell Marty bluntly not to come to the funeral because he just wanted to be there to be first in line for Esther after she would be done grieving and that in itself was disrespecting Curtis.
I kinda like Marty fine enough but I forgot about him when I was discussing leading men on here last week which... says something about the value of the character.

I am not thrilled about the writing and stories right now. 

8 hours ago, AbcNbc247 said:

That would've been the smart thing to do.

Instead of Sheila targeting Brooke and her addiction, she should have targeted Steffy and her addiction instead. It would have been much better to see then Steffy just being a whiny, anti-Logans pain in the ass. And the fact that Finn has just completely disappeared is ridiculous as well.

100% that was the plan before JMW fell pregnant.

But I suspect whatever way they write her out will be Sheila-related.

8 hours ago, Melroser said:

It had better not be the death of Finn after this whole mess of Sheila wanting to reconnect with him! 

That would hardly be an earth-shattering "twist" so I don't believe that's it.

7 minutes ago, Faulkner said:

Must be easy for JMW to remember her lines when she has the same ones over and over again. Curious what will lead her off screen for maternity leave.

Do we think Steffy is the likely center of that HUUUUUGE shocking game-changing upcoming "twist" they are... making... sure... to...tease...and...overtease and announce and publicize and hint at and that they really really really want us to know about?

Frankie's murder on AW.

I mean... 

8 minutes ago, Khan said:

You could tell in that moment that the show was no longer being written or produced by people who understood the show they were working on.

There are deaths in daytime and primetime soap that sometimes feel like someone upstairs disliked the actor and wanted to add a layer of twist-the-knife and this is one of them.
 

The Magnum crossover episodes were very weird and kinda sucked but Jessica Walters!

1 hour ago, Vee said:

Nonetheless, it was a tactless, stupid thing to say while still on the show with a performer who the audience liked while it wasn't exactly feeling her.

"First you give me somebody who, God bless him, I love J.R. but he's not an actor.' And so that's hard enough with somebody who...it's going to be a long time before he gets out of second gear. And I'm constantly having to hedge my performance cause I can't be doing Shakespeare while he's doing something else."

I think we know what she was saying and it wasn't entirely wrong but it was so tone-deaf and sounded so arrogant. Particularly for someone who had been in the business for so long and should have known better.
It was a "Muhneyism" before that was a thing.

But contra what someone said earlier in this thread, this had nothing to do with his injuries or his looks. 

It is not especially directed at Monique, since she isn't the first one to do it, but there is something that feels a bit thirsty and pathetic to me when a reality TV cast member jumps from franchise to franchise.

1 hour ago, watson71 said:

On paper, I'm sure the Justine storyline on Another World sounded much better than what played out on screen.  The change in writers and producers didn't help the storyline.  Justine could have filled the Iris role in Bay City as someone who was looking to stir up trouble for Rachel and Carl, much like Alexis did to Blake and Krystal on Dynasty.  Rather, JFP and the writers turned her into an over the top villain who was deformed when she fell from a train trestle.  Then even gave her a hook for a hand like Captain Hook.  At this point, not even a talented actress like Victoria Wyndham could save this storyline; but, I do think that if they had turned Justine into an Alexis/Iris type character who was there to stir up trouble that it would have worked and Wyndham could have carried it off.

I think the Justine story was always going to be an over the top villain deformed etc. They didn't turn her into it; that was the plan all along once they came up with the idea, wasn't it?
But where I do agree that the theoretical pieces - VW in a double role, Grant and Ryan's mother, former love to Carl, villain - could have worked in a completely different story (and especially with a completely different acting choice).
 

1 hour ago, Wendy said:

Her behavior about being paired with JR Martinez was pretty heinous. I had a lot of respect for the audience seeing past Martinez's looks and embracing him. Too bad Ehlers was so damned shallow. No loss when she got the boot.

Her speaking up publicly was a bad idea on her part BUT, correct me if I am wrong, I don't think her issue was at any point his physical injuries.
She was complaining that he was very green and not a great actor.

8 minutes ago, Forever8 said:

I was hoping Hope would list some too. But we can't have that for some reason. 

I am fine with them returning Taylor to 90s Taylor in a vacuum but it is pretty clear that if we start listing what 2000s Taylor did - killing Darla, sleeping with Rick, etc - there is too much cognitive dissonance for the retcon they are trying to do.
As for Steffy she has a vocal fanbase and JMW is a teacher's pet so we can't remember that Steffy was a schemer. She is the heroine now.

That being said I will play Devil's Advocate and say I like that Steffy in particular has inherited Stephanie's superiority complex re: Brooke - and that the feud carried generations, even if it is not organic.
It is highly hypocritical but so was the original feud. I mean Stephanie had had Eric raise Massimo's baby at his own and was always scheming and lying. Her hatred of Brooke was understandable but her sentiment she was morally superior was nonsense.
Same here. 
I agree it would be better if more people *on the show* pointed it out but fact is they never did with Stephanie either.

 

Re: The Emmy debate

I think it has to do with why Jessica was such as great performance. It is acting work by small touches, infuse someone with a personality, build a character over episodes. There were no showcases, no big emotional scenes and that's what the Emmys reward, especially since they have that system where you submit only one or two episodes. 
That skews the process towards performances that are successful at conveying emotions rather than performances that are successful at creating a compelling character with layers, despite the latter being sometimes a lot harder.
I say this because I think that's  also the number one problem with the Daytime Emmys, in a genre that is build as much on the latter as the former. And I think that was the case with Lansbury here. 

2 hours ago, Vee said:

I'm slow, which pic is super spoilery?

Well, I don't know if I should call it super spoilery for us considering that we have been discussing it for a while but for a casual viewer

Yes, there are a couple of random pairings but I still feel safe reading into it

I would say there is one photo that is pretty damn spoilery.

Not that we are not seeing it coming - and have for a long time - but the fact those two performers were put together in a photo almost certainly confirms it.

My personal interpretation is not that it declined in quality - coz it never was a good show on the merits - but it lost the connection with its teenage audience and the zeitgeist it had captured.
Question is how much was AS's involvement, cast changes and how much was just as the characters got older, it was always going to be hard to adapt the concept of the show in a way that stayed compelling. And - that one may be more my personal reaction - the moralizing corniness that was fine with teenagers became really uncomfortable playing out with young adults.

It is just unfortunate that MB becoming a better person off-screen has come in parallel with him becoming a much worse and laziest actor on-screen.
I am thinking of it because of the Shannen Doherty conversation in the 90210 thread but it seems to me sometimes some actors need to be tough, rough and mean to get the best out of themselves and their costars. As he becomes more comfortable in his own skin and relaxed about life, he lost a lot of his acting drive, at least outwardly, and it shows.
 

29 minutes ago, Khan said:

Otherwise, it doesn't hold up at all.

Yeah...
Prompted by the revival of this thread I have watched a whole bunch of stuff online the past few days and while the acting is better than I remembered, the dialogue is so so much worse.
I had to stop because I was cringeing so hard. The Suite Life of Zach and Cody had more depth in its dialogue and was more subtle in its moralizing than this.

I had also forgotten that Michelle Phillips was playing Val's mother in denial about her husband having molested her which considering subsequent revelations about John Phillips is hella awkward to rewatch

That 180 in terms of who April was always bothered me on the merits.
Wouldn't it have been so much more interesting if Bobby was in love with someone with more shaded morals than him?
This reeked of the misogyny in the writers' room where there are only a few women archetypes - they can only either a bitch (with sluttiness) or an ingenue or a motherly figure.

Jean Stapleton discusses why she turned down the role.
 

Angela also talks about Jean being offered the role first and her take why she declined it.