Videnbas

4 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Since Y&R didn’t really do anything with either character, I think the show should have at least tried to see if Anna Hamilton and Ravi Shapur had any romantic chemistry. 

I will never understand why B&B never gave Storm Logan a serious romantic pairing. Then again, until Clarke Garrison came along, it seemed as though no men other than Forrester men got any romantic pairings. Ethan Wayne had great chemistry with a number of female leads, from Joanna Johnson to Teri Ann Linn to Lauren Koslow. The show should have picked one, even briefly.

True - it IS strange that Storm never got a romance.

Also B&B: I think they should have done more with Bridget and CJ (and with CJ, period. His romantic storylines were always so short-lived and he usually ended up dumped or widowed within a couple of months). 

7 hours ago, boldau said:

Videoland has just reached episode 1600 (August 1993).

Ooh, I'm keeping my fingers crossed someone will be able to upload! I have been wanting to rewatch this part of B&B for decades! 1993-1995 is probably my all time favorite era of Bold.

It's funny, I have really come to reevaluate the Stephanie/Brooke relationship after watching these early shows from the beginning up until 1992.

I used to believe Brooke was in love with Ridge and tried to win him, and Stephanie was dead set against it and did everything she could to keep them apart.

Instead, I have just watched Stephanie spending the better part of the first five years of the show (starting in late 1988, then most of 1989, about half of 1990, all of 1991, and the beginning of 1992) scheming and plotting in favor of a Brooke/Ridge pairing, while Brooke keeps self-sabotaging her prospects to win Ridge (and lashing out at Stephanie when Stephanie points this out to her).

It has really turned my preconceived notions upside down to see how most of Stephanie's manipulations in those early years actually involved getting Brooke and Ridge together in order to achieve other goals (Thorne not killing Ridge, Stephanie getting Eric back).

On a side note - I am watching Faith's/Karen's introduction storyline at the moment and at first I found this Bonnie Roberts character annoying but now she is growing on me. There is just something hilariously creative about making a "tough librarian" character...

1 hour ago, DramatistDreamer said:

No offense to B&B, but what other soap could you see someone leap from fashion consultant to writing staff in less than two years? 

Who did that? 

19 hours ago, MinnaH said:

Susan Flannery’s Stephanie, Darlene Conley’s Sally, Kimberlin Brown’s Sheila. I may even add KKL’s Brooke to that list.

I agree with all of these!

Brooke could possibly work as a recast (after all, they recast Taylor and Ridge, and there have already been two other actresses temporarily playing Brooke), but that would mean losing one of only two remaining original cast members and I'd hate to see that happen.

The other three are just so iconic there is no way they would work as a recast.

As for past B&B characters, I would also count Macy as a difficult recast because so much of her character was built on her (very recognizable) singing voice.

In the other category, "recast roles that shouldn't be recast again", I would count Thorne. The first three were good, but the fourth Thorne did not work, and I think an adult role that has been recast that many times really doesn't need a fifth portrayer.

11 hours ago, ChickenNuggetz92 said:

Casey: "I never said that B&B will change forever, I just said that it would never be the same". Huh???

 I am still trying to wrap my head around that one.

I guess we should be glad Casey isn't a doctor:

"I never said he was going to die, I just said he wasn't going to make it."

Or a teacher:

"I never said you failed the test, I just said you didn't pass."

Or a prison guard:

"I never said you have to stay in here forever. I just said you're never getting out."

4 hours ago, Forever8 said:

A death that should've never happened to begin with. Aly had potential to be a good character to have on the canvas long-term. She reminded me so much of Jennifer Finnigan's Bridget. But of course, Brad had to kill her on the PCH.

I wished someone like Ridge would've told her that this idealized version of Darla was something that Thorne and Stephanie told her and that her mother herself wasn't like that at all. 

So true! That is one death I am still having trouble accepting.

Aly had so much potential and was more complex than any other young female on the show at the time. She was an intriguing mix of innocence and darkness, with a quirkiness that set her apart. And the actress didn't really get to show her true range until Aly's exit storyline in which she was absolutely brilliant. She could have become a force to be reckoned with on the show, driving storyline for years to come.

And all they had to do was send her away to a mental hospital to recover (or better yet, show us her learning to cope with her illness on screen, as a real storyline for Thorne and Aly). That's all. There was no need to kill her off since she was still viable.

I was also waiting for someone, somewhere, to tell her the truth about Darla, and for that to be the wake-up call that made her realize that the "moral avenger" Darla she hallucinated was not real, and that the real Darla was human, not a saint, but a good and fun-loving person who would have wanted Aly to enjoy life to the fullest.

2 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

Having missed certain storylines, particularly going into 1990, would it be a fair guess that the introduction of Mick Savage marks the beginning of the exit storyline for Kristen? It’s beginning to feel rushed in certain aspects. For some reason it almost feels like the show doesn’t have enough time to build stronger chemistry between Kristen and Mick, which is somewhat odd because I felt as if I saw chemistry between Margo and Mick in the first scene where it was just the two of them. And I saw chemistry between Macy and Mick almost immediately but don’t see much of it between Kristen and Mick. Maybe that changes at some point?

I agree there's not a lot of chemistry between Kristen and Mick. But it seems to me Mick is a short term character and was never intended to be a romantic lead. He was needed to move the plot along. I think the show needed to cut Clarke away from Forrester and align him firmly with the Spectras in order to set up a long term rivalry between the two fashion houses. Having Kristen dump him for Mick achieved that, and gave Clarke a bitterness towards the Forresters that he wouldn't have had if he had been the one to cheat.

Mick also served a secondary purpose in developing Macy's character and bringing Sally and Macy closer together. (Especially Macy having her heart broken by him was important because it both paved the way for her and Thorne, and made her rely heavily on her mother for comfort - possibly Macy's two most character-defining factors.)

Wait, so let me get this straight (I am behind watching the current B&B episodes). 

Sheila shoots two people and leaves them for dead because she is afraid someone will find out she glued a couple of labels to a couple of bottles?

The next time I have fruit flies in my kitchen I'm just going to burn the house down. That'll show them. 

2 hours ago, AbcNbc247 said:

I had the same question when I was watching those episodes.

Jake confessed to stealing the formula but it was implied that he was lying in order to clear Macy. But at the same time it was never explicitly stated that he was lying. After that, it was just dropped.

Exactly. On the one hand, Jake had probably the strongest motive and the best opportunity, on the other hand we were shown his point of view afterwards and it strongly implied he was lying when he confessed. 

But the only other character that seemed plausible as I recall was Clarke and there was really not much to imply he did it. 

Unless it was really a nameless burglar with a soft spot for Spectra, which makes even less sense. 

1 minute ago, FrenchBug82 said:

I will play Devil's Advocate slightly in that this is the kind of secret Sheila could obsess about protecting if she deludes herself into thinking there is a stake.
It didn't matter the previous two times she did because she was being vindictive but there was no concurrent goal.
Here she is trying to prove to her son that she has changed, that she can be in his life and she is not a threat. Proving the illusion that she is IS a secret and Steffy telling her that she has ammo to ban them from their lives is a threat.

NOW I 100% agree that if this is all there is to Sheila's stint, it will have been lamer than I would have wanted for her.
And the stakes for her are kinda neutered since Steffy told Finn first. If she was trying to prevent Steffy from telling *Finn* - in her desperation that he sees her as a mother figure he can trust and who has changed - it would have made sense to me somewhat that someone obsessive like Sheila could have worked herself up to become dangerous in service of preventing Finn from learning who she really is.

 

I don't get why Sheila felt the need to switch those labels in the first place. She held all the trump cards at that point. She had just scored a huge win - being invited for Christmas BY TAYLOR. Brooke had provoked her but there was no power behind the words. All Sheila needed to do was stay on her best behavior. Sheila had nothing to gain by switching the labels and everything to lose.

And, well, if the secret is out already, what are the stakes?

20 hours ago, JamesF said:

You've articulated how I feel perfectly and if this does play out as Friday suggests, I'm so disappointed by it. It really didn't need to be inevitable that Sheila would turn to gun toting again, especially over the lame bottle switching. Who gives a [!@#$%^&*]. The Sheila of the 1990s would wriggle out of that in the space of an episode, not shoot up the place.

 

The Sheila of the 1990s DID wriggle out of that quite effortlessly. 

She spiked Macy's drink, and then quietly went about her business. Nobody suspected a thing and Sheila didn't give it a second thought. Sheila didn't even care enough about the event to actively keep it a secret.

And Quinn spiked Brooke's drink fairly recently without it even registering as a plot point. 

This just isn't the type of secret you pull out a gun to protect.

So I'm getting to the storyline in 1991 where they are setting the stage for the BeLieF theft and again it bothers me how this mystery was never conclusively resolved. Or was it, and I missed it the last time I watched this storyline?

WHO stole the formula? Theories? 

3 hours ago, anon4520 said:

some more to keep you all busy  changed the format hopefully this will please more people here.

 

bless you all

Thank you SO much! I am so happy for these episodes!  

I was thinking about this earlier today: There is a lot of talk lately about something happening soon after which the show "will never be the same again", and some speculation has been that there might be a major character death. So here's my question - which past character deaths have been significant enough that they actually "changed the show forever"?

I don't mean (necessarily) that the death has to be very emotional, or very dramatic, or even that it has to involve a major character. But somehow that character death caused a permanent and major shift in the whole structure of the show.

My list goes as follows:

Caroline I - because her death changed the focus of the "Ridge's love life" side of the show and without it there would be no Tridge/Bridge triangle (and probably no Taylor in any major role on the show). Since this storyline was always front and center that changed the entire dynamic of the show.

Eric Forrester III - because his death triggered the baby switch storyline, which in turn introduced characters like Little D, Becky and Deacon, who continued to impact major storylines for years to come (especially Deacon). Without Eric's stillbirth, no Deacon, no Brooke sleeping with Bridget's husband, no Hope, no Brooke losing control of FC in 2003... in fact, the death of this infant we never even met is probably the most significant death on the show, ever.

Macy - because her (second) death was the beginning of the end of the Spectra branch of the show. Sally lost the main motivating factor behind her actions, Spectra lost its primary tie to the show's main family, and the Spectra family and business were left without a viable "second generation" to take over after Sally (as the show never really invested in CJ). So the entire Spectra storyline slowly faded away. (Interestingly, I think Macy's first death was far more emotionally charged, but structurally much less critical as it enhanced rather than diminished the Spectras' role on the show.)

Stephanie - no explanation really needed. Stephanie WAS the center of the show. The show hasn't been able to fill that void to this day.

Just a couple of my thoughts! What are yours?

I think the problem is that B&B is pretty good at coming up with shocking twists, but not very good at following them up with an actual storyline. Sheila's 2017 return was a major shocker, but then she ended up doing virtually nothing. Maya's transgender reveal was a big surprise but the storyline that followed avoided any conflict that could have made it interesting or groundbreaking. The reintroduction of Spectra in 2017 was a very refreshing idea and for a while it seemed like the show would go back to its fashion roots, but instead they literally blew that idea to pieces.

It's been a VERY long time since B&B did a "shocking twist" that actually altered the status quo permanently. In fact, the last thing I remember that really "changed the show forever" was Stephanie's death 10 years ago, and that wasn't a change for the better.

So my major twist would not necessarily be a "shocking moment", but rather a major overhaul of the narrative structure of the show, the writing, the characters, and the plot themes. I would go back to the four corner stones of the show: Forrester, Logan, Spectra, Spencer. I would include actual fashion and publishing related storylines. I would bring back a lot of old characters from the 90s, and get rid of some of the more recent ones that were never developed properly. I would look to the past to find loose ends that have been left hanging and address them, rather than just making up random stuff as I go along. I would bring back some of the children that we haven't seen since they were little (Jack, Dino, Diana, Little D, Rosie, Lizzie).

But a shocking twist doesn't really get me all that excited for the show. It's one moment and then it will go back to being a really poorly written soap. I want the entire writing style to change.

I only watch B&B so here's my list:

Romantic:
Thorne/Macy (Trachta's Thorne)
Ridge/Caroline I
Ridge/Brooke (Ron Moss's Ridge)

Non-romantic:
Stephanie/Brooke
Stephanie/Sally
Sally/Macy
Sally/Saul/Darla
Sheila/Mike

8 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

This wasn't directed towards me, I know but it's such a fascinating question and ironically, one that I had been thinking about recently.

Just my perception, of course, but had Norcross stayed, I could see the issue of Thorne having either some form of mental health issue or psychiatric break being explored. There were so many signs pointing in that direction before, during and after Ridge's shooting. I think because of Norcross' good looks the issue of mental health could have been explored as happening to anybody, even the rich, well-bred and those seemingly having everything going for them in life. Remember on Y&R, Bell Sr. used the character of Ashley Abbott (the "Beauty"), the second born child of an illustrious and prominent family to have a psychiatric break, so I could definitely have seen the second born of the illustrious L.A. based first family of fashion going through something similar. 

It would have been interesting to see Norcross and Eakes together onscreen. I think Eakes is strong enough an actor to have pulled off the pairing in a believable way. It would have been an interesting dynamic to see, for many reasons.

Soaps aren't the best as maintaining long-term issues like physical or mental ailments, so I wouldn't expect B&B to fully explore the issue of Thorne having mental illness, but I could see the exploration of Thorne dealing with the aftermath of a psychiatric break or a mental health issue over several months to a year. The writing used to be at least that consistent back then.

I agree Thorne's mental health could definitely have been explored in depth with Norcross. His Thorne was more fragile while Trachta's Thorne had a more grounded quality that kind of cut this angle short right after the Deveney Dixon storyline had culminated in the second attempted shooting.

As for the potential of Norcross and Eakes, it's easy to overlook that the very first Thorne/Macy scene was in fact with Norcross, not with Trachta. So we actually have two "first meetings of Thorne and Macy" - the bar and the Queen Mary - and can compare these two "chemistry tests".

In my opinion, Norcross/Eakes had a dynamic where Thorne was clearly the most fragile/timid of the two and Macy was the confident one cheering him up. In that scene, she was joking to get him out of his serious mood and Macy was much less vulnerable than Thorne was. I can easily imagine that a Thorne/Macy pairing with Norcross would have had Macy as the "dominant" one, or the "caretaker", and Thorne as the one needing emotional support.

Trachta and Eakes, on the other hand, were equals from the start. Even in the first scene you can see them "mirroring" each other's moods, tone of voice, and body language (which they often tended to do in their scenes over the years). So their Thorne/Macy became more of a symbiotic relationship between two people who were fundamentally very similar.

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

Sally in these early episodes was much more grounded and a threat... not used for comic relief, or the butt of the joke.  When Macy was first introduced, there was sort of a Mildred Pierce vibe going on between the two that quickly got dropped.

 

I think the initial development of the Sally/Macy dynamic was very interesting. It seemed like the writers initially had one kind of  relationship in mind, and then they gradually let the relationship develop in the opposite direction, but the shift was slow enough that it still felt organic. In a way, Sally and Macy's close bond was even more heartwarming because we saw that they didn't start out that way and had to work to mend their relationship. 

B&B - Stephanie's death. 

I may be in the minority, but it just felt so "staged" to me. From the moment she was dying, it was as if Stephanie stepped out of the flow of storylines and into a series of "special" episodes where nothing happened other than her delivering letters to loved ones and them taking turns crying over her imminent death. It would have been more poignant if the entire last few weeks of Stephanie's life weren't reduced to one extended goodbye ritual, but actually showed us Stephanie still taking part in the lives and storylines of her loved ones.

And then there was the Irish-themed goodbye party (where the grandchildren weren't even invited) for a character who had never been Irish in her entire life but somehow became very unsubtly Irish on her deathbed.

Finally there was her dying in Brooke's arms. Unlike many fans, I do feel it was absolutely right to have Stephanie and Brooke together in that scene. But I didn't think the mood was right (the whole "sing to me, baby girl" thing). There should have been some tension left between then, right until the very end. 

2 hours ago, Orea Mou Kiria said:

Why did they get rid of Clayton Norcross (for Jeff Trachta of all people)?

Thorne went from preppy and fragile to 80s Lauren Fenmore hair and singing duets with Macy.

Thorne#1 and Caroline looked like old Hollywood stars. 

I can't believe how good the show looked in its first season.

And yes, I am one of the very few people who liked B&B much better before the Spectra gang showed up. 

Just out of curiosity, where do you see the Thorne character going (post 1989) if, hypothetically, there had been no recast? 

I do feel that the introduction of Sally Spectra in episode 452 breathed new life into the show. The Logans - other than Brooke - had become increasingly isolated (basically just serving as a dating pool for the Forresters) and it was wise to introduce a new group of characters with a more natural common ground with the Forresters outside of the romantic possibilities.

Thank you so much for the uploads!

One strange thing happens to me when I go into the last 1992 folder and the first 1993 folder: When I open the folders, they contain 3 less files than it says that they should contain. For example, the Episodes 1426-1449 folder appears to be full (24 files) when viewed from the "outside", but when I open it, it stops at 1446 and there are only 21 files. Has anyone else had this problem? Or is it just some kind of delay before the files show up in the folder?

EDIT: Never mind, apparently there is a delay before the files show up! I can see them now!

By the way, do we know anything about the Videoland episodes? Will there be no new uploads? (if so, let's hope the official channel keeps going!)

25 minutes ago, divinemotion said:

She was. I am sorry, but she was. She was lead and she had positive qualities that made people root for her. That makes her a heroine. Even in the official Bold site Katherine is written as - the ultimative heroine of Bold. I am not talking about the Slut era... but... in the original... she was Heroine.

I think if Brooke was a (flawed) heroine, so was Stephanie. They were both manipulative and scheming from the start, and willing to do anything to achieve their goals. And their points of view are always on full display, making both of them protagonists, depending on your perspective. But both of them are more like anti-heroines to me. They are both complex and determined, but not conclusively good or bad since both of them have an "ends justify the means" morality. This determination sometimes pays off and sometimes it backfires.

So it kind of depends on your definition of heroine. I think there have been several other "heroines" in B&B. Out of the women Brooke's age, Caroline, Taylor and Macy all had traits that would make them qualify (i.e. being major characters whose moral alignment leans towards the "good" side).

But interestingly, I find it really hard to think of a "hero" in B&B.