Videnbas

It's an interesting question when the decline of Brooke's character began. I'd say she was pretty consistent for many years. She was fascinated by the Forresters and drawn to Ridge. I think even her brief infatuation with Eric was believable in terms of a rebound (with a little subconscious revenge on Stephanie thrown in). For me, the moment when Brooke went off the rails was when she suddenly set her sights on Thorne in 1999 and proclaimed he was her new destiny. That was just such a shift for the character who up until that point had been all about Ridge (with Thorne firmly in the friend zone). The fact that Thorne was her third Forrester didn't exactly help. It just felt unhealthy at best, and out of character at worst, for both characters. After that, Brooke became the scandalous woman who will sleep with anyone no matter who he is married to, including family members. And that part of her grew bigger as her other roles (as a professional woman and a mother) were pushed to the background. I also feel this coupling signaled a shift in the show as a whole towards a more "anything goes" attitude in terms of which characters could be paired up.

William Bell seems to have had a fascination with long lost daughters returning with problematic relationships with their mother. Kristen, Macy and Felicia were all introduced this way. Interestingly, each of those mother-daughter relationships was a "variation of the theme" with a different dynamic.

I hope we get to these episodes! It would be interesting to see if it's possible to detect any difference in the writing once Bradley Bell takes over. Of course, the major storylines may have been planned months or years in advance, so some of what follows may already have been thought out by Bell Sr. Also, I've often wondered about what kind of role John F. Smith played in the writing of the show for its first 15 years or so. It may or may not be a coincidence, but the point where I feel the show began going downhill coincides almost exactly with his no longer being credited as associate head writer (or "executive storyline consultant", whatever that is) in 2002/2003. (I always think of the Portofino location shoot as the last big hurrah of the "old"/"classic" B&B era. From 2003 on, there was a very noticeable shift in the tone and the focus of the show as Jackie and Nick were introduced and became a major part of the show, while Sally and her clan were phased out.)

Once about every five years, I am reminded why I keep watching B&B in spite of myself. Suffering through endless repetitive episodes with no storylines and no character development, hoping for a glimmer of hope, waiting for something good to happen but it never does, and then suddenly, there is this unexpected moment where the show manages to be randomly brilliant. Sheila/Deacon is one of those rare moments of brilliance. Putting these two in a scene together just works, instantly. And it's definitely all thanks to Sean Kanan and Kimberlin Brown. I still think the writing itself is really not that good - the scripted dialogue could be subtler and more intelligent (after all, both Sheila and Deacon have always been quick-witted characters and are certainly capable of cleverer insults than calling each other "crazy" or "an idiot") and the basic premise (they are both outcasts and they should team up to get what they want) was repeated a few too many times. But on the other hand, Sheila and Deacon could read the phone book to each other and those scenes would still be magic. They are just that good. I don't have very high hopes for the actual storyline. But for now, it's a joy just watching these two powerhouse veterans, with their long and rich history on the show, simply do their thing.

I think there was always this parallel between Brooke and Stephanie, right from the start. They were linked from the beginning because they were the only ones who knew of each other's manipulations. For example, BOTH of them knew about Eric/Beth and covered it up in front of Ridge, but for opposite reasons. And both of them manipulated letters in order to win or hold on to the man they wanted (Stephanie by sending an anonymous letter to the Logans about their father's whereabouts, Brooke by hiding Caroline's letter to Ridge), and got dumped when the truth about their manipulations became known. I think part of the intriguing dynamic in the beginning between Stephanie and Brooke is that in terms of visible power and status, they are worlds apart, but take away those superficial aspects, and they are very evenly matched. In fact, going back to watch from the beginning (I am now at 1990), I have a feeling that Beth/Eric was never meant to be the real story. Beth/Eric was simply the catalyst for building a long term rivalry between Stephanie and Brooke. Blake was an odd character. I never did understand exactly what was wrong with him with his sudden attacks of - something? As for Macy, I actually found her among the most "human" and relatable characters on the show. But I think the key to her character is that emotionally, she is a child - she can be pretty naive at times and when bad things happen (basically 90% of the time with Macy) she can't really cope on her own but needs someone to put her back together (usually Sally). She is loving and has a good heart but her lack of "toughness" makes her very vulnerable, even to the point of being self-destructive. I do have to wonder though if the Macy who evolved was really the same character the writers had in mind at first or if they changed her in response to how Bobbie Eakes played her. It seemed in the beginning that they had initially intended to make her more assertive and "Sally-like", but instead she became basically the opposite of Sally. I think where we are at right now, we are heading into the peak of B&B, or at least the years with the most "action". Though I must say I have loved the slow start of the 80s episodes because of the clear direction in long term storytelling and characterization. I couldn't agree more, Marquise! It really makes it a joy to rewatch these years knowing what will happen, because you can see all these seeds being planted, sometimes years in advance! It is very satisfying knowing there's actually a purpose for everything that's being shown.

At the time, and the way I remember them, they were my favorite years of the show! I loved Taylor's Morocco storyline, Thorne and Macy's singing career and Ivana's murder, and Sheila's increasingly desperate actions. I really hope to be able to watch these years again and see if they are as good as I remember. They were "high stakes" years with an unusual concentration of serious "life and death" situations. The earthquake (or was that late 1993?), Taylor "dying", Jack having a heart attack, the explosion in the lab, Sheila killing Jay Garvin, Sheila keeping James in a dungen and then trying to kill everyone including herself, Macy having cancer and covering it up to go on a concert tour, Anthony murdering Ivana and almost killing Sally and Macy while Thorne was wrongfully arrested and facing a potential death penalty, Jasmine falling down the elevator shaft at Spectra, and so on.

I know, I can't wait for us to get past episode 1300 and hopefully get the rest of the year 1992 and beyond! That is my favorite era of the show and I have never been able to find it online except for the odd episode or clip. I used to watch the German episodes but they ended at 1300 and then there's a huge gap.

Thanks for clarifying! Yes, I guess my main concern was if TPTB might be lurking somewhere where the link is posted. But, like you suggested, the "PM me for details" is a safer and more discreet way of sharing if the forum is very public.

Lol! But, seriously, how "discreet" do we need to be about the Vault? I can't help but feel it's almost too good to be true, and wonder if it is truly safe or could get taken down like those old episodes on Youtube, so I am very hesitant to spread the link outside this forum.

I agree. Brooke's character crossed a line when she went for Thorne. Until that point, you could (possibly) justify her actions by her being in love with Ridge (and temporarily rebounding to Eric and other men). Her consistency in her romantic love for Ridge over the years was the thing that kept the character together and made her human. It was possible (at least for me) to view her in a positive light. But when she went after Thorne - the third Forrester man - so aggressively, and pretty much out of the blue, that really signaled a shift in her character (or maybe exposed certain traits of her character that had been less obvious, and possible to overlook, until that point). During that storyline, it became clear that her idea of "love" was really an obsession, and that it was completely selfish in nature. Brooke had held grudges and had many confrontations with her rivals in the past, but she was usually the underdog and I never before saw the kind of intentional and unwarranted cruelty she showed with Macy. In every other rivalry up until that point, it was at least a possible interpretation to see Brooke as the injured party (depending on your perspective). But with Macy (and in subsequent rivalries with Bridget and Katie), that interpretation was no longer possible - Brooke had clearly become the aggressor, hurting other women without provocation and without remorse.

What I really don't understand is, the other month they had this scene where Brooke made a sudden PR move to declare herself and Ridge co-CEOs of FC. Whatever happened to that idea? Did they just drop it? Because a FC power struggle would have pitted Steffy and Brooke against each other in a major way (even though it was introduced in a way that made no sense whatsoever).

I agree that Brooke needs a viable anti-Brooke. She is really at her best when she is in a rivalry with another woman (that has always been the most captivating part of her relationships with men - how she relates to the woman she competes with). Brooke is a character who really needs conflict to thrive. Stephanie was, of course, Brooke's best rival by far. Caroline/Brooke was also an interesting dynamic because they started out as friends (and ultimately ended up as friends as well). Taylor/Brooke had its moments but in the end I think it was overplayed and became repetitive so I really wouldn't want to see that rivalry revisited (in part because I feel the Taylor character has been so poorly written for so long that she can hardly be salvaged at this point). Out of Brooke's rivalries, the one I think had the most unused potential left was Macy/Brooke. It took a decade for the show to pit them against each other (or even put them in the same scene), but when they did, it was pretty explosive. They seemed to have almost as much raw hatred between them as Brooke and Stephanie and they truly brought out the absolute worst in each other. Too bad they kept killing Macy off as soon as the conflict with Brooke escalated. If she weren't dead (if she is dead), that is one rivalry I could see really reviving the Brooke character.

That's great! Until proven otherwise, I much prefer to think of them as the same character! Dr Oshiro seems to be the Forrester family doctor, and Thorne and Macy initially said they would gather their "talented friends - prominent people who maybe had aspirations to the stage at one time". So it does sort of fit. Only problem is, the Elvis impersonator spoke in broken English with Japanese words thrown in and Dr Oshiro obviously didn't. But I guess that could be part of his act. I just really want to keep the mental picture of Dr Oshiro's secret nighttime life, and Caroline being given her death sentence by Elvis! (Not to mention imagining the wonderful awkwardness that could have ensued at Thorne's next yearly checkup.)

I don't know if anyone here can help me with this... I'm currently watching 1990 episodes and I really wonder if the doctor (Dr Oshiro) who gives Caroline her diagnosis in ep 773 was also the Elvis impersonator in ep 749. And if so, is it the same actor playing two different characters, or does the serious Dr Oshiro have a secret passion for karaoke? (And, by the way, I have an INSANE amount of respect for the people doing their acts in that episode! Imagine getting hired to play "the guy/girl doing a cringeworthy audition for a talent show" on a soap that airs worldwide, and doing it with so much gusto!)

I absolutely agree about Dollar Bill! It still bothers me to this day that we were just supposed to accept Bill Sr having a son, without even being given ANY explanation as to why Bill Sr was obviously unaware of the fact for his entire run on the show. I assume Dollar Bill was the result of an affair, but even so, it would be nice to know when and how this supposed affair took place (it was always implied Bill Sr was devoted to Marion) and if Bill is supposed to be younger or older than Karen/Caroline. And then when the retconned Spencers started piling up with Liam, Wyatt and Caroline Jr, creating a whole second generation of retconned Spencers (whose parents were also retconned Spencers), it all became a bit much. To me, the connection with the original Spencers is pretty much non-existent with the present gang. Even present day Spencer Publications doesn't really feel like Spencer Publications the publishing house, but more like a generic "business empire" like Marone Industries.

I agree that Karen is the first glaring retcon this show has done (of course, today the entire Spencer family is made up of surprise adult children showing up out of thin air...) Up until that point, every character seemed so carefully planned and they were all introduced very organically. This whole "Caroline had a twin who disappeared at birth" was uncharacteristic of the writing at the time. But I guess Bill Bell really wanted JJ back on the show.

At least not any more. I shudder to think how a storyline like Jake MacLaine being molested as a child by his uncle would be dealt with by the current writing team.

Macy was a major character throughout the 90s but she was nearly always one step removed from the center of the show (the Forrester family drama) and rarely played a part in a storyline that wasn't either her own or her mother's. She tended to get stuck in the B storyline for the most part. So it was rare to see her sharing a scene with Sheila, Taylor, Ridge or even Brooke (until suddenly they became mortal enemies and Macy got a short-lived frontburner storyline).

I loved it too! I think as far as back from the dead stories go, this one really was perfection. The stunning backdrop of the Italian village, the lighthouse scene (great symbolism with Macy standing up there like a "beacon of light"), the way that Macy's singing voice was used as the focal point of her return (after having been used for the past few years to signal her family's grief), how they gave every "reveal" scene a different emotional mood (epic with Thorne, intimate with Sally, surprising with CJ, and humorous with Darla), how they let us wait for it for two years after hinting very early on that Macy was alive, while her mother spent all that time grieving realistically (i.e. not just "getting over it" like many soap characters tend to do). In short, they played every emotional beat with gusto. So much so that I had no problem suspending disbelief even though Macy's explanation for not being dead was... well, fairly improbable. It was only too bad that once she was back in LA, the storyline just took an extremely frustrating turn. I think pairing her with Deacon and making her all about him and his children and revenge against Brooke was a big mistake and the cause of some pretty OOC behavior for Macy's character (and caused her to be written into a corner much sooner that she should have been). A much better move long-term would be having her unknowingly adopt Thorne and Darla's child, and explore the relationship between Macy and Darla during the pregnancy and after. This could eventually have led to Macy (not Taylor) being the one to get drunk and accidentally hit Darla with her car (which would have made a lot more sense dramatically than Taylor doing it).

I havde a Hotmail account too, and I had the same problem. I couldn't register until I used my other e-mail address.

I would rank them like this: 1987-1988: 4,5/5 🌟 The first two years felt like a very long, but very good, introduction. The writing and characterization were excellent, but the storylines hadn't reached their dramatic climaxes yet (I like to compare this period to the first act in a play). In its own way, it couldn't have been better. It's just that a lot of the payoff was still to come. 1989-1995: 5/5 🌟 This is when the show hit its peak IMO. All the seeds that were planted in the first seasons blossomed and then some. We had Brooke vs Stephanie, Spectra vs Forrester, Tridge/Bridge while it was still fresh, Thorne/Macy, Sheila causing trouble, and so on. To me, this is when the show had the best storylines and the best characters. 1996-2002/2003 4/5 🌟 The show was still very good on the whole, occasionally brilliant, but some characters started changing inexplicably, some pairings lost their freshness, and some ongoing storylines started becoming repetitive. 2003/2004-2006 3/5 🌟 This, to me, is when the show started running out of ideas and showing its age. New families entered the show and set a different mood (like the Marones) and it started becoming a different show to the one I grew up loving. But it still worked on the whole. Oh yeah, and Taylor's 2005 resurrection. That was a jump the shark moment if ever I saw one. 2007-2012 2,5/5 🌟 Darlene Conley's death left a huge Spectra-shaped hole in the fabric of the show, and the new or recast characters (Spencers and Logans) were not as good as their 80s counterparts. But at least we still had the "core four". 2012-2017 2/5 🌟 Stephanie died, original Ridge left the show, and the never ending saga of Liam's love life dominated the show. It's around this time that it's actually getting hard to watch. There were a few glimmers of hope (the unexpected complexity of Aly's character, the return of Spectra and Sheila for the show's 30th anniversary) but they were killed by bad writing. The dawning suspicion that the writers may be making it up as they go along. 2018-present day 1/5 🌟 Yep, the writers are definitely making it up as they go along. No such thing as character development. No such thing as story arcs. Dialogue and direction hits reality show level. Sets are mostly gone. Costumes so bad they actually distract from the plot. Not even Sheila Carter can save this train wreck (unless she snaps and kills everyone, in which case she would have my full support).

Yes, that was when the show had started going seriously downhill. I have this feeling that most characters who were introduced, recast or Sorased from about 2010 onward lack - for want of a better word - a soul. There is no "real" human being at the core of who they are. Nothing that makes you think "yes, I know this person, understand them and genuinely care about them". That's what was so appealing about the early show. Each and every character felt like they were a real person that you knew and had feelings for. And the recast Logans kind of highlighted that. The subtlety was gone.

I also had a LOT of trouble registering. I tried several years ago, then gave up when the confirmation email never came, tried to register again and it said I already had registered but I still couldn't log in, so I cancelled the account and tried again registering using a different email address, and then it finally worked and I got the confirmation mail.

I don't think it was actually said explicitly in dialogue. I just remember when Donna was about to move in with Mark, she and Brooke had a bit of a "serious girl talk" and Donna said something like "I think I'm ready now", implying that Mark would be her first. And her reaction when she skipped a period and thought she was pregnant was definitely not that of someone who had been there, done that. (You'd think it would have come up at that point if she already had a baby that she put up for adoption.) So to me, Donna having Marcus is just one of those rewrites that are simply incompatible with what we were shown on screen.

I much prefer Carrie Mitchum's Donna to the current one, though. The original Donna had brains and guts and she was passionate about what she wanted (even though her judgement was sometimes clouded by her rebelliousness), and there was nothing cartoonish about her. I really dislike how the writers did a complete rewrite of the character and dumbed Donna down when she was recast (not to mention gave her a son she supposedly had at, what, 17?).