Videnbas

The problem with this is Eric ALREADY takes Viagra - it was mentioned on screen. This goes back to (I think) when he was married to Donna. So obviously he has had this problem for over a decade, and he has overcome it just fine, until a few weeks ago when the writers suddenly decided this was a major issue for him. And even if he can't rise to the occasion, well, there are obviously other ways to satisfy a woman. No need to make such a huge deal out of it (at least not the "I can't please my wife" angle).

Well, she did return as Karen Spencer for a few years. But for some reason she was a lot less memorable as Karen than she was as Caroline. I just think the character of Caroline fit her better (and Caroline was a more complex character anyway).

I liked Griffey's too. Stacey the waitress was a great character! It was so refreshing that she was "normal" looking and still so totally and naturally self-confident in a world populated by beautiful people with "perfect" looks and bodies. And she had a great sense of humor. Her deadpan comments were pure gold.

When I go back to watch the shows in the Vault, it feels like almost the first two seasons are the first "act" of the show. Bell Sr really spends all that time setting the stage for the core conflicts on the show (Stephanie vs Brooke, Spectra vs Forrester, tension within the Forrester family including Thorne vs Ridge). Then Act 2 starts in late 1988 with Thorne shooting Ridge (the culmination of a conflict that had been building to that climax for a year and a half). Around the same time, we also get the introduction of Sally Spectra (after hearing about the conflict between Spectra and Forrester for over a year). And just prior to the shooting, we had Eric ending his affair with Beth and going back to Stephanie. This makes me think Beth/Eric was really a red herring whose lasting impact and main purpose was setting up a lifelong conflict between Brooke and Stephanie.

I know. It becomes all the more jarring when one tries to follow both the early show and the present one in parallell. Watching the current episodes becomes a chore by comparison. The early years of the show were far superior in every way. Everything was so well thought out, with attention to detail in every part of the writing and production. I don't know how the budget compares, but it seems that in the early years they spent a lot more on sets, costumes and adding supporting characters to scenes. And of course, the quality of the writing is worlds apart.

I assumed something similar - with KB the most obvious exception. Are there really that many Trump Republicans among the B&B cast (past and present)? Just curious. From a European point of view, it seems hard to fathom.

I don't have words to adequately describe this moment of unintentional genius. It must be the second funniest "dramatic" clip in the history of B&B (the funniest being the fight sequence that ended with Ridge falling into the furnace in 2003).

I think the problem is they are not giving her her own POV in the storytelling. The 90s music cues are nice but they are overdoing it. We get the "menacing" soundtrack virtually every scene she is in (even when she is not actually doing anything menacing) and it kind of "objectifies" her. Like she is an outside threat, rather than her own person with her own motivations. That was always her strength when she was written well - she was crazy and dangerous but you could understand her motivations and sympathize to some extent. That is, Sheila's own sense of reality was warped but so consistent that her actions made sense in that context. Now, it's basically just like they bring her out to say "BOO!".

Yes, you know you fail at characterization when the person you are trying to write as the psycho comes across as the one level-headed person in the room! I am also secretly rooting for Sheila to just kill them all. Thought I was the only one.

One of the strangest things in this scene is that during all the times during Wednesday's show that Sheila calls herself Finn's mother, or Steffy's mother-in-law, nobody corrects her and speaks up in defense of Li. Not even Li herself. Sheila has given up her parental rights. Li is Finn's mother now. And as much as Finn wants to know his biological mother, that is between him and her. It doesn't make Sheila and the Forresters inlaws.

Three episodes in and this storyline is already starting to disintegrate because of the writing. The wedding party just sort of coming to an awkward halt (and Thomas telling Steffy she was ”literally glowing”) while everyone waited for Finn to return, and Paris and Zende disappearing for no reason (other than possibly a plot device to make sure Paris and Sheila haven’t met, in case Sheila decides to drop by the cliff house when Steffy and Finn aren’t at home). Ridge acting distracted and confused, BEFORE Sheila even walked into the room. And Brooke for some reason having to hold his champagne glass (instead of just putting it on the table which was right there), just so she could drop it dramatically a minute later. Sheila telling Finn that she would not have been a good influence on him, and that she wouldn’t have been able to give him a happy life, but also saying she regrets giving him up and that giving him up was the biggest mistake of her life. Which is it? It can't be both. Finn wanting to introduce his bio mother to his in-laws without even having asked her name first. The bizarre conversation with Katie and Donna reminiscing about a character none of them ever knew, including flashbacks of things they couldn't possibly remember or even know about (like Lance and the bees). And multiple Sheila pictures showing up where there really shouldn't be any (in Pam's closet? Really?). Donna declaring she never wants to see Sheila again - have they even met? Sheila agreeing to go say hi to the Forresters, knowing she'd cause a scene and they'd throw her out. Sheila is not that stupid, or that obvious. She would establish contact secretly with him first, making sure to tie Finn more securely to her emotionally before essentially forcing him to choose between his wife and his bio mom. And she'd make sure she told Finn her side of the story before the Forresters got a chance to tell theirs. Finn taking a full episode to blurt out that Sheila is his mother, and not taking in the horrified reactions of every other person in the room. And everyone in the room interrupting Finn over and over questioning what Sheila was doing there when it was obvious that Finn was about to explain just that, if they had given him half a chance. It just seems the writers are going for maximum shock value, whether or not it makes sense. Even when the story would have been better (and more in character for Sheila) if they had built it more slowly. Amazingly, the pacing of the storyline as a whole feels rushed, and yet each individual scene has very little momentum.

Of course, the Angela story was Bell Sr, who clearly thought ahead in ALL of his storylines. In fact, that was the beauty of the early years of the show - how extremely well the storylines and characters were prepared even years in advance. Like Spectra Fashions - first shown on screen in 1989, but mentioned repeatedly in dialogue ever since 1987. Or Felicia Forrester - first came to town in 1990, after the rest of the family had spoken of her and discussed her absence since 1987. Thorne shooting Ridge, which was basically the culmination of almost two years of buildup and foreshadowing. Bridget's paternity, which was left unanswered until it came back into play years later. And so on. This actually used to be one of the show's strengths.

The obvious explanation is Bell didn't come up with the idea of Finn being Sheila's son until recently. It was obviously nothing he planned for the character. He just had a random idea and thought "why not?". And though I'm willing to suspend disbelief for Sheila, I have to wonder how hard it would have been to lay the groundwork for this storyline over the course of at least a couple of months. I can't believe that Finn being adopted wouldn't have come up even ONCE during the entire pregnancy. It seems like the kind of thing that would come to mind for a future parent at a time like that.

I agree with all this! My dream would be to have episodes in English up until late 1995. A huge Thank you to all the angels! As for Sheila, I have said before that she is a character with a lot of range. It is ALMOST impossible to write her out of character because she is a character who has a very unpredictable nature and is likely to do almost anything. BUT there is exactly ONE way she can be ruined by out of character writing, and that is the route they decided to go with her last time: not taking the character seriously. Sheila works as a psycho villain. Sheila works as a manipulator. Sheila works as an ex-convict trying to redeem herself. Sheila even works as a mother, in her own obsessive way. But Sheila does NOT work as a joke. The whole "oooh, scary, wink wink, nudge nudge" they did last time, with the exaggerated use of ominous music cues, dramatic closeups and villainous laughs, followed by Sheila just acting like an average busybody, completely ruins the character's dark appeal.

I want to be super excited, but after the last time my hopes aren't very high. It's one thing to do this shocking reveal, but another thing to turn it into an interesting long term storyline. That's where it failed last time. Otherwise, it's just a casting stunt with no substance behind it, devised just because Bell doesn't know where to go with storylines. "When in doubt, insert Sheila Carter", or something like that.

Going back to watch the early years, I find the Brooke/Stephanie dynamic fascinating. It's really like one of those optical illusions where you can see two entirely different images depending on how you look at it. Or like a Rorschach test where what you see depends on who you are. Who is really the aggressor and who is the victim? Who is right and who is wrong? Who is the protagonist and who is the antagonist? Who was the greatest threat to the other's family? Did they see through each other's manipulations, or did they judge each other unfairly? As a young girl, I was 100% behind Brooke. Now, watching the same episodes 30 years later, I am on Stephanie's side. It's almost scary in a way because I remember thinking Stephanie was SO evil and horrible to Brooke and now I feel a lot more sympathy towards Stephanie than I do for Brooke.

Oh yes, B&B has a way of recycling their names. I really think it's easier to count the children who were NOT named after someone else (Thomas, Phoebe, Hope and possibly someone else). I think the entire list goes something like this: Mark Lynley - name is a mix of both parents' names (Margo+Clarke) Rick Forrester - full name Eric Forrester Jr CJ Garrison - full name Clarke Garrison Jr Bridget Forrester - name is a mix of both (supposed) parents' names (Brooke+Ridge) Mary/Margaret/Erica Warwick/Lovejoy - alternative names, one after her paternal grandmother Mary, the other after her stepmother Maggie, the third after her mother's ex husband Eric Little Eric - full name Eric Forrester III (but sometimes referred to as Little D after bio dad Deacon) Steffy Forrester - full name Stephanie Forrester Alexandria Forrester - named after father's ex wife Macy Alexander (whom he cheated on when conceiving Aly) RJ Forrester - full name Ridge Forrester Jr Nicole Marone - stillborn baby named after her father Nick Jack Marone - named after grandfather Jack and grandmother Jackie Dino Forrester - full name Dominick Forrester after Nick Marone (who was belived to be the father at the time) Logan Knight (or is it Forrester?) - named after grandmother's family name Logan Rosie Forrester - full name Ambrosia Forrester, named after her mother Amber (Ambrosia) Moore Bill Spencer (Dollar Bill) - full name William Spencer Jr, named after his father Liam Spencer - full name William Spencer III, named after his father and grandfather Will Spencer - full name William Spencer, the fourth William Spencer in the family Caroline Spencer Jr - named after her aunt Douglas Forrester - named after great-grandmother Stephanie Douglas (maiden name) Lizzie Forrester - full name Elizabeth Forrester, named after great-grandmother Beth (Elizabeth) Logan Sally Spectra Jr - named after her great-aunt Saul Feinberg Jr - named after his grandfather Saul Feinberg (who apparently had a grandchild despite having no children) Kelly Spencer - named after grandmother Kelly Cooper Beth Spencer - full name Elizabeth Spencer, named after great-grandmother Beth (Elizabeth) Logan Hayes Forrester Finnegan - named after grandmother's abusive ex husband EDIT: I forgot Storm Logan, whose full name is Stephen Logan Jr.

I think this is actually a case of the writers forgetting the show's history. Either that, or Steffy is unaware of where the name Hayes came from. And the whole situation with Carter is contrived - especially the idea that out of all the lawyers in LA, Eric would trust Carter to represent him in the divorce. It's right up there with new parents Steffy and Finn offering Paris to come live with them. I guess if there was anything left in terms of psychological realism, it just went out the window this week.

I just had to take a moment to comment on the absurdity of the scene where Paris visits Steffy, Finn and the baby. Steffy, who used to juggle a CEO position and single motherhood of two infants, and Finn, who is a doctor and (one would assume) used to a lot of responsibility and not enough sleep, are struggling to care for one infant, forgetting to eat, misplacing notes and diaper packages (which must have contained a maximum of 5 diapers), and telling Paris how impressed baby Hayes would be with her... if he could understand a word of what was going on. Meanwhile, Paris steps in and takes over when the exhausted parents are at their wits' end after nearly a full minute of the baby crying, and magically makes baby Hayes go back to sleep (or into a shocked silence) by belting out the concert version of "Rock-a-bye Baby" while throwing smug glances at the amazed parents in between phrases. The unanswered question "maybe he needs a diaper change" that the parents asked when Hayes first started crying, remains unanswered as Paris puts him back down in his crib (because no one bothered to check underneath that mountain of blankets meant to conceal an obvious doll). Steffy, who has always been portrayed as competent and independent, is all smiles and gratitude when a social worker steps in and basically shows her how to soothe her own baby. The conclusion we are meant to draw from the above is "Paris is wonderful with babies". The conclusion we do draw is "the writers are not parents".

True. We have, over the past few weeks, had three black characters in storylines involving them being basically servants. Eric magnanimously lets Carter keep his job on the condition that he is loyal to Eric personally, not professionally (by not pursuing the wife Eric already kicked out). Justin (who was always more or less Bill's servant) gets fired and immediately goes to Ridge looking for a new "master", and pledging his loyalty (again, not related to any professional role) in exchange for his freedom (literally!). He even handed Ridge Bill's sword (which is basically a symbol of Bill's power over Justin, which Justin now transfers into Ridge's hands - almost as if Justin was a genie that Ridge could summon using the sword necklace). Paris who has a career of her own becomes Steffy's live-in nanny and may or may not end up stabbing Steffy in the back. So yeah, this pattern of color-based status imbalance, and the notion that the black employee is unreliable and a threat to the white employer, really is pretty uncomfortable to watch. I don't get easily offended when it comes to fictional characters, and I probably wouldn't have taken notice of any one of these storylines as an isolated occurrence, it's just that when it happens to ALL the black characters at once (Zende excepted but he is barely on screen), and it's basically the same story, it kind of makes you wonder what's going on in the writers' minds. And I don't really think the writers are being deliberately racist, I think they are just pretty tone-deaf with regards to how their writing comes across on screen. It wouldn't be the first time they wrote something with unfortunate implications and seemed completely oblivious.

I think Joanna Johnson, in either role, really only had one pairing that truly worked, and that was with Ronn Moss' Ridge. Same with Jeff Trachta who had great chemistry with Bobbie Eakes but never really clicked with any other (romantic) screen partner they tried him with. Maybe that's the reason why I struggle to remember anything at all about the Thorne/Karen pairing. As for Connor/Karen, I vaguely recall some fake pregnancy prank and an invisible bathing suit prank and then it goes blank.

Was it though? If I recall correctly, Jake confessed to take the blame off Macy, who had been arrested for the theft but had nothing to do with it.

The only plausible reason I can think of is that Deveney got her new face thanks to Thorne, and was so happy with that that she just went on with her life. Or maybe the writers realized that if Deveney hadn't disappeared her next stop would have been prison (probably still disfigured), and that it was a better exit to have her out there somewhere, with a face that could look like anyone. But then they never played that card.

Yeah, I think Deveney was the first "loose end" that the show left hanging. I think the whole premise of the Angela storyline had been planned from very early on (we knew from the start that Stephanie left to visit someone once a week and that it was a well-kept secret), but the way she left the show left a lot unresolved. It would have made sense for her to show up down the road with a completely new face and we would believe it was a new character until the big reveal that she was really Angela/Deveney. But that new character never came. I can only think of one other unresolved storyline from that time period, and that's the BeLieF theft. To my knowledge, we STILL don't know who stole it. (My money is on Clarke though.) I think RM's Ridge had a certain charm and although he had his own "acting style" he was the right type for the character. He had that playful, arrogant vibe and there were certain details that were just so "Ridge". Like the way he would walk into a room like he was God's gift to whoever was in the room (often accompanied by a saxophone theme). Or his way of always sitting down on a chair by throwing one leg over it like it was the back of a horse. TK just doesn't have any "Ridge-y-ness" to him. He is way too serious a character.

My feelings exactly. I tend to watch the show by catching up every two months or so and it feels like a chore for the most part. And I would stop watching if it wasn't for the nostalgia factor. The whole thing is absolutely incomprehensible to me - how can a show that was so good in the 80s and 90s be so completely ruined now? Even though the HW hasn't changed since 1993? I have been watching a lot of classic episodes lately (80s) and two things really stand out to me - the characterization and the long term plot structure. In the early days of the show, it was very obvious that the writers had a plan that stretched many months (sometimes even years) into the future. They KNEW what story they wanted to tell. And they KNEW their characters - as a result, when I watch 80s episodes I can honestly say there is not one character I don't like. They are all interesting and multi-layered and every one of them has a believable motivation, a developed personality and well-established relationships with other characters. Each and every major character has their own storyline and they all progress steadily at the same time - it's really like watching a contrapuntal piece of music. Today, all of that is lost. There is barely even any rudimentary storytelling and characterization left. I am sure some of it has to do with budget, but that can't explain all of it, especially not the dumbed down writing. I am trying to pinpoint when it started going downhill and I think somewhere around the early 00s is when things started deteriorating. And the show became unrecognizable somewhere around the time Susan Flannery left. The whole thing is very frustrating to watch because it wouldn't take all that much to get the show back on track, if someone just bothered to do it. Improve the writing and everything improves. The actors and characters have potential. The basic storyline ideas often have potential as well. It's just that the writing kills everything because nothing is ever developed.