Videnbas

1 hour ago, PSPCindy said:

The actor playing Anthony fit the dark character hiding under a handsome, charming face to a tee.  Anthony was also a talented designer.  Sally fell hard for him but she was always a sucker for a pretty face-Bucky Boy anyone?  It was kind of sad how infatuated she was with him, even moving him in with her.  Anthony went to a really dark place and it was rather shocking.  I liked Ivana but they did a 180 on her character to fit Anthony's evil plans. Michael Sabatino was perfect for this part and Anthony drove a lot of story for a while.

I still miss the fashion aspect of the stories at B&B.  I have heard that they are too expensive to the show but when they were eliminated it took the show to the lowest common denominator-triangles and endless partner swapping, often seeming incestuous due to the small cast. 

Classic B&B is a treat.  Current B&B-not so much.

I can imagine they were expensive to shoot. Classic B&B fashion shows used to have a lot of extras, choreography, lighting, music, clothes that seemed to have been made especially for the occasion, as well as feature a large part of the cast. I just watched Felicia's fashion show on the official Youtube account and it was more like a dance performance.

4 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

Considering the actor had finished up a 3 year stint playing the dark Lawerence on Days right before joining BB...there was some talk whether he was another Lawrence or a nice character.

In fact, critics in 1994 thought he was wasted because there seemed to be no direction with the character.  However I do agree that he was a dark character pretending not to be.  Leading Sally on then going to Macy when she's single thus causing mother/daughter angst.

Meanwhile, Ivana was moved out of the Dylan/Jessica orbit and paired with a newly single Thorne.  So maybe 1994 was a set up year for this tale to climax in 1995.

 

Yes, I agree with the "dark character pretending not to be" assessment. It is kind of telling that he is the ONLY character who managed to drive a serious wedge between Sally and Macy - while acting perfectly charming to both of them.

And how his actions force "angelic" characters like Keith and Darla to do damage control.

It's interesting that he just came from playing a dark character on another soap - I didn't know that! But then it makes sense that the writers may have had something dark in mind for him when casting the actor. 

9 minutes ago, Aback said:

I enjoyed reading your thoughts tremendously. Thank you for taking the time to post it.

I find the "palindrome" point particularly fascinating. Wonder if that was deliberate. I tend to think they might have had a 2-year plan for Anthony - but the palindrome just happened.

Yes, I am not saying all of this was intentional - some of it may have been a consequence of simply the character being kept consistent enough that he had certain behaviors that he displayed more than once. And it's also possible that certain events that were not meant as foreshadowing at the time were remembered in later storylines and retroactively became foreshadowing. Nevertheless, it's pretty neat the way it turned out. At first I thought I might just be inventing patterns that weren't there, but then when very specific and fairly unusual plot points like "feigning grief as a morbid kind of flirting" or "scheming to see the girl naked by manipulating one's own design" happened twice, it did feel like a conscious choice (after all, this kind of foreshadowing/reintegration of past plot elements is very common in fiction). And of course the "bookend" symmetry between Anthony's first scenes and his last must have been deliberate as he even reminisced about the former during the latter.

5 hours ago, divinemotion said:

Clark had the only good male storylines but for the first 3 4 years. Bb is a female driven show. Brooke and Stephanie I think drove 95 percent of the main main storylines. 

True - for the most part, the men on B&B tend to be supporting characters in the women's storylines. But it's the women who have most of the agency and whose point of view is usually explored. I still think there have been a fair amount of interesting male characters (and Clarke is definitely one of them) but they are rarely as "deep" or layered as the women and often fill a single plot function whereas the women are a lot more well-developed.

31 minutes ago, AbcNbc247 said:

So is he another one of those insufferable B storyline male characters like Mick Savage or Blake Hayes 

I am not quite sure how to answer that. If by B storyline male you mean any male who isn't Eric or Ridge, then, yeah. (Back in the day I heard it described as the "Non-Forrester Male Syndrome", meaning all men who weren't Forresters tended to get backburnered and/or eventually written out.) As for insufferable, I'd say the "A storyline males" are often worse in that regard.

1 hour ago, sheilaforever said:

I started reading because I was super eager for your assessment but then decided against it to remain the most Spoiler-free I can in my rewatch. It dawned to me that I missed/forgot quite a lot from the first half of 1994, so I will reply at a later date. I just reached September 1993, #1628 and James and Anthony are not yet in town.

Yes, I was actually going to delay posting it for a while for that very reason (at least until more posters reached the 1994 episodes), but my enthusiasm got the better of me!

I have always loved Anthony's exit storyline because it was so unusually dark and morbid for B&B, and at the same time I remembered that B&B of the mid 90s was pretty crowded with psychos, not all of whom made sense in terms of previous character history (Sly as he was established as a character in 1992 and 1993 would certainly not have done what he did at the end of his run, and Maggie's turn to the dark side was also pretty unexpected). So naturally I was curious when Anthony was introduced which category he would fall into - the "suddenly randomly out of the blue psycho" or the "psycho all along" category. (Of course, in terms of character development and storytelling, the latter is far more satisfying.) Thus my special attention to Anthony's character development, and possible instances of foreshadowing. (#1701 is the biggest one yet.)

On 7/30/2022 at 7:25 PM, Aback said:

Pleaseeee I want to read it!

Okay, here goes! Anthony Armando - the thesis!  (remember you have been warned)

I am now watching early 1994 episodes (and I have watched a lot of old 1995 clips as well), and I have to say I find the character of Anthony Armando absolutely fascinating because of the way his character arc is structured.

What really sent me down the rabbit hole regarding Anthony was knowing how his story arc in its entirety will play out, and wondering if the writers had his turn to the (very) dark side planned all along, or if it was an afterthought. And the more I see, the more I think they did at least have some idea (or if not, they retraced their steps and made excellent use of character history).

Anthony’s murder of Ivana is, in my opinion, possibly the most evil crime ever committed on this show (even more sadistic and diabolical than any of Sheila’s individual crimes, although of course she beats him in terms of number of victims. But Sheila’s evil is mainly defensive whereas Anthony’s evil is offensive - Sheila is a cornered animal, Anthony is a predator. There is also the element of betrayal - Anthony brutally murdered a woman who loved him and thought that he loved her back - and the way Anthony was not tormented but actually enjoyed thinking about the crime afterwards).

And I found it intriguing to check if there were signs early on in Anthony’s character history that he had this extreme darkness in him. So far, I’d say yes, there are signs but they are subtle - so subtle in fact that they could pass for harmless if one did not know anything about his future storylines. But in hindsight, they become major red flags - Anthony’s arrogance, his emotional manipulation, his casual lies, his offer to show Macy his ”dark side”, his crossing lines without asking for consent. Another dead giveaway early on is how Keith relates to him. Keith has always been portrayed as Macy’s ”guardian angel” - he is an excellent judge of character and sees things as they truly are, and he has always been ”pure” in his intentions towards Macy. The way the show contrasts Keith and Anthony is striking, and does a lot to convince me Anthony was always meant to be nefarious, even ”diabolical”. He is the archetypal Big Bad Wolf right from the start. There are also subtle references to classic myths and literature in his storyline - from Little Red Riding Hood to Shakespeare's Othello.

But what really blew me away was the incredible "mirror symmetry" going on in Anthony's character arc, right from the very beginning. There are so many plot points and details that first occur in Anthony’s introduction storyline, and then return in a more sinister form, in the reverse order, in his exit storyline.

Bear with me...

Anthony’s introduction storyline:
1) Macy and Thorne together (starting point)—>
2) Anthony tries to have his way with Macy in her bedroom (kissing and possibly taking advantage of her sexually) but Thorne’s actions prevent him from succeeding—>
3) Anthony’s big ego makes him convinced Macy likes him although she is really furious with him —>
4) Thorne is adamant that Macy should stay away from Anthony and mentions her putting herself in ”harm’s way”—>
5) Anthony challenges Macy to have a drink with him (reverse psychology to keep her from drinking)—>
6) The "Dead Cat Gambit" - Anthony feigns grief over his (non-existent) dead cat in order to win Macy’s sympathies—>
7) Anthony designs a swimsuit for Macy and manipulates it in order to see Macy with her clothes off against her will—>
8)Anthony appears to become involved with another woman (Sally) but in reality still wants Macy
9) Macy turns Anthony down for Thorne—>
10) Thorne and Macy’s relationship changes (they get a divorce)—>
11) Macy involved with Anthony

Anthony’s exit storyline:
1) Macy involved with Anthony—>
2) Thorne and Macy’s relationship changes in the opposite direction (they get engaged)—>
3) Macy turns Anthony down for Thorne—>
4) Anthony appears to become involved with another woman (Ivana) but in reality still wants Macy
5) Anthony designs a wedding dress for Macy and manipulates it in order to see Macy with her clothes off against her will
6) The "Dead Fiancée Gambit" - Anthony feigns grief over his dead fiancée (whom he himself brutally murdered) in order to win Macy’s sympathies—>
7) Anthony suggests Macy have a drink with him (hoping she will accept)—>
8)Thorne is adamant that Macy should stay away from Anthony and even escapes from prison to get her away from him—>
9) Anthony’s big ego makes him convinced Macy wants to marry him although she really hates him —>
10) Anthony tries to have his way with Macy in her bedroom (taking advantage of her sexually and then killing her) but Thorne’s actions prevent him from succeeding—>
11) Macy and Thorne together (end point)

See the pattern? Anthony’s entire two year run on the show is basically a kind of "palindrome"!

11 hours ago, sheilaforever said:

I couldn't agree more about Karen. Originally supposed to play the Caroline angle as her clone, the writers wisely dropped this and opted to make Karen her own personality. Then, she was supposed to enter the business world but got only three or four episodes were we actually saw her doing business at Spectra. At the same time she was second best option for both Thorne and Connor, mostly insecure about her own sexuality yet she was pushing Brooke to get herself the married man Ridge back. WTF!?

I guess the main cause for failure is that as of January 1993 the latest the writers had zero investment in Karen as a character. She is just there and fitting multiple purposes which contradict each other at times.

Another character which is quite botched is Connor: I have now reached September 1993 and Connor has been in nearly all episodes since his introduction. I had no idea how heavy Brad Bell was pushing this character to the forefront. Right now Connor is even involved in a bitter rivalry with Sheila!? Come 12 months later Connor will be involved in a Statler and Waldorf kind of "relationship" with James Warwick where they talk about Brooke, Taylor and Sheila and totally forget about their own lives. You would never know that Connor was initally the new super alpha male in town. In typical B&B fashion male characters burn out quickly in LA it seems.

 

PS: as of #1621 I experience a tiny bit of discomfort by watching the show: the tone seems to have changed by August 1993. Everyone seems to be bitter with each other. You have Brooke vs. Stephanie and Sally vs. Stephanie which has always been the case. But you also have Connor vs. Sheila and the general atmosphere in LA feels like a typical Aaron Spelling soap. Everybody crosses everbody - I kind of miss the lightheartedness of the Spectras and some good old fun. Macy just had the accident with Kevin and was exposed as an alcoholic doing hidden drinking (which was GOLD!) which makes some wonderful scenes, but naturally it is also rather dark. I'm curious about what's coming up next because Catalina and James Warwick happenend a bit later in my memory and I have no idea what else will be going on.

 

I think Connor didn't become interesting until he was out of Brooke's orbit and hanging out with Karen, Anthony and Macy. Connor and Anthony is the most interesting dynamic I've seen with the Connor character so far (very early 1994).

I think after the point where you're at, the two major things that happen are the introductions of James Warwick and Anthony Armando. Both of these are very welcome additions to the show IMO. And interestingly, they serve the EXACT SAME plot function in two different storylines. It's kind of interesting how Ridge's and Thorne's marriages face almost identical challenges at this point, and how Stephanie gets totally involved in saving Ridge's marriage while refusing to lift a finger to save Thorne's.

(The character of Anthony I find so fascinating I'm going to write a really long and n̶e̶r̶d̶y̶ overanalytical post about him when I have the time. ) 

3 hours ago, Joseph said:

Me Too! Most people don't seem to realize how different From Caroline Karen actually is, of course the quick Glam up Refine Up she got doesn't exactly help, but I really enjoyed Karen, As both a Unsophisticated Girl in the middle of the Super Rich and as The Scheming Rich Girl

I actually think that going back and watching Karen in 1992-1994, the later development of making her a lesbian makes sense. Karen never did seem comfortable with (straight) sex.

And she was really quite different from Caroline, once she got past the phase of trying to transform herself into Caroline.

But on the whole, Karen was strangely out of place on B&B. She never really fit in anywhere. However, I did like that she seemed to have a certain kind of common sense and self-awareness, like ending a relationship if it didn't feel right, and thinking responsibly about intimacy. She seemed to grow into a very "balanced" character. But it seemed like TPTB never quite knew what to do with her. 

20 minutes ago, skebujebu said:

I am just rewatching the 2010-2011 season. It really feels like the last classic season with all the SF, RM and all classic  characters there, even infomous Tawny Moore After that it was all Lope and Hope for years…

I think the final nail in the coffin of the "real" B&B was when SF and RM left in 2012. Stephanie's absence in particular is a void that the show has never been able to fill. She was truly the center of the show. 

39 minutes ago, sheilaforever said:

Good point - it really felt like a series finale type of episode with all the Logans from the show's premiere and some present.

I think a lot came down to one's personal perception of how much you were done with BRIDGE (after 10+ years of constant back and forth) to cheer for THROOKE

I think for me it was more the way the "happy series finale" type scenes in that episode with the voice over and rose petals falling romantically in slow motion were juxtaposed with scenes of a bitter heartbroken Sally over at Spectra. I loved Sally and the Spectras, and Throoke's happy wedding with everyone else celebrating felt kind of like the show was twisting the knife in Sally's heart, while painting her as the unreasonable one for not rejoicing with the others.

2 hours ago, Joseph said:

2001 when Brooke Married Thorne, end that episode and it was very happy ending! The Single Fact Stephanie Gave her away was worthwhile

Right, the voice over did make it feel like the show was ending, I remember that now. (Although Stephanie giving Brooke away felt more like her resigning to the inevitable after being persuaded to attend, rather than Stephanie genuinely accepting Brooke.)

I never did warm up to Brooke and Thorne though - that pairing just left too much destruction in its wake and it was all kind of swept under the rug for their "happily ever after" wedding. So I'm glad the show didn't end with them being end game.

19 minutes ago, kalbir said:

B&B's peak was Sally's arrival through the first half of 1995.

That was exactly what I meant!

The first half of 1995, if I remember correctly, was phenomenal. I think it was probably the most action packed period in the history of the show, with Taylor returning from the dead and revealing herself to everyone, Sheila going completely insane with the dungeon and the goodbye party, and Ivana's murder storyline going on all at once.

Then all those storylines culminated and were resolved within a very short period of time, leaving very little momentum after the summer. I vaguely remember a D storyline involving a triangle between Jessica, Dylan and Maggie, but not much else.

That's why I remember when I watched the entire cast gathered at the Bikini for Thorne and Macy's 1995 wedding I felt almost like the show was ending. There was just nothing very significant left to resolve at that point. Sheila was behind bars, Anthony was behind bars, Ridge had picked a wife, there was a party going on involving every character of the show. I don't recall the show reaching such a natural "end point" before or since.

So, today Dr Finnegan just casually took off his nasal cannula and walked out.

Realistically, that was a dumb move that could literally kill him. Or at the very least cause him to turn blue and collapse right in the middle of his heroic display of defiance.

Finn is a doctor. Surely he knows what it means to need extra oxygen. Maybe he doesn't need it, but he would have to make sure of that before just getting up and leaving.

This is the kind of behavior that makes me think Sheila was right to sedate him because he doesn't seem to have any sense of self preservation.

18 minutes ago, Soapfan8 said:

So how would you all grade 1987,1988,1989,1990,1991,1992,1993 seeing them all in full?

I think all of them are good. Possibly with the best being 1990 and 1993. But all of these years really have good writing and character development, as well as some great storylines. I don't think there are really any bad years in this early era of B&B.

1987 and 1988 have a different feel to the show from 1989 onwards, due to the introduction of Sally and her gang. I personally love the Spectra side of the show.

I think the next "shift" in the show was around 1997/1998 when Amber arrived (I didn't necessarily enjoy Amber, or at least not THAT much of her). But the show was still good, it just didn't have the "magic" of those early years.

Then there was another major shift in 2003 (with Nick and Jackie's introduction) and that's when I feel the show started going downhill.

My favorite era of the show is roughly 1989-1995.

9 minutes ago, sheilaforever said:

# 1616 - this is definitely an episode I have missed out on during its original run

 

Quote of the day goes to Stephanie when Brooke wants to evict her from her office: "I don't quit, bitch!"

Yes, a lot of drama packed into one episode!

I had forgotten just how much of Brooke's Forrester takeover was motivated by her desire for revenge against Stephanie. The whole office thing was nothing more than a power display, there was no other reason for it. And I like this version of Sheila - trying the best she can to play both sides so that she can ultimately gain something for herself.

(By the way, has Sheila's fantasy sequence about Forrester happened yet? It is GOLD! I don't remember which episode it was.)

And it is an interesting change of pace to see the normally so "soft" Thorne SCREAMING at Macy. I think the hospital scenes are the real payoff to the alcoholism storyline.

3 hours ago, PSPCindy said:

The clip of Thorne seeing Macy was actually in Venice.  Thorne was devastated after finding Ridge kissing Brooke in their bed.  It was a huge setup by Ridge and Eric to prevent Throne and Brooke from continuing as a couple.  Eric and Stephanie were at home.  She was recovering from her stroke and in a wheelchair.  This led to the quicky marriage of Thorne and Macy.  The other clip above is where Brooke had gone to visit Thorne for seduction and hid under his bed.  Macy came in the make love with Thorne and discovered Brooke.  The first part of the reveal is hilarious.  Wish I could post it.

Both Venice and Portofino/Camogli were beautiful! The clip of Thorne and Macy by the lighthouse was in Camogli, and the scene with the two of them standing on a bridge in the pouring rain was in Venice. Both those scenes were visually quite stunning.

4 hours ago, sheilaforever said:

Ha!

Birthdays of characters not actually born onscreen are so fluid - and rarely mentioned. I think the bdays of Ridge and Brooke were also mentioned once many years ago.

wasn’t Macys birthday her second wedding to Thorne (in 1995) or so?

I have actually tried while watching the classic episodes to make a list of birth years and birthdays as established or hinted at in dialogue during the early years (before SORASed kids came along and messed up the timeline):

Eric: around 1939?
Stephanie: around 1942?
James Warwick: June 29th, 1957
Ridge: January 28th, 1960
Thorne: 1961 or early 1962
Angela: December 1962
Taylor: Fall 1963
Storm: Fall 1963
Caroline: 1964
Kristen: 1964
Macy: October 23rd, 1965
Brooke: late 1965 or early 1966
Darla: Spring 1967 or 1968 (she and Clarke(?) couldn't agree on her age at her birthday party in 1992)
Felicia: 1968?
Donna: late 1968 or early 1969
Katie: Spring 1970

(I don't include the kids born on screen because their ages will never make sense.)

I was wondering if anyone else of the "1993 watchers" has reached James Warwick's introduction storyline yet.

James Warwick really intrigues me because his storyline is such a refreshing change of pace for this soap - it plays out like a psychological whodunit, and he is an unreliable narrator who constantly keeps you guessing as to whether what he is saying is true, true on a metaphorical level, or not true at all. And some of the ”therapy” scenes are truly riveting and beautifully written, almost poetic. I especially liked the "guided imagery" dialogue.

I think the show did a good job portraying a man who is very intelligent and analytical, yet unable to cope with his own emotions and inner demons. There is this ambiguity about him where you don’t know if he’s a victim or a perpetrator until the very last moment. In a way, he is a more sophisticated version of Jake Maclaine (and the parallels between the two storylines are really very striking). James’s confrontation with his father in Scotland had me at the edge of my seat.

At the moment, I don't recall if James was ever this interesting again after he was "cured" of his psychological problems.

Li looks like she was raised by wolves.

That must have been some crash.

So Sheila (not for lack of trying) actually did manage NOT to kill anyone this time.

1 hour ago, Liberty City said:

Throne's return should have had him teaming with Spectra to overtake Forrester, instead of short-term pining for Brooke.

Absolutely. Thorne's history with the Spectras went a lot deeper than his history with Brooke. And since they made him a designer it would have been natural for that to play into his storyline. 

22 minutes ago, yrfan1983 said:

That was a shocking moment! I feared for poor l'il Eric, to be in proximity to his psychotic soon-to-be stepmother.

With Sheila, maybe it's not OOC, because she is not sane. Maybe in summer '92 she convinced herself she had only pure love for the baby, but 6 months later, her true feelings emerged.

PS - in 1713, Sheila asked Molly why her friends can't help her, and Molly explains why her friends can't help, but I was disappointed when Molly named the friends, but they weren't Naomi and Doris 

I thought her behavior with Eric Jr before the wedding was OOC. Even if she is insane, she can still have a consistent personality, and that moment didn't quite fit. Sheila has always had an obsessive fondness for babies and small children. She would not have an "evil stepmother" moment - she would direct her aggression towards the real mother, not the child. 

2 hours ago, sheilaforever said:

I'm totally blinked out that KB was on maternity leave in 1994. Hopefully it was not too long - unlike her 1998 maternity leave which basically killed all storyline moment at the Psycho Villa - with Barbara Crampton walking out after contract expired and never giving proper resolution to the whole Maggie/James/Sheila story. I tend to believe that Brad Bell wrote out the entire crowd within the next 12 months because Amber/Rick clicked and it was far too simple to write for Brooke/Ridge/Taylor/Pierce than to come up with some good story for Sheila afterwards...

Jack is murky character at best. I had no problem with Chris Robinson as Rick Webber on GH but his Jack was never "it" for me. Taylor is one of those characters who does not need her parents in town because she is sane and smart. Jack was only beneficial to Zach but as soon as young Mr. Hamilton was dropped, there was no need for him either. The grandparents triangle was, IMO one of those stories you could tell on Y&R because it is 40 minutes of airtime, but on a 20 minute show having 60+ character "getting it on" kind of kills all interest of a young demographic in the entire show. Seems like Brad Bell thought so, too, because the later triangles with Eric (1995) and Massimo (2001) were equally short-lived. That's why those sex-pot pairings with Lauren, Donna and Quinn made Eric seem like a horndog but made much better storylines.

I think part of the reason why these triangles never worked was that as wonderful as Susan Flannery is, she did NOT have romantic chemistry with any of her co-stars. Stephanie and Eric worked as an "old married couple" but she was never believable as "falling in love" with someone new, because the spark and excitement of "new love" was just not in Stephanie's character. Sally had it, and Jackie had it, because they were both very sensual characters, but scenes like Stephanie and Jack going skinny dipping in the pool simply did not ring true on any level. 

1 hour ago, sheilaforever said:

Now that I moved on to #1590 I've to say that your assessment is spot on. For the past 20-30 episodes Macy and/or someone else from the Spectra orbit was feautured in basically in at least every second episodes. What a difference it made! Suddenly, one is invested in all of this. Keith doing research on alcoholism, Macy hitting rock bottom with a brawl at Bikini Bar, Thorne "saving" Macy in an alley, Thorne being there for Macy but she is moving in with Darla, Macy denying that she is an alcholic but willing to get better, Sally's beachelorette party etc. etc. etc. Somehow the grandparents triangle, as SOD or some other magazine once called it, is heavily under-utilised with all of them but Jack too absorbed in the other BIG stories - Stephanie in BeLieF or Sally in Macy's alcoholism storyline -, but all actors involved are doing great work.

Yeah, Macy's storyline gets better and better once they start playing all the beats. I actually think they did a good job of making "manic overconfidently sober" Macy somehow more unsettling than "passed out drunk" Macy.

LOL, "the grandparents triangle" is a wonderful name!

I have to say that my opinion of both Stephanie and Taylor went down a bit because of their disrespect of Sally's engagement to Jack. Taylor was encouraging her father to reconnect with Stephanie, and Stephanie and Jack kissed on his wedding day to Sally. Of course Jack still did have feelings for Stephanie, but it just strikes me that neither Taylor nor Stephanie would accept another woman getting close to their fiancé so close to the wedding, and yet they think it's okay to do it to another engaged woman because the marriage hasn't happened yet. But of course this was "only" Sally Spectra's wedding... I kind of think it ties into the general contempt that Stephanie has always had for Sally and her family.

As for Jack, I feel he starts losing momentum as a character right about here. He was the most interesting to me during the poker storyline, and he had some moments with Sally, but Jack and Stephanie just don't generate any sparks to me - they really do have a, well, geriatric feel to them. And the dynamic between him and Taylor is really not that interesting now that their conflict is resolved. I have to say Jack is one character I didn't miss at all once he faded into the background.