Jump to content

Faulkner

Members
  • Posts

    21,165
  • Joined

Posts posted by Faulkner

  1. 1 minute ago, Liberty City said:

    The choice for some of the shows they're mentioning for several of the actors. Wow.

    Glad they included Ellen Holly given how recent her passing was. But they pissed Shirley Anne Field.

    Yeah, Rebecca Hotchkiss for Andrea Evans? 

    No Lucinda for Liz Hubbard?

  2. 2 minutes ago, AbcNbc247 said:

    They should have at least gotten a fair chance to win.

    Even though I’ve always thought the categories were somewhat dumb, I get the reason why the Younger Actor/Actress Emmys once existed (to an extent). However, daytime doesn’t have the deep community of young, high-profile performers it once had. Let the very best compete in the Supporting categories with the adults.

  3. 9 minutes ago, BoldRestless said:

    IMO a lot of this has to do with actors looking and acting much younger than in the past (including the way they dress, speak, and are styled). Michael Graziadei is old enough to be Lucy's father, given she was born on screen and only lightly SORASed, but he looks young, and an artist like him would be more likely to be starting his family at his age rather than raising teenagers (as Graziadei himself has young twins). I'd rather see him as a younger leading man than disciplining a wayward teen. Don't get me started on Christel Khalil being given college age twins who looked the same age as her. Her onscreen kids must be in her 20s now which means she'd be potentially playing a grandma the way soaps marry off characters so young. 

    I'm all for de SORAS whenever possible. Like Heather.

     

    Yeah, and like you said, people are waiting longer to have kids these days, yet these soaps always go back to sticking characters with babies for short-term stories and live to regret it. Why saddle Teriah with a kid so soon, for instance? Partially because they can’t or don’t want to tell the other kinds of stories for a young (same-sex) couple. 

  4. This show survives (and likely stays No. 1) by being nostalgic comfort food for an aging audience (no shade) who’ll rage if Victor isn’t played enough (whipped into further fury on social media by Eric Braeden, one of soaps’ few remaining superstars). In an era when you can’t afford to accommodate a sprawling cast, there’s no room for a young group to flourish, especially if they need a few young non-legacy characters in the mix for romantic purposes. They aren’t going to let Bergman, Stafford, Case, Morrow, Heinle, or Thompson go or take a backseat to their kids, especially with the salaries they command. It’s a huge bottleneck.

    The tried-and-true wins, with soaps becoming more risk-averse about unloading popular expensive stars whose time may have come and gone. Newbies are halfheartedy introduced, then jettisoned to refocus on the older stars with a proven track record who command more viewer loyalty. 

    I’m curious how Claire will be integrated. Will she be thrown at Kyle or something? Is a Victoria/Nate/Claire triangle a possibility? This show just feels stuck even when it’s “making moves.”

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy