Members daysfan Posted February 26, 2007 Members Share Posted February 26, 2007 Well, this was expected. *sigh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Posted February 26, 2007 Members Share Posted February 26, 2007 I think it's silly Divins said Chad found the comfort of this person during Rome, and Vincent didn't join the show until 6 months after Rome ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mitchapalooza Posted February 26, 2007 Members Share Posted February 26, 2007 LAME! Wake me when this show ever gets exciting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PhoenixRising05 Posted February 26, 2007 Members Share Posted February 26, 2007 Well, considering Chad being on the down low came out of left field why not make the lover come out of left field too? We all called Vincent weeks ago. If this is supposed to be a shocking story as advertised, make it shocking. Hell, they destroyed so many characters on the show and with Chad they could have at least made it worth it by making the lover someone important. Like King said, it being Vincent is stupid because he just came on the show in December. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JER Soaps Fan Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 Wait a second, this does not add up! That was Chris' hair on the cell phone. There's no way that was Vincent's. Someone, please, confirm. Did NBC fool us, the fans, on PURPOSE? Because that was so Chris' hair. We all know Vincent's hair so I again say this with mostly certainty--there's NO way they were filming Vincent for that clip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JER Soaps Fan Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 But that's the thing--down-low isn't totally out of left field (see "down low" thread for more info) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PhoenixRising05 Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 The fact that Chad, who still wanted Whitney and did everything he could to get her back when they thought they were siblings, all of a sudden started having a male lover is out of left field JSF. Hell, even if he were just cheating it would be out of left field. It's put of character and, therefore, is character destruction. If they are going to do this, they should have at least made it a shock and made the lover a character we actually care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members px780 Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 I'm with JSF- I don't see it as something out of left field. But I think part of that's 'cause I enjoy taking what Passions writers throw up and adding stuff to make it more enjoyable for me. As far as this reveal- it's not nearly the cop out I expected. So good for you, writers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RionPassions Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 I just have to say that some people take Passions more seriously than Passions takes itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R!ck Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 Exactly Rion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members psychofan Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 ICAM. And RionPassions is right. People need to stop taking Passions so seriously. It is the LEAST SERIOUS SOAP IN THE HISTORY OF TELEVISION! It's ment for enjoyment...so just enjoy it and stop criticizing everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members soapfan4life Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 If he is the real son on Eve/Julian that would mean that Chad would be his uncle because Alistar is Chad's father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JER Soaps Fan Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 See, that's the thing. One could argue that his love and SEXUAL desire, maybe even fetish, for his "sister" is the sign of a sexual perversion, which could manifest itself in a sexual addiction to a man. Sexual addiction, coupled with sexual perversion, means the sex is not shared between people; it's all about pleasure. Not the person, or the gender. So I can totally see it. That's why I defend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 Shame on you, PR, for taking a show you've watched for eight years seriously! I mean shame on YOU for wanting some logic and consistency after eight years! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PhoenixRising05 Posted February 27, 2007 Members Share Posted February 27, 2007 ***Hangs head in shame*** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.