Jump to content

B&B: Is ANYONE on Brooke's Side These Days?!


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I've loved Brooke since Day One because she seemed to be a Nikki Reed Newman in-training.

However, over the years, Bradley Bell has really trashed her character. Obviously, Brooke used her sex appeal to marry Eric and try and lure Ridge, etc., but in the early years she was not the Resident Slut of the show. Rather, she was doing things that other characters (Eric, Ridge, Caroline, Stephanie, Sheila, even Taylor -- who, like Caroline, fell in love with Ridge while she was still married to somebody else) were also doing.

Bradley Bell, however, cannot write two- (let alone three-) dimensional characters. So he eventually went with the Brooke = Slut paradigm and stuck with that. Mainly because he knew that KKL could pull it off. Sometimes I wish that KKL had complained a little more about certain SLs. Breacon being one of them. Rushing to beg for Ridge's love every 20 seconds being another.

Truth be told, Bridge was ruined the character of both Brooke and Ridge. And having Brooke jump all over Nick is fast ruining Brick for me. I don't know. I haven't watched the show in over a month. I'm bored with Brooke's same-old same-old SLs. I guess you could call me a KKL fan because I think she makes lemonade out of lemons. But Brooke? She's going to need a SL AWAY from any men to rebuild this character and find her spark, independence and intelligence again, because it has been FAR too long since we saw any of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 19
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I couldn't put it better myself. The writing for the character has always been so jarring with Brad Bell that it's difficult to make a moral judgement about the Brooke character. Every time Brooke finds herself without a storyline, she's suddenly shoved into hypersexual mode and attempts to seduce another woman's man. That's not who the character was when B&B started and it's boring to watch over and over and over again.

Though Breacon was the worst example of this, it can be traced back to around 2001 when Massimo first joined and KKL had her eye lift (all irrelevant points but just giving a frame of reference). Until that point, the romance with Thorne had been written fairly realistically even if the breakdown of the marriage was unrealistic. I lost count of the number of times Brad hammered home that Brooke loved Thorne and would never ever go after Ridge again. It was a new beginning. Ha. Soon enough she began to turn into this sinister Sheila-esque character out to get Ridge and ended up being dropped on her head off the top of the Eiffel Tower. This started 6+ years of ridiculous stories that have only been salvaged by KKL being such a great actress.

Recently, other sections of the show have been working but Brooke is still stuck in the usual quagmire. I just hope that the current breakdown story teamed with Kay Alden's influence gives KKL something different to get her teeth into. She must be bored shitless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Those are great ideas. That could adapt the whole claim that Gus was meant to be Rita's son. A child born of Ed and Rita and influenced by Roger would be great drama. I should probably have Philip's long-lost son be mid-twenties to make sure he's in a different peer group than Lizzie. 
    • Not to mention, there are an equal number of men versus women in each opening: seven women and five men (including the core four Duprees).
    • Well, the head writer obviously knows nothing about writing romance.  He writes couples, but there is nothing romantic about them.  They just pair-up for a year or so, and then move on to somebody else.   He needs to give us a couple of long-term romantic pairings that struggle to get together, and make mistakes despite their deep love for one another -- couples like Victor and Nicki used to be, or like Doug and Julie, Bill and Laura, Alice and Steve, Rachel and Mac, Holden and Lilly, Tara and Phil, etc, etc.   Everything this dude writes is so superficial and lacks any kind of depth.  Even his silly business plots aren't really plots -- they are just musical chairs for who is CEO here, or there, and then over there.  
    • @P.J. No, you are not alone in this. I agree, the writers have overused "I'm a Dupree." I get it, but if they could pace themselves and use the term at more pivotal moments, I believe it would have more impact. Right now, they turn me off. A part of it is that they went the opposite way I felt they should have with the core four, Anita should be our favorite character, and I am sorry she is at the bottom of my list. Why do I care more for Nicole, the daughter who has everything, over Dani, the underdog? Like I said, it's an odd setup that I am getting used to.  I look forward to the in-laws interacting more and bonding away from the Duprees. I already root for Bill and Bradley, I see myself warming up to New Ted soon. 
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • A proper recast for Alex, who pulls the strings behind the scenes (and doesnt HATE Amanda like MarjAlex did) would be great..at that point I see her having her fingers in the pie just to make sure it all doesnt go to hell. My rival for Phillip would be my fan fiction of a kid of Ed and Ritas. Somehow Roger got a hold of him, made him think he was Alan's kid ( I would think Rita would push him as someone who could get a piece of the Spaulding) and secretly raised him to HATE Spaulding and work to take them all down...of course the truth comes out that he is Ed's kid, so we have a "bad" Bauer who is Phillip's match, and Rick is stuck in the middle trying to make a relationship with the brother who HATEs his best bud.
    • Does anyone know what happened to her post-RH? She seemed to evaporate after she left the show. Which is why I can believe she said negative things about the show--maybe it got her labeled as "difificult?" I thought she was a very good actress. I liked her performance as Siobhan. She had really good chemistry with Michael Levin. IMO, they were a bit gutless not to go for a Jack/Siobhan romance after Mary was killed off.
    • You might be going crazy and overthinking, because that's not how it goes.  Right now, it's the Hamiltons versus the Richardsons in the openings, with Alex Alegria/Buglioli/Ben Gavin with the Richardsons (Opening B), while Jen Jacob is with the Hamiltons (Opening A). Opening A: Brandon Claybon Timon Kyle Durrett Marquita Goings Jibre Hordges Jen Jacob Mike Manning RhonniRose Mantilla Arielle Prepetit Opening B: Alex Alegria Lauren Buglioli Sean Freeman Ben Gavin Trisha Mann-Grant Ambyr Michelle Colby Muhammad Keith D. Robinson By your reasoning, the opening should be (and would make zero sense): Opening A: Alex Alegria Lauren Buglioli Brandon Claybon Timon Kyle Durrett Sean Freeman Ben Gavin Marquita Goings Jibre Hordges Opening B: Jen Jacob Trisha Mann-Grant Mike Manning RhonniRose Mantilla Ambry Michelle Colby Muhammad Keith D. Robinson Arielle Prepetit
    • Oh yes, I still remember that. But I'm much kinder to David Henesy than you are overall.
    • I just finished the Locher Room Texas reunion.  I really enjoyed it.  I love that the actors have such fond memories of the time they spent working on Texas and with each other.  It is really special and unique.  Kin was being Kin.  He was moving the camera around or he was constantly moving, at one point he is completely in the dark, then you can't hear him.  lol.  He is like a hyper child.   And as I suspected Alan admitted he has not read Tom Lisanti's book.  It is lazy and unprofessional for him to not have done so before speaking with this group.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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