Members bakedghoti Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 what does everyone think? are the luke/noah characters being discriminated against and not being "allowed" to kiss on air because they are gay? there's an actual petition (for real) and boycott of the show because the 2 are not intimate. what does everyone think? personally, i think there is no bias. the characters were allowed to kiss (quite passionately) before. now they are not because the storyline has BOMBED. they failed. they're a failure. js (noah) is a terrible actor and has effectively dragged down the pairing. vh (luke) is crappy. the writing is less awful than the 2 actors. the people pushing these 2 wanted them to herald more lgbt storylines and characters on daytime. but luke/noah can't do that because they bombed. so no, i don't think there's a bias. i think the actors are terrible, thus there is less screen time for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stenbeck212 Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Oh PLEASE. Roger Howarth has been the WORST actor on the show since he joined it. Nobody denied him kissing or sex scenes because of that or the soul-sucking crap that's written for Paul. The quad story was a bust when it began, and yet lips were meeting for months. You couldn't have watched daytime for long not to know that lame actors are propped for excruciating periods of time despite fan disapproval. It's a BIAS when a couple played by popular actors hasn't kissed on the lips in 6 months in a genre dedicated to the ins and outs of romance. ...With all due respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 so Im assuming they havent had sex yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members leevo64 Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 They haven't kissed, I think, because this is the 21st century equivalent to having african americans as main characters on the shows. They are allowed to be gay, hold hands, talk about being in love, but the network has shied away from the kissing. I think it's ridiculous. As for sex, they have actually discussed it, both seriously and playfully. I hope that we get a kiss one of these days, it's crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bwilsonwriter Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Too bad they wasn't on Passions they would do more than just kissing. JER maybe the crappiest writer in daytime history but he did actually went all the way there with Chadcent (Chad and Vincent). Also Vincent even kissed boldly with another male character SPike. I just don't see Luke and Noah going to do more kissing scenes due to P&G disapproved of it as I am hearing and also they don't want to lose their hardcore, loyal viewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members P.J. Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Do I think the lack of kissing for Nuke is hypocritical? Yes. Even for a secondary couple. I've seen Henry and V practically crawling all over each other anytime they're alone with abandon on several occassions. But I also think Nuke is handled with "kid gloves" in positive ways too. Chances are, you're not going to see them have raging arguments like Jack and Carly, or be unfaithful like the rest of the town. But other than a few characters (maybe Paul, definitely Katie IMO,) ATWT doesn't show that much sex going on anyway. I could count Willen's sex scenes on one hand (thank God..they're painful...) and I believe Maddie and Casey got TWO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sungrey Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Wow. Way to go, P&G. Why didn't you veto this story before it got started if you weren't committed to it? I don't think there's anything wrong with this story at all in terms of its conception. Its execution has been less than perfect. It sounds like P&G wanted to approve it and then see what happened with the viewers before going further. Yikes. Either [!@#$%^&*] or get off the pot in Cincinnati. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 I don't know how anyone can say they bombed. I think ratings went up, their youtube presence was an internet smash, and even ATWT and P&G admit ratings went up since they arrived. It's bias plain and simple. They don't want to show two guys in bed together so they write them like a soap couple from 1958. I think it is disgraceful and P&G practically admits there is a bias in the LA Times article on this very subject. http://www.calendarlive.com/tv/cl-et-atwtw...0,2253193.story So what does that mean except "we know one portion of the audience wants to see them naked and sweaty, but we know there are people who don't want to see this so we take them into account too". Does P&G factor their "different audiences" when showing african american couples? Boy/Girl couples in general? Do they factor in their diverse audience when showing violent topics like rape and murder? Of course not. They just know they have gay hating people out there in TV land and don't want to offend them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Soapsuds Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Nope, they havent had sex. Of course there is bias. They were the hottest couple on ATWT. Then bang nada...nothing. BTW...love your avatar stenbeck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 PGP is a f-u-c-k-i-n-g wimp of a production company. If they know they would OK a storyline involving Luke coming out, then they should've known the natural step would be for him to be in a relationship with another male, and being teens with raging hormones, sex is a natural progression after that. That said, the whole Nuke relationship was terribly written from the get-go. I can only imagine what the storyline would be with better writers, a more daring EP, and a production company and network that backed it wholeheartedly. I guess I can see part of PGP's problem, the P&G soaps typically skew towards a much older and conservative audience and they might not want to push things too far. However, as I said before, if they knew it clashed with some of the views of their audience, then they should've NEVER OK-ed Luke coming out in the first place. Honestly, sometimes I'd just rather PGP get out of the soap business all together. You know they're itching too (despite this who remodeling production crap), I barely recognize ATWT and especially GL anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Ooh, I second the love for stenbeck's avatar! Goutman's been there for almost a decade, time for fresh blood! Passanante should've been gone like yesterday too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted February 25, 2008 Members Share Posted February 25, 2008 Luke & Noah should be treated like other couples on the show, BUT there's a sore lack of romance on this show as it is. IMO Luke & Noah aren't the exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members juppiter Posted February 26, 2008 Members Share Posted February 26, 2008 I agree with whoever said P&G should have vetoed the storyline if they weren't going to go all the way with it. I'd rather have no Luke and Noah than these dumb filler storylines they'll keep giving them since they can't really be a couple. BTW, I am so over Goutman as EP, but I never realized what a handsome guy he is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members All My Shadows Posted February 26, 2008 Members Share Posted February 26, 2008 Copying and pasting what I said on another board... Both sides of the argument are spouting all kinds of BS. PGP is full of **** if they really think they're doing a fair job with Luke and Noah. I saw the Christmas episode, and their little way of panning up to the mistletoe just as the two characters kissed was ridiculous. It was a blatant slap in the face to the couple and their fans. When I stopped watching the show, I'd tune in here and there for good scenes between Holden and Lily, Luke and Noah, and whenever there'd be episodes that heavily featured characters I like (Barbara, Lucinda, Kim and Bob, Lisa, sometimes Will and Gwen), but the stuff with Luke and Noah is moving SO slow, it's barely even moving. Any other couple would have jumped out of the paralysis storyline into something else and then something else, but nope, Luke and Noah are portrayed the same way the older veteran characters are portrayed: they trot the characters out two or three times a month and get mad when the fans aren't satisfied. BUT, on the other hand, GLAAD is full of **** is they truly thought that Luke and Noah's initial storyline was thoughtfully written. We endured a summer of homosexual son with a disapproving father in 2006, with Luke and Damian. Why did we need to see the same damn thing with Noah and the Colonel in 2007? Not to mention, the coupling of the two characters came out of left field and I *still* don't know why they were ever even drawn to each other in the first place. How did Luke go from being annoyed by Noah one day and then "falling for a straight guy" the next day? It made no sense. And as they got closer and closer, we never ever saw Noah's attraction to Luke build. All we got was a kiss out of nowhere. And then bam, they're a couple, Maddie's out the window, and we're supposed to believe they're the next Jeff and Penny. After going through the coming out drama with Luke and his family in 2006, the show really did not need to cook up another story just like it, with a cartoonish villain to match it. I actually stand on my feet and commend them for the amazing, incredible twist of having Noah be Cheri's son. But it's a complete and total shame that the show didn't follow through with that. Cheri and Noah could have moved to town together, and with a mother like Cheri, Noah would have been already out of the closet and proud of who he was. And then he would have met Luke, and it would have been Luke confiding in Noah about coming out to the world and being comfortable in his own skin. And then, their relationship could have been built on something, they would have already had something between them before the kiss and it would have been more than just really juicy. It would have had a purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Soapsuds Posted February 26, 2008 Members Share Posted February 26, 2008 And their current storyline blows. I have no idea where they are going with this mess of a storyline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.