Jump to content

B&B: Interview with SF


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

That's a pretty insightful interview. Then again, I do love Susan Flannery. She really is the Queen of Daytime, IMO. NB's right, if she goes, the industry won't be the same. Honestly, I don'y know what B&B will do. They haven't really made strides to bring B&B into the future or set up "tent-pole character" for that future. Yet.

LOL at bitch, bitch, slap, slap! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

god what a boring interview!

you'd think he'd come up with something more exciting, considering that la flannery has announced her retirement. but nope! it's the same ol' fan worshipping to the bells.

interview had zero originality. no depth in the interview. just fan worship for the bells and brad bell, a writer who has yet to integrate characters of color on b&b. where were the "tough, journalist" questions? none of the hard questions were asked. for ex. why was stephanie's shooting drummed up to replace further delving into brooke's rape? why has the show virtually dropped something as "great" as stephanie's childhood abuse? why has the show not delved into stephanie's continued abuse of brooke despite stephanie knowing she was abused? where are all the people of color in b&b's la la land?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This isn't an interview with Brad Bell. I don't think it would be appropriate to ambush her with combative questions pertaining to things she has absolutely no control over. I'd love to know why B&B is the whitest, straightest soap on daytime but it wouldn't be the top of my list of questions to ask Susan Flannery.

I do think we'll be getting more interviews like this now that she's decided she's definitely retiring and perhaps she'll touch on more political stuff of her own accord. My only wish is that SF wasn't so "writers write" oriented. I know she was spoiled in her formative soap years with Bill Bell but she's too bright a woman not to sniff out garbage. I'd also love to know the original plans for the rape story because it seems as though it was altered somewhat.

"Bitch, bitch, slap, slap!" :lol: I love that she doesn't take herself too seriously and knows how people watch the show. Same goes for bemoaning the lack of camp since Darlene Conley's passing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I could not agree more.

I dont know about. I am sure we will get some interviews, prob more than she has done .. ever.. but i would be shocked if she much. She likes NB and called him (i think thats what i read), so i think thats the only way we will get a sit down interview.

I disagree. I think the actors should just let writers write. I hate it when soaps do what the actors want. They need to shut up and act more. Unless it is something major and they have a serious issue with it, like SF with the rape, i see no need to speak up. Now dont get me wrong, i love it when stars speakout besucae of the drama and things we learn, but IMHO, they shouldnt speak out unless it is needed (another great example is EZ re Dena)

That made me LMAO!

I love this woman. She is such an all around class act. Her leaving daytime will be felt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

clearly la flannery has power and influence on b&b. the fact that she complained to brad that steffers would be directly responsible for brooke's rape made him alter the storylines. and la flannery directs the show and is a mentor to the younger set.

SO, her opinions on 1. stephanie's abuse of brooke 2. stephanie not delving into her childhood abuse 3. brooke not deliving into her rape and MOST importantly 4. the lack of racial representation on B&B would be enlightening since she is a core cast member.

To ignore these important questions and put filler like "oh i worship you, the bells, blah" is typically lame of branco.

And for branco to claim that La flannery likes him thus she's giving him an interview is HILARIOUS!

how many times has soap opera weekly and sod interviewed her. michael logan interviewed her numerous times. logan was able to interview la flannery about bridget/ridge pairing! the italian media interviewed her during the lake como shoot. heck even mr.smartypants, a b&b website owner and not a "journalist" like branco, interviewed her and kkl! it's on youtube!

typical of branco to pretend to "score" a big interview when a non-journalist like mr.smartypants has a video interview of 2 of b&b's MAIN divas in youtube!

hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love that! I really do because I felt the same way about La Vie En Rose.

I enjoyed reading the interview and it's so weird to actually read an interview that she's leaving. It's not a dream- it's true. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

bakedghoti, if you want a different take on the lack of black representation in Daytime (for example), NB has posted a recent interview he had with James Reynolds (Abe, Days) on this very issue. I imagine you might find it lacking but I thought a lot of the questions -- and, more importantly the answers -- were interesting and thought-provoking.

http://tvguide.sympatico.msn.ca/State+of+t...s_NB.htm?isfa=1

In fact, it sort of made go into "If only I were an EP of a soap" mode. :lol:

Re: SF and this interview, IMO Susan Flannery is a joy to read whoever is giving the interview. I don't know whether she'd be able to act as a proxy for Brad Bell's decisions, regardless of the respect and high regard she wields on set. And I honestly don't see how Brad Bell would ever answer those questions directly himself. I guarantee that 80% of all your questions raised, bakedghoti, would be met with a "This is a half-hour show. I would love to include more stuff about Stephanie's childhood abuse/more people of color, but we just don't have time or space." The standard B&B answer to almost every query. <_<

Regarding Brooke's rape, I think SF said it all. She didn't think the audience would ever forgive Stephanie for going that far. Hence a climbdown (and, implicitly, the hastily put-together Who Shot Stephanie plot) to soften it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

La Flannery is wonderful with interviews...!

SO SO SO SO sad that she will be leaving! My God I hope she changes her mind and that Bell makes her more of a human and less of a cartoon. If there is one reason the character is not a complete joke it's because Flannery has been saving it with her incredible talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Does it get any better than Susan Flannery? Didn't think so.

I think retirement has been in her mind for years now...and if that's what she wants, so be it. I would prefer that she stay and become the Jeanne Cooper of B&B (not that she isn't already) but when I think of B&B I think of Stephanie just like I think of Katherine when I think of Y&R.

Stephanie is most definitely a tent pole character, she is SO necessary...if I were Brad Bell I'd get on my hands and knees, offer Susan Flannery the same money she gets now to only do 30 episodes a year. That way she can be there for sweeps, when she really counts and yet enjoy the benefits of retirement. The only other alternative is to place Brooke in the Stephanie role and cast someone new to be in the Brooke role. That relationship is VERY necessary as well but it doesn't necessarily have to consist of Stephanie vs Brooke. It needs to be Alpha Female vs Alpha Female.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Great interview with Susan! I love all of Nelson's interviews and the actors he picks. Sad to hear Susan is leaving, but I do like that she at least had them change Stephanie being directly responsible for Brooke's rape. That would've been too much. Also loved the Katherine Kelly Lang love.

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

    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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