Jump to content

GH: June Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

There is no justification for Luke has become. Why would Lucky regret raising kids that are not biological his? Does Mac regret raising Robin, Maxie and Georgie? Children are not responsible for the circumstances of their conception. Loving a child can never cause regret unless you are man without a soul like Luke. Besides Lucky is a young man who still may have his own biological children with Liz or with another woman, not that I think that he would love them more than Cameron and Jake. Bet Luke would have no interest in his biological grand children. Anyway this is all a smokescreen so that TG can spew his hatred all things Luke and Laura and their offspring. Hell, Luke doesn't even like Lulu that much more than he likes Lucky. She is too judgmental and clingy which seems conveniently forgotten for plot purposes. All Luke wants a clone like Boba Fett. It is embarrassing to watch. On some level, GH knows this which is why they are trying so hard to whitewash the criticism and make Lucky back down.

Nikolas and Rebecca are creepy and repulsive. No more words needed to describe that relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 268
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

He may not but Liz was wrong for creating a smokescreen in which Lucky felt responsible for the child and thought that the child Liz was carrying was his. Now Lucky was tricked into loving said child because his mother lied to him and he was duped. He was tricked into loving a child that wasn't his and now he feels responsible for said child and it was wrong for Liz to put him in that position.

Why is it expected for the other spouse to love children that aren't there's biologically? Especially as a result of cheating? Why are they expected to HAVE to support children that aren't their own? Especially when the paternity was lied about?

I think that is unbelievably unfair to have Lucky expect to love and support these children that he really doesn't have a legal obligation to. Of course now that he and Liz are back together and now that her lies are exposed and she is out of Jasonland and she loves Lucky again which means Lucky has to love Liz and all of her baggage and support them and love them, clothe them, etc. but if they were to seperate he would still feel obligation to those kids. He would still love them and that's the point I think. He is trapped. The trap with Jake was made all the more worse because he loved Jake and thought he was his.

Lucky also doesn't legally have rights to any of those kids.

They are never going to let Lucky have his own kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't think Lucky has felt trapped. He has always been close to Cameron and even when he was not with Liz, even when they were barely civil, he told her he'd always be a father to Jake.

Luke didn't say, "I feel sorry for Lucky, he has to raise children who don't have his DNA/he has to raise a son he was tricked into thinking was his," he said Lucky was a failure because he's raising other men's children. At least this explains why he no longer has a relationship with Bobbie -- she must also be a failure.

Lucky is the whipping boy for various Guza favorites, even if he does have a kid, they'd just turn this against him. Look at how much good it did AJ to have his own child.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Lucky doesnt care if Cam is his. He is his father, in every way that matters. Its one of the few good thing about his character, IMHO.

as for Jake... thats just a mess.

But whatever, as soon as KMC leaves and the show kills Robin they will go forward with Liz/Patrick and they will raise the boys and emma. We all know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Really? I don't like Will on DAYS, I find the actor completely stiff and boring. New Michael, on the other hand, is really good. Drew Garrett just fit right in on his first day at GH. He can cry on cue, and he has really good screen chemistry with his acting partners on the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's hard to be excited about new talent on GH because the writing is so bad the talent almost always flickers away in favor of mannerisms and phoning it in. At one time, Tyler Christopher was a good actor. So was Maurice Benard. Steve Burton had his moments.

Now that GH has their next generation of misogynist tantrum throwers at center stage, I wonder if they may finally be easing Sonny or Jason out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah, let's just hope Drew Garrett isn't another Julie Marie Berman, who started out with so much promise and was quite good, but then became lazy, horrible and over-exposed on this show.

Garrett has a really natural presense on screen though, and I like that he's not the typical looking soap teen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I dont find him stiff and boring at all, esp in the past month i think he has relaxed and come into his own and his growing a lot from day to day.

Thing is Bermans till has it, she even pulls it out from time to time. But shes just sooo lazy all the time.

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

    • That would have made sense. Did all these characters get dropped when DePriest left or had they already been dropped?
    • The other issue with Missy: in June 2020, she "liked" some social media posts by Candace Owens -- things Candace said that were against Black Lives Matter.  That is described here https://tvline.com/news/melissa-reeves-racism-days-of-our-lives-instagram-controversy-2894568/ I don't know if that was ever resolved.
    • She appeared onscreen not long after Rose Livingston and Sara Montaigne, and we found out that Sara was Rose's estranged daughter. I wonder whether Peggy might have been part of that family group -- or else they were just juggling a few different potential mysteries so that they could develop whatever seemed to be getting the best response from the audience. They didn't do anything much with Rose and Sara really either. Maybe Rose would have become more prominent if Rachel and Mac had split up over Mitch, or if Sara had really flourished. In some ways I can picture Cheryl being affected by MJ's prostitution similarly to how Josie was distressed by finding out about Sharlene. But I can also see that Josie as a Frame being involved with Matthew would have different stakes for Rachel and Sharlene than Cheryl being involved with Scott. I do think the solution for Cheryl would have had to be a badder boy than Scott -- either a real bad boy who would do her wrong, or the kind of bad boy (not Chad!!!) who is essentially misunderstood and other people just don't understand. Cheryl would also have been better off with some friends her own age. Matthew and Josie benefited a bit from having other teenagers to interact with.
    • Sally Spencer was a decent actress, but the writing destroyed the "M.J." that Kathleen Layman had built. Layman had a quiet strength about her, and she and Osburn really felt like sisters. Spencer's character should have been either an unmentioned sister, or maybe Jake's that grew up close to Kathleen, M.J. and the rest, but was away for a few years before joining the force. Kristen Marie was o.k., but I always got a mousier vibe from her. Being pigeon-holed with Scott for most of the run hurt things for her, as well.  The Loves were also underserved between Rhonda Lewin and Philece Sampler. Philece would have been better as Nicole. Thank goodness Anne Heche  showed up for the next round of auditions. Christopher Holder was mediocre as Peter, but given a shot, I think Marcus Smythe could have stuck around for a while.  I would have had Peggy Lazarus be a Frame -- possibly an ex-wife for Vince with an agenda. Smythe and Hollen had  a fun chemistry that could have kept the two around.. Bringing recasts for  Cheryl and Ben back mixing it up with other Frames. Corys, Lawrences at the time might have kept all the families stronger. 
    • shoot...he said in that Locher room with Krista. I think he met her before that---she was doing Broadway and they had mutual friends or an agent maybe?
    • Yes. And I assume he met Mary Ellen Stuart at GL.
    • That's an odd coincidence. Yeah, Roger would turn anything he could to his advantage. At the time, he's just taking the pictures to bank leverage over Reva, Billy or the Lewises.  I'm kinda squeamish about 1986 episodes myself. I'd love to hear the original version of Ross/Vanessa/Dinah, but the Cain story is bad, and I don't want Billy and Vanessa to break up.
    • Eeek. I didn't know this either! I will say, though, even though they skimmed over a lot of Roger's past, I will give them props for not trying to turn him into a hero. Yeah, I was hoping we would get more 1986 episodes than were available on YT before, but now I'm wondering if I really want to see that. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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