Jump to content

GH: Michael Logan's Interview With Jonathan Jackson


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

The last answer is just so wrong. HIS connection to the role of Lucky and HIS fans?? It's been 10 years. He's not kid anymore. Things change. Fans change. Fans leave.

And please ABCD just be honest for once...Greg Vaughan was fired!!!

I guess Nathan Parson just lost his best friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Not that I watch GH, but I hope he's dropped that whole aping Christian Slater thing where he talks in his throat and his voice is all clicky.

It's strange because his Lucky was so very successful, moreso than say Nathan Fillion's Joey whose successors also showed a noticeable physical change. Don Jeffcoat and blond twin boy were so hard (impossible) for me to wrap my brain around as Joey, and when Nathan came back it was like all was right with the world. I just don't think it'll work the same for JJ... at least not initially. His teeny bopper fans in 1997 are grown now, many of them probably don't even watch anymore. It remains to be seen, but I'm willing to guess that what made teenaged JJ appealing to girls won't exactly translate to a man in his twenties. Female fans want their men to be like GV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I hear you, but even in LD's case, youth was on his side. Of course he's had a super successful career, but just watching him in the kind of role he continues to play, there's this thread of that Tiger Beat boy the girls fell mad for playing grown up. As the face gets fatter, the eyes get more lined, I really don't think fans want to see LD grow up. It's the difference between "golden boy" actors like him or JJ, and actors like Paul Newman and the men who've played Bond. Just different types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't think it will matter that much because female fans aren't a priority for GH. The show is anti-good looking men, and anti-female.

The question I have is whether JJ is going to get bogged down in the tic-laden Master Thespian stuff he and Tony had a tendency to do, and whether they will make Lucky the same waste of space they have made their favorite leading men into. Wendy Riche was there for JJ's entire run. The type of young man Lucky was under that regime does not exist on GH now. Now, if Liz had been raped, Lucky would have slept with Sarah to help him get over the burden of a girl who was damaged goods. That's how GH sees rape now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't even know what is left of the Spencers and the Cassadines. I think he happily destroyed both of those families, and that legacy, as some type of spite move because he only cared about them when JJ was around.

I guess he can rebuild them (I'm sure we'll be getting some new, very very scary Cassadines soon), but by the time he wrote JJ's Lucky out, Lucky was starting work for the mob. I won't be surprised if we get that again.

I wonder if JJ knows that the show had Luke get a big kick out of his Lucky being tortured and brainwashed by Helena.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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