Jump to content

Should Noah and Luke be written off ATWT??


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I'm split. I don't think Luke and Noah add anything to the show. But to be clear, I don't think I'd miss any of the twenty-somethings on the show right now.

But neither do I want to deal with the backlash should they be axed. Personally, I think a lot of the hype surrounding Nuke was manufactured by their fanbase. I don't think X number of articles in papers from Hoboken to Boise translates into "public interest" in a minor role in a largely scoffed at genre.

I do think Forbes March is right---ATWT is screwed any way they turn. Their story doesn't draw new viewers to the rest of the show, it risks turning off a portion of the viewers who are invested in the show, and the writing is too hit and miss to overcome either anyway. It's even hard to feel sorry for them---they said time and time again that this couple would be "treated just like any other couple", and the tiny spark they created became a firestorm that bit them in the ass when they couldn't deliver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 26
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Scott DeFreitas better actor than Van Hansis? Sorry, he was unconvincing and awkward in all the old clips that I've seen, and was just okay when I was watching ATWT in 1999-2000 during the Denise story (I came over because of AW being canceled).

They shouldn't have eliminated Andy from the show, but DeFreitas was no great actor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, I'm going to have to agree to disagree, I think he was a good actor who brought amazing heart to all of his stories, from his romances, to his family scenes, to his battle with the bottle. He wasn't Olivier, but he had chemistry with everyone and fit in with the fabric of Oakdale, and that's what ATWT used to be about. I miss him to this day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I thought DeFreitas acted like he was in a stage play, talked too loud, made eyes, dramatic awkward gestures. I would welcome a return but if Van and Jake are going to be called worse actors, I'm going to say what I really think.

But yeah, we'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well if he did..which I think he didnt...Van does the same damn thing...LOL...and so does walking zombie Silbermann except he doesnt talk loud ...he just mumbles his words....lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

For me it's not necessarily either/or. ATWT used to have acting coaches, they used to have top notch writing and production. P&G used to care.

I mean they had dud actors back then too, but really when I look at the show now I'm sometimes surprised that the acting is even as decent as it is. I still think soaps get a bad wrap about their acting. There are only a few where the level of acting shocks me in a bad way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh, God....hasn't it been two years yet? It seems like forfriggin'ever.

I'm sure someone would be offended if Noah and Luke were having hot monkey like Lily or Meg sex...you'd be surprised how conservative some of the viewership is---I've heard more anti-abortion talk than I thought I would during Libby's pregnancy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There is always someone who will be offended but that doesn't mean they will leave.IMHO viewers are more likely to leave out of boredom. But I don't think most Luke and Noah fans are expecting tons of full blown love scenes. There are ways to make Nuke more romantic and sexual without showing them having sex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There's a difference between vets and legacy characters. All those you named (except for Iva...at least IMO) are vets who have already have a legacy left on the show should they be written out any time soon. Hell, I guess I'd include Iva since she's really Lily's "mutha." I think of a legacy character as a character who represents a bygone era of the show and also has more "stages" left in their...err...characterhood. Especially characters we've seen as children/teens. Luke, Paul, Andy, Emily, Jennifer, Will, Casey, Alison, etc, would all be legacy characters. Barbara still counts because she's not at the age of characters like Bob and Kim, and definitely not at the age of a character like Nancy, though I doubt anyone's gonna get the chance to be that age on this show again.

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 a way, it's a shame that Lynne Adams decided to leave the show when she did, because I think Mike and Leslie were positioned very well to become GL's tentpole couple.
    • Correct. Lynne Adams (Leslie) decided she wanted to leave the show, as Leslie hadn't been given much to do since Adams returned as Leslie in 1973 (and now everyone can witness her first scene returning as Leslie in 1973 on YT - unreal) I don't think the Dobsons tried to stop that from happening, as I think they wanted Mike single again. I agree, @DeeVee - they should have let Mike and Leslie have a child together. I wonder it they thought it would be too strange to have two siblings that could also be cousins 

      Please register in order to view this content

      . As far as Ed and Holly go, at least they allowed Ed to show up at the end of TGL and take Holly on a "trip around the world". IMHO, I don't think Peter Simon had as much chemistry with Maureen Garrett as Mart Hulswit had, but I'm glad the show gave them a final scene together.
    • IF this gets a renewal I can't see LY sticking around    
    • Well, I'm glad to know Devane and I are on the same wavelength, lol.  But seriously.  I don't believe there's any other word to describe the machinations that the producers constructed in the name of keeping Greg and Paige apart.  Greg and Paige made Sam and Diane look mature by comparison! Which would have been just as well, since a character like Greg Sumner didn't really belong in the '90's, as the storyline with the task force proved only too well.  If KL had returned for another season, it would've needed a MASSIVE overhaul, including ditching Greg, Paige, Claudia and Anne.  Mack and Karen would've needed to be there for the sake of continuity; and maybe some mileage could've been gained from exploring Gary's new life as a widowed single father.  (I still would've loved to bring back Julie Harris and have Lilimae help Gary take care of the twins).  Otherwise, it would've been a new era for KL, one without The Sumner Group, or stories like Wolfbridge and Empire Valley.
    • This is "Last Call" for anyone who wants to download a copy of any of these Award show files. Daytime Emmys, Full Episodes: 1982, .. 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, .. 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 Daytime Emmys, Extras or Partials: 1990 1998 SOD Awards
    • What he said. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Didn't she know when she involved him in her scheme, before the character was introduced? I thought she tracked down Janice's son and poisoned his mind against Rachel in order to get him on board.  It's a bit confusing because in the summer of 1988 we get a lot of Drew Marsten (whom I had forgotten was Nicole's ex) and mentions of a mysterious Countess and also Reginald working to undermine Cory. Drew disappears around the same time Evan arrives, and gradually we get the reveals that he is in cahoots with Iris, Janice's son, etc. 
    • I apply totally different standards. For Felicia & anyone else in Bay City it's reel as opposed to out here in the universe where it's real.  
    • And that is why western civilization is screwed up with organized religion. but thats for another board. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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