Jump to content

Y&R Episodes Discussion, Week of November 2, 2009


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Well, of course my opinion matters to myself. It's why I change the channel if I don't like what I see. LOL!

Which is why (so Toups doesn't come after me with a chainsaw) I didn't change the channel during the Phillip/Chance/Nina scene today. Because I liked it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I like this new Ashley, but I wonder how long will it take until she breaks down again because we all know it will happen once she learns the real paternity of Faith. It's stupid how all these women need to be victimized all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I found there was much to admire on Wednesday actually:

- I liked seeing P3 and Nina, and I liked that we finally got a hint of some of the complexity of the Chance resentment.

- I liked that Chance had a backbone with Chloe. I also liked seeing him in workout gear, LOL.

- I thought Bergman did a great job..."Am I being fired?"

- Emily seems more and more interesting, and I liked her interaction with Bergman and Davidson

- The show is moving RESOLUTELY to business storylines, so I am intrigued by Kay taking Chancellor public

- There is a promise for Neil to be in the thick of this, and he was the only watchable part of the Winters for me yesterday. I cannot watch Lily-Cane, and I'm irritated by how facilely they resolved Devon's romantic crisis OFF CAMERA

Beyond the Winters/Cane, I find myself a little perplexed by why Kay suddenly needs to "make amends". And I am groaning that her lost offspring is coming back into the mix. The show needed to take a break from that for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wonder if Katherine taking the company public means she will lose Chancellor via some sort of takeover or other collapse (she is a woman, after all).

I do like the brief focus on Chance and his parents. I wish Chloe weren't involved, as I often get the feeling this is all about her (and EH tends to get more of the focus in the soap magazine piece about these episodes). I like EH and I like Chloe a lot more when she isn't in the needy stalker role but I'm sorry they didn't do more with the Phillip/Nina/Chance relationships outside of her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I worry about the same. At least they explicitly addressed Jack's Jabot debacle...implying it would be avoided. Clearly, Kay having an undivided 51% or even 60%, or limiting the public shares to non-voting stock, would all be fixes. They acknowledged the economy, but I find the property of an IPO in this climate quite implausible.

My fear is that this will be used to bring Kay's lost child back into the fold...and this won't be a nice person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So are you expecting someone to take over Chancellor and then we find out that this is her long lost child and they are going to ruin her business out of revenge for being given away at birth?

I'd hate to see that, although I would hope this might throw her and Jill together in a positive way, as they fight to save the company. Then again, if it's a man, then he might win Jill over and get her to work with him against Katherine.

All of this could be a very interesting, long storyline...if it was written by someone like Harding Lemay. With Sheffer and Rauch, it scares me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, you offer a compelling rationale for why Kay wouldn't let this rest. And, for the show, it makes some sense that they'd want to get this person in place before Jeanne becomes too infirm to launch the story.

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

    • Jean Hackney was awful and that lead to Ben's exit story which sucked. I liked Ben/Val together. Val's love for Ben was that of a grown woman moving on with her life and Ben's love for Val made him willingly decide to raise another man's children as his own.
    • It wasn't just a GL thing, it was an 80s thing. Opulent party scenes on soaps were very big back then. Even in regular episodes where people are just going to dinner they're dressed up like they're going to see royalty.
    • Just started the May 27 episode and first thing I see is that Willow got an ugly haircut since hte last time i watched   I dont have the context for how everthing went down but I know its all Lulu's fault which make her a bish for what she did to Gio
    • I'm pretty sure he was. But point taken. GL really had a thing for masked and costumed balls/parties in the '80's. Everyone looks fabulous, but those poor costume designers.
    • Still here ^^ Come on Prime Video, it's due to bring it back!
    • Got through the eighth season, and it was... painful. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I agree 100% with both you and Mitch64.  Soaps have been going further and further off-course since 1981. TPTB just don't have a fundamental understanding of what makes soap fans so loyal. I'd love to be on a writing team with both of you.  Maybe we could put together a real soap opera, and show people what its all about...  
    • They weren't in town, but Fletcher worked at the paper (and we saw anniversary Journal headlines for the 50th, although I don't remember if Roger was one of them), and I'd think Alex would have at least heard of him due to the damage he did to Spaulding only a few years before her return to the fold. I know I have to remember it's not real life, of course.
    • YES. The videos being uploaded to Spauldingfield are almost to the point where Alan is reintroduced. They're already talking about the guy he pretends to be, and yes, he returns at a masked ball. In fact, that masked ball is almost beat for beat the same as the masked ball where Alex was introduced! Get a new schtick. Before the Kobe era, that's pretty much what they did. Characters would just show up. Maybe other characters would talk about them for a while--the Chamberlains, Tony, Maureen, Andy, Kelly, Carrie--but then they would just appear. When Hope came back, she simply knocked on Bert's door and said something like, "Hi, Grandma, I'm home again." No particular fanfare. Sometimes it would be a bit dramatic--Jennifer and Morgan were introduced when Mike accidentally crashed into their car, for instance, and Alan and Elizabeth were introduced through Jackie's flashbacks when she was remembering giving up Phillip for adoption. Nola was involved in the Roger return. Roger's return in 1980 was very dramatic, but in a way that made total sense. He was trying to kidnap a child, so dressing up as a clown did not seem crazy. The mask bit was not only silly, it didn't even make sense. Alex never knew him, so there was no reason for him to be masked in front of her. Yeah, she knew OF him, but there's that phenomenon called cognetive dissonance. If you see someone outside of an expected situation, you probably won't recognize them, especially if you never met them in person and think they're dead. I bet a CIA spook like Roger would be familiar with that concept. And he didn't have to be skulking around SF for months. Again, I will cut Long a little slack--it was not her idea to bring back Roger, she was told to do it. She never wrote for the character. It was something that was not planned. They originally went to Zaslow to offer him the role of Alan. He, of course, turned them down because that was a ridiculous idea, but then he suggested coming back as Roger. At such short notice, it's not strange his return was not handled well.
    • Eh...but neither had been in town. Know the name Roger Thorpe? Sure. But Alex would have gone crazy trying to memorize all of Alan's co-conspirators/lovers/wives and Fletch didn't even know Roger/Adam was on the island, IIRC. But who knew or should've known each other is always a little dicey when people come back to town. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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