Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Soap Opera Network Community

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Y&R: Week of November 23 Discussion

Featured Replies

  • Member

And by toxic, I meant more than just tone. I mean the piss poor and inconsistent character writing,the inconsistent and sometimes TERRIBLE day to day writing, the reliance of psychos and shock value, crappily paced storytelling, horrendous execution, TERRIBLE casting, and a lot more of the "little things" that make the "big picture" so awful.

We agree on the bolded part.

  • Replies 169
  • Views 18.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Member

Incidentally Sylph, I agree with you on all the bolded elements in your list. I don't personally consider GH (what I have been seeing of it) or Y&R toxic. I have to say that GH is just so compelling to me right now. Indeed, after I watched the Franco body-arranging scenes, I was so disturbed, I watched the Sopranos scene where Adrianna tried to get away from Silvio on her hands and knees as he aimed a gun at her head. Both were disturbing to me...and both were "can't turn your head away" in the sense of "what evil can humans do to one another".

I don't think it is bad or wrong to show this dark, disgusting stuff. It is a lens on an aspect of the human condition. Like Dexter on Showtime. At least GH is vaguely original for daytime.

This is very intriguing.

Would you say it has an influence on you? How does it affect you? How does it affect the millions of viewers watching regularly? I.e. are they to become more violent in their lives? Or something like that? What are the implications, if any, on human psyche if it's constantly exposed to that kind of television? And does it say something about the people if they want more and don't stop watching even if it disgusts them?

  • Member

The whole thing with Sharon and Adam is that it's as hollow as it is toxic. They skipped over the grieving process of Sharon and her baby, because they would rather we just enjoy this "romance" with Adam, and enjoy Nick and Adam chest-bumping.

They did a storyline on Corrie where Tony Gordon had his wife's lover run over. His wife then ran off when she learned the truth, and Tony fell in love with Maria, the widow of the man he'd killed. This was all a bit ridiculous, but there were at least a period of months where Maria became insane with grief and paranoia, sure that Tony had killed her husband. She even went as far as running Tony down. Then finally, when no one would believe her, she gave up, and became full of guilt over her actions. She fell in love with Tony, over time, as he did with her, almost like some sort of conditioning on both their parts.

This story was plot driven and not exactly perfect, but at least they played the beats.

Y&R wants to have it both ways, they want the drama, but they rush through the buildup.

  • Member

This story was plot driven and not exactly perfect, but at least they played the beats.

Y&R wants to have it both ways, they want the drama, but they rush through the buildup.

The thing is… This story doesn't deserve beats. The faster they run through it, the better. This sh!tty story needs to end its run on screen. :)

  • Member

I'd believe this Sharinit/Adam [!@#$%^&*] if she had the affair with Adam instead of Billy and when he found out she was having Nick's baby, took the baby away from both out of jealousy. Adam still has not been given a motive for his actions which is why this storyline as a whole sucks the greatest soap a$$ next to Erica's AMC's (unheard of in today's medical history, let alone 30 years ago) unabortion/embryo transplant.

Edited by BadZoe

  • Member

I already answered that. I don't think she's given her all in her performances with Jack. It doesn't matter if she believes that her character can't be emotionally attached to others. I don't care what she believes. If it's written she needs to play it, that's my point. It's too soon to say what will happen with Adam, but if it's written that she is attached to him, that should be what I see on my screen. That is my point in response to the idea that MM has to win her over by watching movies with her. WTH should he have to do that?

I don't disagree that she should committ to what the story says , the MM using movies to win her over thing I'm not going to conclusively point my finger at that being fact when I don't know for sure if he has to "win her over" this way. I don't necessarily think that is fair to say either but that's my opinion on that. I don't know of (other than Brad ) her other "romantic pairings". Her chemistry with BM was fine actually, and I'm trying to remember who PB last had major chemistry with in the romance pair ups.

  • Member

I'm not disagreeing with you.

I'm just saying that the failure that was Jack/Sharon wasn't just because of Case.

For me Sharon Case sold Sharon not loving Jack but wanting to & Bergman sold me that he loved the idea of Sharon much more than the reality.

But Morrow never convinced me he cared about Sharon beyond sex post plane crash & has never sold THE GREATEST LOVE EVER he supposedly had with Giggly Heffa.

Amen.

Amen again!

  • Member

The elderly woman with white hair at the Chancellors, was that Liz Foster on today's show? Or Nina's mother Flo? Whoever it was she had zero lines!

I don't think I can add much more than the criticism already leveled at the show. I hardly watch it these days.

Edited by soapfan770

  • Member

Damn entertaining, check. Emmy winning, check.

Exactly! That episode was BRILLIANT. It's a shame that some refuse to remember and acknowledge the good things the current regime have done.

  • Author
  • Member

Exactly! That episode was BRILLIANT. It's a shame that some refuse to remember and acknowledge the good things the current regime have done.

Brilliant to you, but your opinion is not everyone else's opinion. How many times do you need to get into that discussion?

I personally am not a fan of stand alone episodes on soaps, and Y&R was one of the few soaps that very rarely if ever did crap like that.

And the "good things" this regime has done has been done a million times better in past regimes, and that's my opinion.

  • Member

Brilliant to you, but your opinion is not everyone else's opinion. How many times do you need to get into that discussion?

Could you direct me to the part of my post where I stated that my opinion was everyone else's opinion?

  • Author
  • Member

Could you direct me to the part of my post where I stated that my opinion was everyone else's opinion?

Exactly! That episode was BRILLIANT. It's a shame that some refuse to remember and acknowledge the good things the current regime have done.

How can it be a shame that "some" refuse to acknowledge something when quality is opinion based?

  • Member

How can it be a shame that "some" refuse to acknowledge something when quality is opinion based?

A year ago, even YOU were touting the current regime as the second coming. Then they made a few mistakes and suddenly they were worse than Latham. That's all I'm saying.

  • Author
  • Member

A year ago, even YOU were touting the current regime as the second coming. Then they made a few mistakes and suddenly they were worse than Latham. That's all I'm saying.

This discussion was about the Michael episode that aired last year, and if you read my original posts on it, I was not blown away by it.

And yes, a lot can change in a year, and now they've officially had more time at the helm of this show than Latham (post Smith and Alden), and they've made many of the same mistakes and compounded many of her mistakes. Do I believe they've officially gotten worse than Latham? Hell yes. But also, their awfulness and incompetent writing skills is of a different style than her's.

2009 has been an overall disaster, but I did enjoy some of the latter part of 2008 - I have no problems admitting that, but that was their beginning honeymoon period, which ended long ago. Now the show is officially a directionless mess thanks to this writing regime, and if Latham can be called out for her mistakes and what she did to this show, then so can this awful current writing regime.

Edited by Y&RWorldTurner

  • Member

The elderly woman with white hair at the Chancellors, was that Liz Foster on today's show? Or Nina's mother Flo? Whoever it was she had zero lines!

I don't think I can add much more than the criticism already leveled at the show. I hardly watch it these days.

Well I wish it had been Liz or Flo but after watching the beginning online I realize now it was Pearl. *smacks head*

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Important Information

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

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.