OLTL: Discussion for the week May 3

[Scotty]

Discussion for the week May 3rd

[SFK]

This Blair and Kelly stuff, are they doing this for the benefit of new fans? Not to minimize a mother's experience losing a child, but this feels so tired and rehashy. They are playing scenes they played almost a decade ago.

[Bright Eyes]

This writing team is the absolute worst at referencing the past. RC never once wrote things like this well. All those forced reminders of Téa come to mind.

[alexisfan07]

I think they're setting up Nate to be Blair's "dead" kid

[SFK]

[Cheap21]

What dead kid? The one with Patrick? When Kelly hit her with a car, causing Blair to have a miscarriage, Blair was written out of the show as she went to get physical therapy due to her injuries. Are they trying to say she actually had the kid at this time "forgot" about him and now he's back as a teen. Oh boy....

Are they killing Tea ofF?

[SFK]

I would be very surprised if they actually killed and buried Tea.

I am not at all surprised by them getting rid of her and pushing Dani into Todd's arms.

I think Tea will pull a Laura Avery and go off to die like a cat (but won't actually die and come back someday) or she'll have the surgery and be placed in some sort of rehab facility off-screen. I don't think (er, I hope) they don't go the Evangeline coma route.

[DRW50]

The problem with that story wasn't just Blair losing a child, but Kelly, who killed the baby and covered it up, was written as the only victim in the story. I have no idea why they are bringing it up so much now -- I think it's just to try to push conflict between them as a smokescreen when the real conflict in the show's mind is that they both want Todd.

I wouldn't even care if they did bring the child back as Nate or some other overaged brat, as it couldn't be any more ridiculous or pointless than droning Dani, and the child was near full term, so I guess they could come up with something.

[Leia]

Okay but Blair has more than enough kids in her brood. Neither Todd nor Blair need anymore children.

[SFK]

I totally agree.

[DRW50]

In my head, I agree, especially since I do not trust OLTL (or any soap today) to be able to tell a good story, but on paper, the idea of Blair finding the son she lost, something which deeply scarred her, would be such good drama, and most importantly, would give her material beyond pining for Todd. It would give Blair a child who does not worship Todd and who is not controlled by Todd. It would also cause some conflict with Cole, as I'm sure he wouldn't want to be reminded of something beyond his golden memories of Patrick and Marty. Ideally, it could even be used to bring Addie back in -- he could remind Addie of Blair's father, or something, and that story could finally be addressed.

[SFK]

I like the things you suggest (and I'd really like a dark early/mid-'90s-esque story about Blair's father) but this has an unsettling unabortion ring to it for me.

[DRW50]

I guess it wouldn't bother me as much because the baby was nearly full term, fully developed. That was one of the reasons the initial story upset me at the time, one of many reasons.

I think the whole thing would be ludicrous but with the proper writing I would buy it. If only good writing was likely.

[SFK]

Ha, you said it. I'm not really a big fan on insta-children in general, and we just got Dani. The only thing I would like is if we did in fact get some of that good writing and we'd explore the dynamic of Todd and Blair's mixed brood: Starr and Jack by them both, Sam (Todd's by Margaret), Dani (Todd's by Tea), and Brendan (Blair's by Patrick), and all of that nature/nurture kind of stuff someone like Harding Lemay would have worked masterfully.

[SFK]

What would be your guesses for Brendan (i.e., yet another crazy hospital baby theft/science project, and where's he been all this time, adopted, Patrick secretly still alive and raising him)? If this turns out to be even remotely true, I hope Allison and Mitch have absolutely noooooooothing to do with it. Geesh.