Jump to content

Days: Will & Chad


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

No, thank you! Those Luke/Reid/Noah are more than enough!

Though, this thread is a welcome departure from the funèbre mood that pervades the threads in recent weeks (Oh! The memories...; Wow, the eighties...; Oh, if... etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don´t see anything homophobic at stating the fact that gay character can only be in relationships with other gays which means the character pool they can choose from is severely limited. And yes, the relationship troubles, geometrics and secrets are usually the center of most soap stories and they certainly are on DAYS. Or I´m the only one who remembers poor Matt Fielding on original Melrose Place? Gay characters (well, any characters) can certainly have long and rich life outside its relationships on soaps, unfortunatelly majority of viewers could care less about it, so characters without interesting social/sex life are spending their life on BB and forever relagated to be just a filler and supporting characters for those lying bitches, deceiving husbands and sexy whores who go from bed to bed.

You are right, that "Writing 101" teaches you to explore every single facet and area of a character's life, but it also says it shouldn´t be just for the shock effect and you should very carefully think about what it does to the character´s future. And we are not speaking about movie, where you can imagine the most sad/beautifull story ever, everybody cries at the end and goes home. I´m not arguing that Will and/or Chad coming out couldn´t be an interesting story, but I have huge doubts the show would know what to do with them after the initial period is over. I like the characters, I´m happy the DAYS teen scene is finally getting some firm shape, and I don´t want to see them "sacrificed" just because bunch of vocal gay online fans wants to see them get it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can't believe you're mentioning Matt Fielding from a show that premiered 18 YEARS ago! Are you saying we haven't progressed since Melrose Place? What about the complicated gay characters & stories on Brothers & Sisters, Desperate Housewives, Queer as Folk, As The World Turns, and Guiding Light? Or do those shows not count because they fail to prove your point? Hell, they don't even have to make Chad full on gay- it would be FAR more interesting for Will to be the gay one & Chad....well...."confused." That way, as other fans have said, you could have Will scheming & lying to bed Chad, keeping him away from whatever babelicious babe they pair him with, and even pull other characters, like EJ, Sami, Rafe, and Stefano, into the story's orbit. That way, we'd get the angle we're looking for, which is just simply that they explore the chemistry between the actors, AND Will AND Chad end up with one helluva social life. You get your lying bitches & your deceiving husbands & your sexy whores, only their names are Chad and Will and they don't have to support sh!t.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You can't say that all facets of a character should be explored & that Will/Chad would be an interesting story, but then go on to say you don't want your precious teen set sacrificed because a bunch of us "gays" want to see them "get it on."

Yeah. We're looking for "Chill" porn. Right. On an industry where same-sex kissing has caused advertising boycotts in the past couple years. Yeah all we're hoping for is some hot sex. Do you even see how insulting that is? We're bandying out story ideas, that would even use a character's parents' history, but all you see is a bunch of horny fags that want some gay sex on your screen.

Seriously, wby don't you just post what you really mean instead of posting all this politically correct bullsh!t in the middle, k? Fag/Dyke does not equal moron who can be appeased with some double talk. Which is exactly what you're doing.

But really, MATT FIELDING? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Your assessment of what constitutes a soap story is not only, again, completely cliché, but also as you put it severely limited. Is there any reason why there is an erosion of viewers or why people have this f&cked up view of soaps? No one is willing to think outside of the box is exactly why these shows get year renewals and can barely register anything in the ratings these days.

Care less about their relationships outside of being gay or both? I mean, call a spade a spade. If you're an 18-49 year old female who doesn't want to see gay relationships explored on the programs you watch, then just say it. It seems like all you're doing is tiptoeing around your own limited world view and homophobia for fear of being branded a bigot. Quit holding your cards close to the vest and come out with it so that we can properly assess your opinions without holds barred.

It's this opinion that is shared not only by you, but by executives like you who just wish to see straight, rich, white people f*cking each other with very little, if any, diversity on these shows or any sort of deviation from that storytelling. How utterly boring. But hey, at least you're one of the six who will be left watching it.

Oh and yes, we all remember Matt Fielding...the guy who got beat up by thugs on his way home/to work(TWICE), had a drug addiction, was in an abusive relationship and then killed off(off-camera, mind you) without having ever found true love. If that's a template to go by, then I say we rewrite that sucker and elevate the bar instead of using it as a reason to continue the same hackneyed plots and stories.

Do what other straight couple do. Get jobs, run the town, get into a love triangle with another core character, straight or bi...

And no one would want "Chill" purely for shock value. No story(whether it be movie, short story, soap, anthology series, whatever) should ever be done for shock value, Professor Jane. It should come from somehwhere organic. And from what fans are saying across the board, Chad and Will's chemistry is so.

As for the "here today, gone tomorrow" nonsense, all shows should know what do with ALL of their characters down the road. Including to the straight ones you want to watch ad-nauseum.

"Sacrificed." You make it sound like these fans want to take these characters and stick fangs in their necks.

Look, as a gay person and someone who is not fond of the gay mafia, I find your reasons for not wanting "Chill" are based on ludicrous reasons.

Man, I'd hate for you to have a gay son or daughter. You'll do everything you can to keep that kid's Madonna/Melissa Ethredge CDs from them, keep them from playing house/Cowboys and Indians, or keep them from watching soaps/sports. What would you say? "Sorry honey, you can't be gay. I won't let you SACRIFICE yourself to the gay community!"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That may be one of the most presumptious things I've ever read. So, anybody who thinks a Chad/Will pairing would be a good idea must be gay AND just want to see them "get it on."? Well, I'm not gay and neither are several people that I know who also think that Chad/Will have some serious chemistry going on and that exploring that relationship would be a good way to go. Why? Because it could actually be a good story, filled with all sorts of different layers as family and friends accept, or don't accept the situation. And since chemistry is one of the keys to a good story, it's a shame to see good chemistry wasted, as neither Chad nor Will have shown a spark of anything with any of the teenyboppers they've been matched up with. I don't seen a good story as ever being a sacrifice of a character.

Lastly, to bellcurve. Outstanding posts!!

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

    • I'm hoping that it doesn't happen. If the show keeps putting out good performance and story it will be hard to shut it out. Daphnee, Trisha, Ambyr and Colby are earning nominations without question.
    • Speaking of correcting dates, since you mentioned it above, why don't you go back to your Saturday post and edit it and replace your wording of "DAYS Ruth Buzzi 11-2-83"  with "DAYS Ruth Buzzi 11-1-83" and add a note that the video has the wrong date of 11/2/83 on it, and that the video is actually 11/1/83. 
    • If the show ever chooses to show any flashbacks of major Ted scenes, the Ted/Eva, Ted/Kat, and Ted/Nicole scenes would need to be re-filmed with nuTed. Since there have been hardly any Ted/Martin scenes with the CurrentTed, they have avoided the difficulty of doing recreated flashbacks with nuTed for scenes with Martin.  The only one would be Martin punching Ted after the anniversary reveal (unless there's something in the next few episodes). I agree with other posters that the fact that we barely saw CurrentTed and Martin interact, makes it less impactful to viewers to see Martin's outrage at the reveal. 
    • This makes me think of that famous quote from COOL HAND LUKE,  "What we've got here is failure to communicate." I did not bring up "apparently" to try to get across either truth or validity, but doubt. If I had been sure, I would have said something entirely different. But, I'm not trying to argue, I hear you & I will comply. Besides that, I will endeavor to word things differently. I am never against trying to improve. 
    • That’s been my main issue with his response. It didn’t feel that earned by what came before. Definitely needed to see more of the Richardsons as a full family unit prior to all of this.
    • Bingo! I thought the exact same thing. Martin's anger feels so out of place, because we've hardly seen him interact with his parents. Vernon and him have more of a father/son relationship and we've seen their dynamic more fully play out. While obviously Ted and Marton are father and son, it felt a bit empty because we haven't really seen them bond or truly connect in any scenes.
    • Leslie inferred over 20 years ago, so Eva and Kat are over 20 at least 
    • As it happens, 40 years ago this week, ABC and CBS revealed their 1985-86 fall schedules. NBC revealed theirs the week before. ABC's would end up changing. The original plan for Tuesdays was to have Diff'rent Strokes lead the night, with He's the Mayor at 8:30, followed by Who's the Boss at 9, Growing Pains at 9:30, and Moonlighting at 10. There was some surprise over MacGruder & Loud not getting renewed, but it was considered part of Aaron Spelling's declining influence at the network. Yes, Dynasty was still a hit (for a while longer), but Aaron's shows steadily took up less and less of the schedule. Fall 1984: Seven hours, five of which were new programming (Dynasty, Hotel, Glitter, Matt Houston, T.J. Hooker, The Love Boat, Finder of Lost Loves; MacGruder & Loud aired at midseason, by which time Glitter was gone.). Fall 1985: Five hours, two of which were new programming (Dynasty, Hotel, The Colbys, Hollywood Beat, The Love Boat). Fall 1986: Three-and-a-half hours, a half-hour of which was new programming (Dynasty, Hotel, The Colbys, Life With Lucy). Fall 1987: Two hours, none of which was new programming (Dynasty and Hotel; HeartBeat premiered at midseason). Fall-winter 1988: Two hours, none of which was new programming (Dynasty and HeartBeat). This led to Variety's infamous shady headline in spring 1989: "Aaron's Dynasty Over"
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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