What I really don't understand is, the other month they had this scene where Brooke made a sudden PR move to declare herself and Ridge co-CEOs of FC. Whatever happened to that idea? Did they just drop it? Because a FC power struggle would have pitted Steffy and Brooke against each other in a major way (even though it was introduced in a way that made no sense whatsoever).
As Alexis,Joan had a signature role that embedded her in the television annals after years of movie and TV work and she was savvy enough to know that it was as much Alexis as it was Joan the public loved.
So every role thereafter had a little (or a lot) of Alexis in it .
She wasn't going to take over the role of Bea Reardon...
I concur with what everyone said. And I do agree it is for the best that they moved Brooke out of the romantic leading lady role that might come off as silly now that she is a bit older (still beautiful and all but the stuff she used to do that was already immature would look ridiculous on a woman in her 40s/50s),
I personally think they are not leaning on the Steffy/Brooke dynamic enough. There are enough good reasons for them to eye each other warily, enough ties between them that they can't walk away, and enough resemblance between them that the animosity could make a lot of sense - and it would mirror the show dynamic where Bell is clearly writing Steffy as the lead the way he used to with Brooke.
They are only exploring it in the context of Hope and, Brooke as marital counselor, setting aside the (dis)merits of her advice, is not really compelling material.
I really wish they would find ways to pit Steffy and Brooke against each other in ways that cut deeper and that have nothing to do with Hope or Ridge (although they'd get dragged into it) the way the Stephanie/Brooke dislike ended up being driven by many things other than Ridge and Eric over the years.
That would be my vote for the "counter-Brooke".