Jump to content

B&B: Old/Classic Discussion & Articles


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

i think Katie was written for the teenage public - she had acne problems, love problems and so on. Then she staid for the story with Father Logan. And as far as i remember Katie left with Logan family for Paris in 1989. Storm had a story in 1989 when Taylor came in and then he was also on recurring status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

If she already had Marcus, I guess you could read that to explain why Beth really didn't want her going to the beach party, yet Brooke still thought she was innocent. Really hard to believe that she got pregnant by Justin with Storm always hovering around... must have gotten it on in the bleachers at the gym, lol.

 

I knew that Bill was a retcon, but I'd never realized how adamant the writers were that Caroline was an ONLY child, and Bill Sr had NO ONE ELSE. I just thought he'd never been mentioned. How was Karen introduced then? She was a new character when I started watching. Bill had money and a stable marriage... how on earth did they just "lose" a twin? She wouldn't have been adopted out, surely.

 

Brooke going to the hospital was bad enough... I guess I could see a young girl getting starstruck and wanting to see celebs in person... but to actually go into Caroline's hospital room and talk to her... and for Caroline to be fine with it... really ridiculous. Maybe it played differently in the 80s before the privacy laws were expanded. Brooke is definitely stringing Dave along, wondering what life would have been like had her father made money... but you can sort of understand it, since she hasn't even graduated college yet and doesn't want to be tied down into a lifelong commitment. I really hated Brooke in the 90s and actually see her in a slightly more sympathetic light in these episodes, but the seeds are there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It was quickly established in December 1991 to allow Joanna Johnson to return as the failed Karen character: Karen was kidnapped as an infant (which Carioline apparently knew nothing about) so that's why she was not ever mentioned in 1987 onwards. Bonnie Roberts who was an aid to the kidnappers then took the child (when they wanted to get rid of it after a failed money exchange) and fled through the entire US, ending her un in Starlight (Texas) where she raised he girl as Faith Roberts and lived a simple life until Blake Hayes passed through town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 

I think Bill Bell LIKED the idea of large families on soaps, but often had a difficult time finding stories for all the siblings.  Once he focused on one or two siblings in particular -- Brooke Logan, Ridge & Thorne Forrester, Chris & Lorie & Leslie Brooks, Paul & Patty Williams -- the others fell by the wayside.  IMO, Y&R's Foster and Abbott clans were his most successful, because there were only three siblings in each (Snapper, Greg and Jill; and Jack, Ashley and Traci).

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Three thoughts after finally re-watching Kristen's party episode from the start.  (1)Is there rational given in 1988 for why Caroline still lives at the Forrester house without the benefit of marriage?  It seems odd to have terminated an engagement, but stay in your in-laws' house.  (2) 32 years later the vibe between Stephanie and Ridge is uncomfortable.  I thought it was clever later when they referenced it in the Mossimo Morone story (I wonder who was the inspiration for that character's name?)  (3) And if they're really the 10 most eligible bachelors in Los Angeles, why are they all available on the same night?

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Answers

Please register in order to view this content

 1. In 1988 Caroline is maried to Thorne so it is normal to be in the house; 2. I think Massimo was not intended in so early stage it was Bell son's invention; 3. If you are an eligible bachelor and you are invited to a Forrester party it is supposed to be prestigious so you will make yourself available

Edited by Marquise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the idea of large families came about because writers realized that after several years the original characters become 'worn out' and fresher family members are ready to step up into the limelight. That's the theory but it doesn't always work in practice because it's hard to leave the original characters behind and make room for the newbies.

In the case of B&B the actors chosen for Katie/Donna/Storm/Kristen weren't strong enough and therefore Bill wasn't inspired and so they got less attention...self fulfilling prophecy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I would disagree about Donna...she had a lot of focus into 1990...and than just as she was getting a new story...the actress quit.  But she was fairly well liked and written for..hence why she was spared from the Logan family axe.

 

Kristen got a lot of focus up till she left suddenly in 1990.  Its interesting how stephanie had bad relationships with botth daughters..but in different ways.  Jealousy of some sort in regards to Kristen...and in regards to Felicia..because they were so alike.

 

I also think Sally Spectra being popular changed the landscape of the show..and adding Macy as her resentful daughter made Kristen less necessary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

A lot of the actors from the first season were not very polished or strong. Terri Ann Linn only survived as long as she did because Daniel McVicar was an unexpected instant success. As soon as he was absorbed into Sally's orbit and with Colleen Dion's arrival as Felicia who was a fierce actress, Kristen was completely unnecessary.

 

Katie and Storm were never given a proper chance (or storyline for that matter) as characters so it's hard to say whether the actors were really that bland. We will also never know how much was altered from the original plan due to the writer's strike of 1988. Bill Bell was famous for writing meticulous long and detailed outlines (and very much ahead), yet is not credited on the 1988 episodes as soon as the strike material started. So maybe Katie or Storm were supposed to have some sort of story but I doubt it.

 

Quick heads for the YouTube episodes of Amy Silence: the Angela story will kick off in 10 episodes...

 

 

On a more trivial note as I was never expecting to get to see those pristine quality B&B episodes from 1988 including full credits: it is very interesting to see some random directors being involved with the show back then. Doug Rogers!? Bob Bowker!? 

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1078924/

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0736848/

It is evident that John Zak - after his successful directing gig at Y&R - became a regular director on B&B at the same time that Bill Glenn left and the show had only one regular director: Michael Stich - who at that time was still very young. There were LOADS of freelance directors hired or trial gigs happening from March-July 1988, it seems. This became really uncommon during the 1990s and onwards with the taping schedule getting tighter and soaps relying on a rather fixed set of contract directors. And the tenure of Dennis Steinmetz as producer (and occasional director) was also rather brief considering that the succeeding producers at B&B stayed for at least 5 years or until their respective retirement.

 

Edited by sheilaforever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Yep! Very curious to see where this goes. 
    • I was confused too, but I think it was always a "tribute thread" (this one and OLTL's were created when their cancellations were announced). They just changed the show abbreviations to their titles spelled out, I guess to make the board just a little bit more uniform. I was lost, too lol
    • Well... I am. I think she's losing her initial menacing presence. Slowly but surely. I need the crazy dialed back. But as I said... this is very miniscule negative reaction. I am loving the show right now. We'll see how they'll continue after the fireworks. 
    • Oh, I am so looking forward to the reveal about Laura's accident, and Nicole and Leslie having a real one on one.
    • I'm not seeing that right now. I'm stepping out on faith and believeing MVJ will not turn "Silk" into a ridiculous caricature.   
    • One little... very little... tiny... minuscule negative comment. I was debating if I should care to say it... In some ways... Silk has been acting clownish... I think they need to dial it back, because if this continues with the current pace... she'll be worse than Sheila in terms of getting totally predictable and not menacing anymore. TMG is one hell of an actress... I just want to see a more normal and less clownish Silkpress in the coming weeks*months. We need to dial down the wigs too. It's becoming a funny caricature and we don't want that. Maybe we do, I'm not sure. I just like her more menacing and sinister than... "Hahhahahah what is she wearing today". That's a personal preference.   So far... I am okay with it... but I have fears this may turn into a really tired joke in the future. I want TMG as long as possible on my screen!  
    • Not really short-lived as GH went to color in 1967, so the blue background actually lasted about twice as long as the black background. You can see it at the very beginning of this set of clips from 1974:

      Please register in order to view this content

      Also would like to put it out there in the universe, as I often do, that the wait for any AMC from 1972-1976 has been too damn long. At this point, it is the only long-running soap (10+ years) that has absolutely zero video clips from that time period online. We have either whole episodes or clips from every year of the show's run except those five, which happen to be the exact years when one of my favorite characters I've never actually seen, Margo Flax, was a major player. Justice for Margo, please.
    • Both EE and Corrie remind me of RC's OLTL, where maybe, just maybe, if we keep bringing up the past in cheesy, forced ways, the audience will transfer their positive memories of better days onto what we're giving them now. I used to love that kind of crap, but it became so constant and transparent with OLTL, not to mention obnoxious as hell. Like when they had KDP singing the Peabo Bryson theme over the opening sequence for an episode or two. I've been reading little blurbs about Sonia's exit, and they all mention trumpets as if the she had grown up and became a trumpet virtuoso. It's too sitcommy to me, just like Bianca being damn near 50 and still wearing the jacket and hoops. But then they like to introduce new young female characters and put them in a metallic jacket and hoops so that the audience will like them right away. Things just hit better when it's more of an "If you know, you know," type of thing. Like Max watching Stacey's plane leave in 2010 as Stacey gazes down at the Thames in reference to the opening sequence...just like when Phil watched Kathy's plane leave in 1998 as Kathy gazed down at the Thames in reference to the opening sequence. It's like the more "iconic" the original scene is, the less effective the later allusion to it is. B&B and Y&R recreating their first scenes were perfect because we don't get hit over the head with how incredibly iconic those scenes were to begin with.
    • Ted has been too-good-to-be-true-on-the-surface guy from the get go. It's always these guys that end up having a secret mistress with 2 children on the side or are secretly bisexual and sleeping with men while they wifey thinks she is living the dream. Even the way Dani was talking about them in the beginning... I knew it was coming. The show was hinting at it. And it came.  I have nothing against the show writing a second affair, when it's used to present this exact type of message. That the two sisters end up dealing with a similar catastrophe. I would have had problems with it... if it was not written the way it is. But I have no problems with it right now. And I love how the focus is not just on the affair, but on Ted's overall character. His dark side. And, no, you don't need to be a serial killer or a lunatic with a knife to be a bad guy. Sometimes just making bad decisions that end up hurting your entire family makes you that.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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