Jump to content

GH: Discussion for the Month of February


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 597
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I hear you, I just wonder how important Van himself was to them. I'll believe what KA says and think pretty important. He may have been a tough find, and maybe they thought it was too much to recast the role yet again, I have no clue. That was a new baby Hope though, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Van was great but I don't think they would have had him stay even if he was available. If not for Michael needing a new sadface partner I'm not sure Starr would even be joining GH. That the whole thing has been about Michael's feelings is sort of telling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I really didn't see anything campy about that stuff. It pales in comparison to the typical OTT campy Luke stuff with Helena which is played up for laughs. The stuff today was actually more dramatic and meant to be taken seriously
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have this fear that the actor who played Ford will be hired as some sort of totally unrelated character/lookalike that only Starr will make a point of noticing. I wonder with the news of Cole's death if they'd ever consider bringing James on as a Michael/Starr potential spoiler. wacko.png I mean, she already broke his heart, but I'm assuming Starr is going to become the center of a couple dudes' affections just like on OLTL. Lord help...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think the writing diverged from the acting. Samms and Parsons were awful, and Geary was overdramatic as always, although more restrained than usual.

I was watching with someone who came over because of OLTL, and she said, during this scene, "A lot of the people on here can't act."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Wait! tongue.png I could be wrong, but Starr and Michael will probably at least get Markko/Langston-type foils. Starr is not a character who we're used to seeing exist without friends and family

so it'll be interesting to see with whom she bonds in town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I was disappointed to see her comments. She shouldn't have said anything at all. Obviously since Cole is a fugitive on the run he could easily be sent back to jail. Hell, they didn't even need him for one episode if an actor wasn't available. Then for Hope there is just no excuse. This was lazy writing to make it easier to launch an insta!couple we may not even like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Thanks Eric.

Yeah, I had missed some stuff so I went to check it out on YouTube and it is bananas how some fanatics are already acting like Michael and Starr are of Luke and Laura status. I don't get stuff like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Every couple will have some type of following on Youtube. I'm sure Michael and Abby Crane did too.

As for Starr and friendships - I'm sure she will get on well with Lulu, as long as she can tolerate a drunken shrew berating her for her failings and talking to her about Dante at all times. Other than that, can't think of anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yea but what would keep Starr in Port Charles then if she's not forced to testify or if Hope isn't injured in GH? Not saying it's impossible to come up with a logical reason but clearly RC went with the easiest route possible with the most emotional impact. The situation they've created goes for the sympathy points for both Michael and Starr - Michael cause he feels guilty about what happened and Starr, the newbie of the show, is given some of the worst pain a human can go through. In RC's eyes, what better way is there to draw people to a new character than to create sympathy? Without that there is nothing to go on - no history or familiarity with the character, a lack of interest completely.

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

    • Right. Literally for decades, soaps mesmerized their audiences with tales of romance, family conflict, class struggles, and recognizable interpersonal-relationship sagas. We didn't need relentless, heavy violence. We didn't need clones, mad scientists, extra-terrestrials and demon possessions. We didn't need gaggles of plastic himbos and bimbos pushing beloved vets off-screen. We only needed to see people whom we cared about, and the intelligent, moving progression of their lives. Flashy sets, gaudy gimmicks, and high-falutin' hairdos be damned. The characters and the words were important.
    • Absolutely! Brad should've simply moved on from Lunacy. There's no point of freeing her, if you're not going to at least make an attempt at redemption or incorporating her into the fold. It happened with Quinn, who committed quite a few felonies before become the Forrester Matriarch.  Heck, keep Lunacy in prison and have Poppy/Finn discover that she gave birth to twins - 'Sunny' could've come on with a clean slate and still had Sheila/Finn and all the other drama. It certainly couldn't have been worse than what we've witnessed with the destruction of $B.    
    • I would enjoy it if Swan popped up on BTG as an old one time friend/mentor of Anita’s for a cameo. This is just

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I had totally forgotten that Courtney story. I see Burton was already phoning it in by that point.
    • omg I completely missed that, but now when I see it typed here in your post, it's obvious icky cringe. So now I just checked and Tomas said that -- on May 27 that he likes the author Carl Ivati.  He said it with sort of an accent, so I didn't catch the stupid joke or think about the spelling.   I remember when that aired, that I actually said to myself at the time, "I wonder if that's a Latin American author, and I will have to google him later." And now I see your post, and I see. Well that's cringe, and I feel stupid to have fallen for it.

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • There's a lot you don't need if you have the writing.  You don't even need large casts!  You could make do with a cast of 12-18 actors if the writing is there.
    • Thank you. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with sleeping around if your spouse actually knows about it. She’s just a cheating slut.
    • OMG...Robert Mandan! And Donna Mills is a child. I keep hoping for more of early Ross/Vanessa.
    • I get your point, but I also know that if the roles were reversed -- if a man were screwing around on a woman this way -- everyone would be all "All with his head!" When I say Vanessa needs therapy, I'm actually being kind, because I could begin and end with the fact that she's a cheating slut.
    • Is nobody going to mention the cringefest that is 'Carl Ivati'?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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