Members SFK Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 The actress looks like she could be kin to Erica and her children and her name is Jane, same as the psycho lookalike... perhaps it's silly, but writing/casting that cuts so close like that kind of annoys me. Of course I have no idea what the character's story will be, no prejudgment. They probably want to distance themselves from that pod Erica s/l, but what if there's some connection to the presumed dead daughter that Susan Lucci's Jane was mourning... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PeterAKer Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 Today's Word of Advice: Patience! We will get back MEK, SL and others in due time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 I was just teasing you! Pine Charles, I am trying so hard to practice what I preach and be a grown-up in this thread, and then you go and post "Hart's Tarts"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jonathan Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 I forgot about the daughter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 A large part of my dislike, as I found out, was the characterization. Pratt wrote the character all wrong. Once Broderick took over and wrote Liza as Liza Colby rather than Liza LaFountaine of Melrose, I was totally on board and loving JL's take on the character. As you said, she carried some of the same shades and tones of the mid-90s Liza, which was always what I wanted the Liza character to get back to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 I'm curious to see what they'll come up with, and how plausible the stories for these absentee spouses and children will be. Not everyone can be off on an archaeological dig like Langley, or taking care of their sick aunt like Mary Fickett's Ruth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 As long as they don't start asking you to tweet in and vote for stories or anything like that, I think it's a great idea if they use the social media/internet angle as much as possible to connect people with the show. ABC briefly seemed to be experimenting with this (like those AMC and OLTL video podcasts which were pointless but fun, and OLTL showing cut scenes), but there's a lot you can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 Yes, I think that was Liza at her best. I'm not sure that being matched with Adam did too many favors for her character. MW's final years on the show are kind of a blur of victimization for me. There sure is. But honestly, I'm not expecting more than an intern or "cast member of the day" walking around with a hand-held camera doing micro-interviews and such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jams1234 Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 That's what I've wondered too? Why the need for Zach if Kendall is not there? Not that he's only viable with her and vice versa (as some Zendall fans seem to think) but really .....What's he gonna do? He's not needed either way but I had a feeling that he might be connected to the casting call for the European Thugs. Maybe we'll get the full on thug version of Zach...not the danced around version ABCD gave us. He was always a disgusting criminal but was painted all too often as the good guy. Maybe his casino connections were responsible for the shot(s) we heard on the finale. Maybe Kendall is in a coma?!?! Would explain why his first scenes are with a cop & doctor. Has the criminal pig fully embraced his Cambias roots?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jams1234 Posted February 27, 2013 Members Share Posted February 27, 2013 Oh just embrace the insanity(aka wishful thinking) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted February 28, 2013 Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 "While many cast members had previously been announced by The Online Network, a few previously unannounced actors were on hand for the photo shoot as well, confirming their participation in the series." Like who, Errol? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jams1234 Posted February 28, 2013 Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 Not to speak for Errol but Queen I think it said in the PR. All the kids, Francesca James, Heather Roops, etc they were never officially confirmed. At least that's what I assumed?!!? Oh and is Julia Barr missing from that last PR about the Fashion Police/photo shoot!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alexisfan07 Posted February 28, 2013 Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 PP had officially announced her and added her to one of the releases, not sure why she's missing here. Probably a bad copy job from an early press release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EnglishTea Posted February 28, 2013 Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 I think JB missing from the Fashion Police PR is just an oversight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted February 28, 2013 Members Share Posted February 28, 2013 Oh dear. Please don't call me "Queen." That makes me think of that awful Halle Berry miniseries. I'm fine with being called "Your Royal Highness." I got the impression for Errol's using the word "confirming" that the people who showed up were ones that have been discussed before but maybe I read that wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.