Jump to content

Y&R: March 2017 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 587
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I wish I could remember more of the time (as I was pretty young) or where I read it more recently as a reminder, but it's been said this version of Jack is actually more in line with the 'original' characterisation. Terry Lester's Jack was more like this. Selfish, rough around the edges, invariably drawn to the wrong woman, at odds with Ashley and ruthless as a businessman. To the point it causes problems. And that it was Peter Bergman's good looks and portrayal that necessitated the change into 'smiling Jack'. 

 

The habit of losing (to the Newmans) I believe was born out of his feud with Victor. And because it's become so commonplace, and dramatically produces good scenes, consecutive writers have extended the scope of his losses to the Newman children. Case in point, this past week with Victoria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Would it have killed the writers to write Nikki seeing this young woman busking outside of CL a few times before she gets the sudden flash of inspiration to bring her and Reed together for a lesson?

 

Such clunky writing, it makes me ask over and over whether the writers use an actual outline for their stories. It just doesn't seem like they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 I was young too but I remember the first Jack as always being desirable even though you knew he was a bad boy. It was almost like a dare for a woman to be with him. Whereas with PB's Jack, I only like him when he's being the better man or a good guy. He's not charming when he's ruthless. TL's Jack was attractive even when he was naughty. He had more sex appeal.

 

 

They're really listening to fans. I've seen viewers ask for both Neil, and Devon, to have their own businesses for years, so it's perfect that they are doing this together. Another plus is it will re-establish the father & son bond that was first tarnished by Tyra, then decimated by Tucker, and finished off by sharing Hillary.

 

Yesterday I saw the Neil I used to know, a father and a highly successful business executive who helped Newman, Jabot, & Chancellor make big money. Victor & Tucker are nasty, ruthless, and constantly break the law. Neil's an honest businessman more like John Abbott. Who better to mentor Devon into being successful?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Completely agree. Or have her appear a few times in background at CL - without Nikki. Have Sharon befriend her or at least be cool with her hustling for change while playing. Nikki hears her, asks Sharon about her. Sharon gives two-cents, Nikki hires her and when Tessa turns out to be an opportunist, Nikki can blame Sharon, of course. I'm not sure why there was a rush for the insta-teacher. People complained about Pratt being plot-driven, this is exactly the same thing - but worse because it's boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Nah, Sally is slovenly but Pratt was more atrocious. He didn't care about character and he ran roughshod over story.

 

The reality is that Y&R hasn't had a writer concerned with detailed storytelling in about a decade now. It's all so slipshod, it's like they can't be bothered with details, which is odd since they only have 5 freaking days per week to write story!

Please register in order to view this content

 

Both SS and Pratt are far from ideal storytellers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I didn't understand Jordan's comment to Hilary either at first. It seemed so isolated and out of nowhere. And then in Friday's episode, we get some information from Jordan's conversation with Lily that he's done some seemingly shady things to make ends meet. Could Jordan's comment to Hilary and his past actions be connected?

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 think in some ways the story could have been stronger because Wendy and Stephanie had a more nuanced mother-daughter relationship and Lisa Peluso could act, but I don't really think Louise worked as Stephanie, so the impact wouldn't have been the same.  That would be a better way to bring drama than another serial killer story. And Sarah probably would have snapped and Jo would have been held hostage again... As someone said above, I do wonder why Philip Brown didn't last longer. Then again, I'm not sure why Kevin Conroy didn't last longer either. 
    • That thought crossed my mind too but I really don't want Kate to cheat on Roman 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Bored or just bored with story or character: Ashley Derek Pamela Vanessa Doug Joey aka Jon Lindstrom....he truly sucks in the role. The gambling set, gambling story hate and bored with a passion. Dani and Andre in bed every five seconds.....yawn! Diego the fitness guy....yawn!! Today's show, minus Kat, Eva, and Jacob/Leslie sprinkled in, was very boring!
    • Is Ashley/Derek really arguing over a damn scratch on the fridge?!  MVJ, get rid of both characters... NOW! 
    • I do think Vanessa was lesser than Reva and Alexandra in those runs, but I think Long also gave Vanessa a centerpiece on the show she never would have had otherwise, and she did bring the character back (I know Maeve had only wanted a break but if Long had not wanted her to return, she wouldn't have returned).
    • Well, Catherine Hicks did say once that the only way she'd agree to a reboot is if started with Eric's funeral. I used to love this show when I was little but I watch it now and all I do is roll my eyes. The writing was so heavy handed and honestly, the Camdens were a bunch of pretentious, judgmental snobs 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/19/benjamin-netanyahu-israel-take-control-gaza-uk-france-canada-threaten-action    Benjamin Netanyahu has vowed that Israel will “take control” of all Gaza, as three key allies attacked his “egregious” escalation of the military campaign and blockade on humanitarian aid. Britain, France and Canada attacked Israel’s expansion of its war as disproportionate, described conditions in Gaza as “intolerable” and threatened a “concrete” response if Israel’s campaign continues. finance minister Bezalel Smotrich said Israel’s army would “wipe out” what remains of Palestinian Gaza.  “Now we conquer, cleanse and stay" ---------------------------- My thoughts: This is genocide, ethnic cleansing.  It's just evil and there's no excuse for it.  I'm glad Canada, France, and UK are making a statement, and I hope they back it up. There are some Israeli citizens who don't support what Netanyahu is doing, and I hope they are able to enact some positive change from within.
    • -- I'm not unhappy that Nina and Carly had a bad fight including slapping and tackling and falling down. But geez, all that insane SCREAMING was over the top. It was three minutes of shrieking, and I thought it was all too much. -- And ANOTHER day of Dante ripping Gio and Gio again discussing his sins and failures. Make it end already. -- In the previews, Gio is walking the Nurses Ball red carpet with Joss. Uh...why??? I don't know why Joss is there at all. Doesn't she have some secret agent stuff to do? -- Chase is at the end of the previews, yelling into the phone "You want me to do WHAT???"  My guess is that's another fakeout that there's something important going on, and that Chase got a call to perform at the Nurses Ball. This show....
    • Watching...   For the most part, today's show is boring and trending on fast-forwarding scenes.
    • I figured that they would take Kat in this direction with men for the time being. I like those small bits of history from Tomas, but I still have not warmed up to him yet. A Pamela/Vanessa feud could be worth the watch.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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