Jump to content

Y&R: June 2017 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I just finished friday and while the Chloe/Kevin/Nick/Chelsea stuff puts me to sleep, Ashley is just a revelation under Sussman. It's amazing that she has no love interest (on a soap!) yet she is so compelling to watch! I'm happy to see this because typically these days if a woman doesn't have a love interest they don't matter. She's been written as such a smart and complicated woman and I LOVE it. I loved the scenes with Graham and also with Dina. This story keeps surprising me and giving me a reason to tune in. I'm glad they hopefully cleared up that Dina isn't sick. That would be too obvious and a waste of a great character. I hope the actual twist is more dramatic than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Graham looks to have a dark side, he definitely seems to be controlling Dina in some way. It's a mini-mystery and it gives Ashley something else to do. Maybe Traci can get in on solving that.

It's weird that Jack only mildly seems intrigued by it all. Perhaps he thinks 'if Mother's happy...' 

 

Does it add anything for Billy and Phyllis to move in together?  Or is this just to move Billy out of the mansion before Jill and Colin return? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's about time they started doing more with Graham.

 

i agree about Ashley. Characters used to be able to stand on their own. Now I see people wonder who their love interest will be and if they don't have a kid they aren't relevant ... characters shouldn't be defined by a coupling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Honestly, I feel like they ruined the redemption of Sharon by putting her with Scott. I don't want to see Sharon kissing ANYBODY! She still has chemistry with Nick when they're together, but since they put her with Scott not only do they not have chemistry, but she's isolated. I liked seeing her at work and with Mariah and Faith. I would've kept her in that type of role and when enough time has passed just put her ass back with Nick. If she absolutely sparkles with someone cool, but we've seen her paired with so many people over recent years that I was enjoying the break.

 

Also, I don't even like Judith Chapman's Gloria (JVA for life!) but I do think it's unfortunate they don't feature her relationship with Jack more. It's ageist. They finally pair him with an age-appropriate love interest and the one love scene they got was played for laughs, which could be shrugged off considering their history, but since then we get nothing. We see they've gotten closer, but we're not allowed to see it. No matter how old he is, if Jack was with Phyllis or another young character like Juliet they'd have love scenes. It's obvious their relationship isn't featured because Gloria is old. You can argue Nikki and Victor are still a frontburner couple, but they're also one of the most popular soap couples of all time so they don't really have a choice there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree they shouldn't have paired Sharon with anyone but that doesn't ruin her reset IMO.

 

Gloria and Jack's relationship isn't featured because it's awful. It makes no sense. No one cares about them. I doubt it's because she's old they don't get love scenes. Jack's not exactly a spring chicken either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

It doesn't ruin her redemption but it does taint the narrative of Sharon being a woman focused on school, building the business and her children by making it about Scott and Sharon's relationship.  I don't know what this pairing does for either one of them, TBH.  

And while I'm being honest, I have to admit that Sharon's conversations with Nick have been far more interesting than her conversations with Scott.

With Scott, I feel she is constantly rehashing her past and repeating assertions that she's already made.

At least in her last conversation with Nick when she relayed a fact about her past it was tied in with a relevant storyline (Chloe's suicide) and Sharon actually revealed something that she'd never talked about before (whether she'd ever considered suicide while in the depths of her  depression).

 

They started out with Sharon having good ideas about the direction she wanted to take the coffee-house. I thought she'd be meeting with distributors, etc to dramatize some of those ideas. She also seemed animated when discussing her volunteer work. I find this stuff, not a budding romance, interesting.

 

As for Jack, while I have no desire to see him with some 'young thing', I have no desire to see him with Gloria and age has nothing to do with it.  Jack should've been returned to his 'Smilin' Jack rogue roots.

It's one thing to have a ONS with Gloria, fine (and if they played it for laughs, they shouldn't have) but he should've also been wining and dining the real estate agent that showed Abby the warehouse that he has known for ages.

Jack just got out of a heartbreak situation, why not have him date several women- try to 'get over' Phyllis by 'getting under' a bevy of paramours? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Perhaps TPTB thought that Sharon Case could make Scott interesting.  But even she can't do that.  The actor himself is OK, he's attractive (and I for one love his hair) but he doesn't have any charisma.  It wouldn't matter how good the writing or the story is IMO because this guy, while pretty, just doesn't have it.  As opposed to Jordan - I believe if they put that actor in the right story, he'd improve with time.  
 

I don't wanna see PB/Jack in bed with anyone.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

That was implied. We didn't see him in bed with Gloria but it was implied/stated that they 'did the deed'.  

I wasn't suggesting that we see it onscreen. Just that it's implied, maybe in phone conversations or over dinner, etc. 

I don't want to see that either.

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

LOL 

 

I will make one exception to that.  IF Jack wanted to stick his toe in the other side of sexual pool, and hooked up with David Beckham  and only if PB had the covers pulled up to his neck while Davy Boy sauntered around in his skivvies... I'd watch that!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

+2

 

They definitely thought Sharon would be the making of him. They were hoping her popularity would rub off same way JFP finally bit the bullet and paired Dylan with her hoping she's finally make fans care about him. 

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

    • No idea if this one had ever been up before or what the exact date is, but it's always good to look at/save the new AMC content while you can. If you're here for the drama there is some delirium with Adam and Erica about 10-12 minutes in.

      Please register in order to view this content

      @Vee @Jonathan @Maxim @All My Shadows @alwaysAMC @Contessa Donatella @Soaplovers @DemetriKane @dragonflies @AMCOLTLLover @Khan @Paul Raven @slick jones @Wendy @DeeVee @j swift @EricMontreal22 @AmandainNC28655 @Wilsoky @Franko @Liberty City @robbwolff
    • I think there's a story to tell in someone who always believed in honesty and integrity being emmeshed in so many lies, but I agree that it wasn't very well laid out over the last few months. I think if I was more invested in Lois, I would have more of an issue than I do. Few can hold up against Jane. This is one of those cases where I think mentioning who already switched babies or have long-lost children would just take away from the fallout. If Lulu wants to drag Brook Lyn for hypocrisy there is probably still time (if the show bothers). I don't think anyone would claim these are the best GH episodes ever. It may be very lowered expectations at play. But I do think that scenes like yesterdays were some of Tracy's best, as she is a character who is often not allowed that type of moment.
    • You would think that, wouldn't you? I'd almost think they needed the money to get Robert Newman back, but they also had to know Larkin wasn't going to stick around and play second banana either. I don't get what the writers thought they were doing with Calla. Long liked using actors from Texas, but other than Alex/Bev McKinsey, the characters she wrote for them seemed blah.
    • Bo has a bad history with kids named Zach. (too soon?)
    • Christie said in her interview this week that she recently started taking acting classes again, and has been doing some work in England, so that helped her to jump into Carrie for this (as well as it being all so familiar, it really was home.)
    • Andrea Barber aka Kimmy Gibbler did have a few scenes with Drake too, when he first came on. Christie came in the middle of that storyline 
    • Carrie, as played by Andrea Barber, was at Bo & Hope's wedding. She was the flower girl. The ringbearer was Zachary Parker, the little boy that Megan tried to pass off as her and Bo's son. Andrea's Carrie was at Tony & Anna's real wedding (Aug. 5, 1985). She appeared for the last time on March 21, 1986. Christie's Carrie debuted on April 14, 1986. It appears that Carrie remained in Salem, just off-screen, during that near-month. Christie picked up with what Andrea had been playing, apprehension over John.
    • I don't think she is. I think she just created some really boring characters and for some reason doesn't know what to do with them.  But let's say that she is being force to write these characters that she doesn't like or want to write for.......that's a really bad sign that the creator of the show is being told what to do from the very beginning.  With so many EPs, I was worried there could be too many cooks in the kitchen, too many people giving notes - all those EPs are representing companies who have a stake in the show.    Canada continues to be one episode ahead. Thursday's US episode is another lacklustre episode, even with Leslie in it.  We'll see if Friday or Monday's episode in Canada will be a repeat. 
    • Like a lot of soaps, once relatives left, they kinda dropped off the face of the earth and out of conversations. I don't know why writers do that. If they just don't want to confuse viewers, or don't think it matters, or want the liberty kind of revise history to make their stories work. After Josh left in '84, he's barely mentioned. Even when Billy's railing against Kyle and refusing to accept him, it'd be the most natural thing in the world to say "Kyle's NOT by brother, JOSH is!" and I don't think he ever really says that.  The only writer I can recall who didn't do that is Doug Marland on ATWT. 
    • IIRC, there is a line during this time period where Reva says something like Marah is her first-born child, which fans were not thrilled with.  Dylan makes a few appearances through the rest of the show (and a much later recast that isn't really worth talking about, with a face that is familiar to you). He will make one briefly during 1997, if you get that far.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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