Jump to content

Y&R: June 2017 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I love how you described it and I felt dirty at the same time. But JM has always had Nick come across (more back in the old days) as primal at times but yes, touchable indeed.

 

@allmc2008, actually since L.A., I think the writers have been doing that.

 

Count me in as a fan of Abbotts. I was not around for Dina, but have seen/heard references to her for years so it's nice that she does not at all disappoint. And I guess it's just the family vibe that the Abbotts give up. Very relatable to me when I was little.

 

@DramatistDreamer, be still my writer heart and how you think. And you do plays? Jealous.

 

 

???

 

I was just liking that they are leaning a little toward him and Abby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Agree about keeping Dina around being worth it. I also think it was EOL. But so far I'm not seeing holes in the story or seeing a drastic turn that doesn't make sense to say her story is rewritten. I'm still waiting on the big moment, whatever it is, to happen.  

 

Using Scotty at Fenmore's requires them to use Lauren. But then maybe not since that merger with Jabot. He can easily be interacting with jack, Phyllis, Ashley.....and Dina. I don't get the point of him and Sharon. 

 

I think he was brought back cause the show needed men, in general. But he's being used all wrong. I think he's attractive BUT not the thing of my fantasies by any means. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Great. This is really great commentary. 

 

Scott's story is a prime example of one of the main problems I have with the show at the moment. Instead of telling story that makes sense using characters that make sense, the show warps story to push characters, pairings, rivalries, et al that they've decided they want to focus on. It makes zero sense for Scotty to be involved with Newman when Fenmores is/ was struggling. It makes no sense that his entire family is offscreen while he builds relationships with Newmans instead of them.  

 

It's also absurd to me that Hilary is leading story about Juliet. I've said it before, but from what's onscreen you'd think she's the one who slept with Cane and filed a lawsuit instead of Juliet. 

 

Please register in order to view this content

 

It's just bad story telling. I struggle with it. Dina's story is one of the few playing proper beats with characters that should be featured, if you discount Tracy and Jill not being utilized as they should. Is there any wonder it's the best one being told? 

 

I think this is a reach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I know it won't happen, but can you imagine if Y&R can build on the past 4 weeks by adding the following catalysts during the next few months: Dru, Adam and Shelia? The lack of a morally gray character is evident as Chloe and Hilary have filled that void during the past few weeks - they immediately grab your attention because they are pushing story forward. The same could be said about Dina, but in a far deeper emotional way ties back to the Abbott family introduction 30+ years ago. If only they could return Michael and Phyllis to their devious/clever selves.

 

I exclude TGVM because he that vulnerable part that makes you like him was gone decades ago - he's all about manipulation, control and whisking Nikki on 'exotic trips with no business' when she strays too far. But it's better that he's at the office than sitting around listening to classic music and playing chess with Faith, who knock wood is MIA until SORAS'd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That first paragraph is everything. And you are right. Chloe and Hil are really driving story which is drawing you in...for better or for worse. Same for Dina. And I think we need more of that. And watching old Y&R shows in the Old Articles Thread is making me see how watered down Michael and Phyllis are. I guess I do kinda miss that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

So, yea - they really need to ship MCE off somewhere and keep EH.  She's so much more interesting than MCE's Chelsea.  Send Chels and Nick off somewhere to "start a new life" until such time as Adam is back (hopefully not for a couple years) and bring them back for the Christian WTD reveal.  I know none of this will never happen but still...

 

 

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

    • GH was good? I havent watched since Joss went away to do her traininig and Lulu had just called Brooklyn out for having Dante's baby and not telling him
    • BTG: A-  DAYS: B+  Eastenders: C
    • There was a rumor that Jean will die and that’s probably why she’s back then
    • There has been some confusion about Michael & facial burns. Please see this post: https://bsky.app/profile/shallotpeel.bsky.social/post/3lqkrryu54226 I've chosen to put this here instead of the Classic Thread because it is now with the appearance of recast Michael that this has come up. Different places online, including at least one podcast, remarks have been made about how remarkable it is that he is without facial scarring. Other fans say it was clear from the first that he did not have facial burns. What is included in this post is 2 screengrabs where you can see his face at the hospital & a very quick edit of that day in the hospital. 
    • Put me in the LOVE KMH camp. As a poster alluded to above, her detractors seem to come from people who first experienced the 80s Emily actress. And that's often the case with soaps, myself included. I enjoy the original actor so much that I just never take to the recast. However, KMH played Emily far longer than the original - for almost 20 years - and when she had great material, she was great. I get the sense she didn't like playing the whiny oh-woe-is-me Emily which was all the material she got from about 1996 until she took over the Intruder in late '99/early '00 and got to play a stronger kiss-ass woman who didn't care what anyone thought of her. (Some would call that a bitch but, if a man was in that role, he'd just be called a smart and savvy businessman.) Her relationship with Hal was great. The transformation was done realistically and I thoroughly enjoyed those years the best out of all. Once the writers decided to break up those two, they went back to writing Emily half the time as whiny and pathetic. I preferred when the writers made her stronger.
    • Hahaha - I do. I've always been the type, though, that can't miss anything. I get FOMO, so I'll not skip episodes or fast forward anything. There are only a few TV shows I've dropped because they got so bad vs. sticking it out to the end.  The promise that GL 1997 is better is what keeps me going. I especially want to see the fallout of Blake's lie about her twins and then Annie's descent which I believe won Watros's Emmy.
    • Rita's rape is an episode i constantly search on YouTube hoping one day that it will show up. I always feel like I may have seen it, but I was only 6 at the time and can never figure any of the things I have vague recollection of 
    • FROM THE VAULT: NON-SOAP DAYTIME RATINGS: HIGHLIGHTS FROM FEBRUARY 1973 & MAY 1973:

      Please register in order to view this content

        FROM THE VAULT: NON-SOAP DAYTIME RATINGS: HIGHLIGHTS FROM AUGUST 1973 & NOVEMBER 1973:
    • The rape was in 1979 after they were married. Blake was the result of Holly cheating with him while she was married to Ed. I believe she was born in 1975. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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