Jump to content

Y&R January 2018 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 489
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

That was what two months ago? Clearly, it was set-up as a plot-point - and a very bad one at that. In addition to voiding the previous documents (and getting a restraining order against Graham), due to Dina's diagnosis, the conversation about having one (or all) of her children appointed as health-care and/or financial guardians should have happened. Dina (like my mother) could've rejected it - and that would be a great material about personal choices of one's future. Of course, I don't have to deal with a gold-digger staking a claim. Haha 

 

MY needs to get a clue, Dina as the Grande Dame of GC would be a far better use of MA than this 'personal' story. It would be so different if the actor wasn't amazing and the character full of rich "real" history with ties to so many characters/families on-screen. The beauty of Dina is that she had a whole other life in Paris that could be mined for stories for years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think aspects of the show are good. I like the increase in conflict. Many of the characters are more interesting to me.  Dina's story is a mockery though.  Not only is her disease progressing too quickly, but making her an arsonist and a kidnapper?

Please register in order to view this content

No. Way more likely she would drive her car through Crimson Lights storefront and wonder why the breaks weren't working no matter how hard she pressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

+1

 

I'm really really disappointed they're wasting Dina on the alzheimer's story.

 

Is the actress who plays Sharon's mother still alive? They could have had Doris develop it as Sharon goes on a search for her father. Sharon takes on the care of her mother while trying to find her father. I get why MY chose Dina, I just don't like it.

 

Imagine if Jeanne Cooper were still alive, he'd probably have it be Katherine.

 

And sadly, I also have to agree he's hellbent on doing this. I haven't seen this weeks episodes so I don't know why Graham is back but why bring him back? Is Dina going to croak soon? I keep waiting for the dreaded day I read "Marla Adams Out"

 

I feel similarly. I like some of the conflict and some of the set up of that conflict but the one episode a day thing kind of ruins momentum to me. It actually wasn't a big deal to me at first, sometimes I didn't even pay enough attention to think about it being a new day, and I don't actually hate the idea, it's the execution of said idea that's slightly failing.

 

I don't love that the show feels like the women are all catty bitches to each other and the men are calling the shots and seem to be leading things. I know some will see it as 'strong' but I don't need a catfight to know a woman is strong.

 

I agree on the Dina story. I appreciate MY wanting to bring awareness to it, but I don't think he's really doing that, even if a lot of it is sadly accurate. Marla Adams was the perfect person to fill the void left by Katherine (and NO ONE can "replace" Katherine or Jeanne Cooper but MA fits perfectly in that similar role) and they're wasting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I disagree.  It should have been the FIRST thing they did.  They didn't even know she had Alzheimers when they brought her back.  Why didn't they take her to see Michael upon return and put a stop to Graham's meddling?

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

    • 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. 
    • No. Ed and Holly were married and having problems. She had an affair with Roger and that's when Christina--Blake--was conceived. The rape happened much later, after Holly and Roger were married.
    • Was Blake the product of Roger raping Holly, or did that come after when they were a couple?
    • I really wish we could see that episode...absolutely, my memory could be faulty, it was a very long time ago. I'm not going to contradict what the actors said--there has to be a reason it made them so uncomfortable that they talked about it in the press and complained to TPTB. I think that was the first one where they made the point that they wanted to educate the audience about the subject.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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