Jump to content

Y&R February 2018 Discussion


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 494
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

 

They were quite cute back in the day and apparently had a big following online.  I read that Y&R was hesitant due to the age disparity but the pairing became so popular with fans that they decided to pursue it.

Back then I had no idea how old TL was or any of the Glow By Jabot kids, TBH. 

I noticed that Y&R chose to highlight a clip featuring Lyndsy Fonseca and Thad before their episode, I think hearkens back to when their fanbase really was its strongest.

 

Have you ever since that CW series Nikita

This weekend I just found out that LF and TL again played a couple on that show.  I saw a few episodes on Netflix and they have obvious chemistry but while watching them I couldn't help but feel that this was some type of window into how the two characters could've been had Fonseca stayed on the show (but honestly, it was a wise decision at the time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't know if anyone else has mentioned it....but I tuned in and am completely not surprised that it's "Victor" is behind it with the money missing.  This show has completely made Victor the Stefano of Y&R.  Victor always knows all, finds out all, and is behind it all.  They just can't keep him out of a story for very long and I hate it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

No problem @GMac.  It actually seems to be an interesting show from what I've seen. 

 

 

This is why I'm wary of the whole Ashley vs. Victoria story just turning into yet another proxy war between Victor and Jack. This is why initially I had hoped that Ashley would build her own lab and work with whoever she pleased. 

The storyline still could've been that Jack would want to get her back to Jabot while Ashley wants to make Jack (and by extension Jabot) regret that he ever alienated her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Not a bad episode today minus the Victor being involved again in another climatic story.

 

I had to LOL at Phyliss telling Lauren that she had to continue to dig for the truth in the stolen money because Nick deserved better. Really? Is Nick some prize we don't know about? He is still smooching off of Chelsea. He doesn't work. He has completely forgotten about Faith. He looks like a bum and is weak as Victor pointed out. Whats so great about him? Do tell me Phyliss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think it's the mature writing. They have JT acknowledge his mistakes, and his nod to history has been good. He's not overbearing, and Thad Luckinbell is sexy as!!!

 

Lol why are some of y'all taking credit for Mal work all of a sudden when you were non-stop hating. Sit down lol.

 

I might not like Cait Fairbanks, but cyber bullying is NOT OKAY. I really hope the director can help her improve if they are committed to keeping her.

 

Mal has been acknowledging history in a great subtle way over his predecessor, it's one thing he's definitely gotten right. I'm not surprised anymore, because it shows that he does have a respect for the show.

 

I feel sorry for Doug Davidson in a way. His character has been butchered for years. He really needs to retire from the GC PD and start getting better stories. It actually would be cool seeing him be the lead investigator, as police officers tend to go to corporate role after their career. I'd like to see Victor and Paul have a greater feud after Victor messed up his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

LOL Your Nick abuse is always good stuff, even if I don’t agree. 

 

I admit I’m a Josh Morrow fan, both of his looks and laid back and genuine portrayal of Nick. Nick DOES deserve better than a deceitful, lying partner.

 

(S)Mooching off Chelsea? Don’t think so. He gave away the money he sued Victor for. Doesn’t mean he lost other money he had....trust fund, etc. 

 

He doesn’t work? He’s rehabbing an apt. building, and that’s good enough for me. Besides, the people on this show with “real jobs” don’t work, either.

 

He's forgotten about Faith? Uh....we all know that when kids aren’t seen on soaps, we’re not suppos3d to assume the parents are missing or terrible. Time and time again, Nick has been shown to be a great and loving dad, and JM’s comfort level with kids and babies is obvious.

 

He looks like a bum? I think Nick is hot. If you don’t like him, take a seat. More for me. 

 

 He’s weak as Victor pointed out? Wow. Now we’re taking the word of VICTOR on a character’s worth LOL. Give me Nick’s supposed weakness before Victor’s supposed strength any day. 

 

So yeah, I think Phyllis pretty much nailed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Soooo...apart from SS & KA leaving, were there any other changes to the writing team?  It looks like they still have the same breakdown and script folks from SS's tenure.  Anyway, I'm not sure it's the writing, as I tend to gravitate to the underdog/antagonist.  Although with Chel's story, Phyllis sure comes off as the antagonist lol

 

I don't think anyone here is "taking credit" for Mal's work.  They simply pointed out that they've posted a similar story idea as what is being shown and tongue-in-cheek said he read the forum and used it 

Please register in order to view this content

  It's been done under every regime, not just Mal's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

This!  Also, this happens in real life.  I've taken screenwriting classes where someone had an idea, writes the script, only to discover that a similar idea is under development.  Or someone goes to option source material for an adaptation only to find that someone else just beat them to the punch. Anyone who believes this to be uncommon knows nothing about how the business of creative development truly works. 

There's a phrase that says that "nothing new happens under the sun".  Knowing how this show operates, you pick up definite patterns and there are truly only half a dozen scenarios and directions in which a story can go at any given time.

It's not rocket science.

 

And if I come up with an idea, it's gonna be better than Mal's. And more expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Besides, it isn't the idea that matters, IMO, but the execution.  There are a MILLION romantic comedies out there -- heck, probably more -- with the same arc of "boy meets girl/boy loses girl/boy and girl live happily ever after," but some are simply better than others.

 

What hangs ME up when I noodle with notions for this-or-that story is not the plot, but the character(s).  I always want to create characters who don't talk or behave like any others you might've seen in some other movie (or tv show, or play, or book), but I always feel like my characters ARE derivative, so I give up.

 

This might be why I have not written any serious, creative work since 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I think there is plenty out there that is missing in terms of specificity of character.  The challenge is to write work that lets others (like producers) see the need for the specific character/story that you're trying to tell.

I usually lead with characters when I write anything.  If I make my characters unique, this tends to open up possibilities for the story without it being derivative but yes, it is a challenge and the nature of the business can be downright discouraging @Khan I understand this completely.

Maybe after all these gatekeepers are cleared out from these harassment scandals there may be people who are actually inclined to listen to different voices.  It's already starting to slowly happen (in dribs and drabs).

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