2 hours ago, edgeofnik said:

 

 

Anyway, on a B&B note. Has the show done any remotes this year? I can't recall any non-LA location shoots. It's truly the one thing where B&B excels - the other soaps aren't even players compared to them. 

 

I don't think the show has done any remotes since Australia for the 30th anniversary, and the very narrow scope of which characters get used doesn't really necessitate one. Unless Brad gets the idea to send Hope/Liam/Steffy off to a Parisian fashow show just so Hope can be horrified when she sees Liam and Steffy kiss on a bridge with a full view of the Effiel Tower in the background. Y&R did exactly that with Nick/Sharon/Phyllis years ago. I was disappointed by the Monte Carlo one back in 2016 other than the slap heard across Monte Carlo it was pointless! 

1 hour ago, soapfan770 said:

 

I don't think the show has done any remotes since Australia for the 30th anniversary, and the very narrow scope of which characters get used doesn't really necessitate one. Unless Brad gets the idea to send Hope/Liam/Steffy off to a Parisian fashow show just so Hope can be horrified when she sees Liam and Steffy kiss on a bridge with a full view of the Effiel Tower in the background. Y&R did exactly that with Nick/Sharon/Phyllis years ago. I was disappointed by the Monte Carlo one back in 2016 other than the slap heard across Monte Carlo it was pointless! 

 

Thanks for confirm. I'm guessing budget issues are catching up to B&B finally. I thought they may have returned to Monte Carlo in conjuction with the international TV awards. I could've sworn they went back after the "slap" but they had terrible weather and had to do a lot of it indoors - maybe that was the same one. 

4 hours ago, Darn said:

I've been watching a lot of old B&B clips lately and wow is this Steffy/Liam/hope drama a copy and paste of all the crap Brooke/Ridge/Taylor went through. The dialogue might as well be lifted from their scenes.

 

Making the show only about that triangle highlights that the show was never only about those three or whatever romantic entanglement was keeping Brooke and Ridge apart. We had Stephanie and a plethora of other plots going on too. I think this show desperately needs a commanding presence like Susan Flannery's to keep things moving and Bill is not it. Don Diamont is a handsome man but he's not a very good actor. 

 

 

 

I've long felt the same, just cross out their names for Brooke, Ridge and Taylor. It's all just wash, rinse and repeat for years on end.

 

While I think the show has struggled for a good long time with not telling more than one story, really, they at one point did manage to involve a lot of characters. You can still have a well flowing show and not have a zillion stories on-going. I feel like the show's been on autopilot for a while now.

 

And as you said, losing people like Susan Flannery hurts more than I think is realized at the time. I know she retired (who can blame her? Stephanie became the Victor Newman and Stefano DiMera of B&B) but the loss matters.

 

Also having a bunch of recasts on soaps doesn't help. Sure, characters are there in name, and sometimes an actor can win us over, but it's still not the same. Who cares about Thorsten's Ridge beside Brad Bell? I was never a Ronn Moss fan but I'd take his Ridge back in a heartbeat because he's familiar and the history is there. 

 

Anyway, just rambling like I usually do

Edited September 13, 20187 yr by KMan101

4 hours ago, ChitHappens said:

 

What type of MAN does this?  I didn't grow up with men thinking this is acceptable to say/do things like this to a woman.  

 I think the internet has really given a certain kind of man more opportunity to be plain awful. 

 

 

28 minutes ago, edgeofnik said:

 

Thanks for confirm. I'm guessing budget issues are catching up to B&B finally. I thought they may have returned to Monte Carlo in conjuction with the international TV awards. I could've sworn they went back after the "slap" but they had terrible weather and had to do a lot of it indoors - maybe that was the same one. 

 

Actually, I think your right. The slap was in 2016. I do recall now they went back last summer but it was just a very short trip regarding Steffy vs. Sally with crappy Thomas and Carolina drama but most of it was indoors. 

 

 

11 hours ago, JellicleCat said:

Like I said, I'm not defending Winsor, and I haven't being following whatever else he has said or tweeted. It's just not that uncommon for people to criticize when politicians/actors/etc they like are being subjected to ridicule on social media, while having no problem with politicians/actors/etc they don't like being subjected to the same ridicule. That's all I meant to say.

I'm certainly not defending anyone being racist, and that includes Winsor Harmon.

 

 

You say you’re not defending WH, but at least twice you’ve attempted to make an equivalency between marking Maxine Waters with that picture and comments about Republicans like Trump. There is no equivalency, and these things are not the same.

 

You were polite about it, but there still something about your posts that bothers me. Winsor Harmon was racist. That’s the bottom line..

11 hours ago, Juliajms said:

Yeah, a white man comparing an African American woman to a monster is never going to be the same as people mocking Trump's looks (which I've never done because there is so much else to go after).  The power dynamics and cultural context are completely different. I would have thought that was obvious.

 

^^^THIS

11 hours ago, ranger1rg said:

You say you’re not defending WH, but at least twice you’ve attempted to make an equivalency between marking Maxine Waters with that picture and comments about Republicans like Trump. There is no equivalency, and these things are not the same.

 

You were polite about it, but there still something about your posts that bothers me. Winsor Harmon was racist. That’s the bottom line..

 

When I wrote my original post I had no idea that Winsor had made racist remarks elsewhere. All I had to go on was the picture that was posted, and his tweet about being open to being sexually harrassed in exchange for a job. Had I known then about his other activities I would have looked differently upon the whole thing. As it was I didn't find anything racist about the picture. Without the context of his other remarks I interpreted it more in a political and sexist way (which of course is bad enough in itself). That's why I made the comparison to ridiculing Trump (or Hillary Clinton, or Paul Ryan, or Bernie Sanders or any other similar person) and that's why I felt that there was an overreaction. If we're open to ridiculing some people because we don't share their political views then we must accept that people ridicule the people whose political views we do share. And if we accept that men are ridiculed for their appearance then we must accept that women are fair game too.

With that said, racism is not, and should never be, acceptable, and I would not have made my original post if I had interpreted the photo as that, and if I offended anyone I apologize. It was not my intention.

 

4 minutes ago, JellicleCat said:

As it was I didn't find anything racist about the picture.

 

Really?

^^

Yes, really. I've seen similar things with other famous people when they've had unfortunate pictures taken and then being compared to all sorts of creatures, monsters, animals. So I just saw this as another one.

On 9/13/2018 at 1:00 PM, Juliajms said:

Yeah, a white man comparing an African American woman to a monster is never going to be the same as people mocking Trump's looks (which I've never done because there is so much else to go after).  The power dynamics and cultural context are completely different. I would have thought that was obvious.

 

THIS!

 

Anyone who doesn't know the history of African American men and women being compared to animals and subhuman-type species fails to understand the history of racist imagery and iconography that was prevalent on the 19th and 20th centuries (and still is).  

10 hours ago, JellicleCat said:

 

When I wrote my original post I had no idea that Winsor had made racist remarks elsewhere. All I had to go on was the picture that was posted, and his tweet about being open to being sexually harrassed in exchange for a job. Had I known then about his other activities I would have looked differently upon the whole thing. As it was I didn't find anything racist about the picture. Without the context of his other remarks I interpreted it more in a political and sexist way (which of course is bad enough in itself). That's why I made the comparison to ridiculing Trump (or Hillary Clinton, or Paul Ryan, or Bernie Sanders or any other similar person) and that's why I felt that there was an overreaction. If we're open to ridiculing some people because we don't share their political views then we must accept that people ridicule the people whose political views we do share. And if we accept that men are ridiculed for their appearance then we must accept that women are fair game too.

With that said, racism is not, and should never be, acceptable, and I would not have made my original post if I had interpreted the photo as that, and if I offended anyone I apologize. It was not my intention.

 

 

I know it seems as if we’re ganging up on you, but part of the reason you continue to get pushback is because you still don’t seem to get it.

 

You apologized with “if I offended anyone.” If? What’s wrong with just saying “I’m wrong. I messed up here and learned something”? Sorry, but I’m not a fan of apologies that sound like they were written for a politician.

 

The other problem is your LONG explanation for getting this wrong. That photo ALONE is racist. No other context is needed, including Windsor’s other awful tweets.  It is a problem that you didn’t “find anything racist about the picture.” Respectfully, you need to do some reading and research.

 

You then AGAIN give us your LONG explanation of how we have to accept ridicule of politicians we like if we accept ridicule of those we don’t like. You make th3 point that men and women are both fair game. We get it — you’re against double standards.

 

After all that, you FINALLY get to “racism is not acceptable.” You buried the lead at the end, and it came across as an afterthought.

 

i do not think you’re a bad person, and I don’t think you’re a racist. I’m sorry for dragging you like this, but I think you need to hear that your response is weak. The number of people here telling you that your message wasn’t well-received should be a sign that you needed to do better than a blasé apology following a lengthy excuse. 

Brooke really needs to go.  Tuned in today to hear her question Thorne and Katie’s marriage proposal being too fast?  Lollll when she shoved her daughter towards Liam’s penis and told her not to wait another moment?  Conspiring with Bill to basically become Will’s Mom because we know that’s where it’s going.  Argue with Ridge about Will, Bill, Katie, etc.?  Someone dump her out of a Helicopter and actually make it permanent.  

This show really needs another woman in her 40s/50s. The Ridge/Brooke/$Bill carousel is boring and repetitive, and Bill goes from declaring his love for Steffy to sniffing around Brooke within weeks again.

 

I hear HT will be more of a presence moving forward, though.

3 minutes ago, Faulkner said:

The Ridge/Brooke/$Bill carousel is boring and repetitive, and Bill goes from declaring his love for Steffy to sniffing around Brooke within weeks again.

 

 

This is why I can't take any of these stories seriously......Bill loves no one but himself....his lust for Steffy and then Brooke is pure bullshit. It's not believable ....

Edited September 19, 20187 yr by Soapsuds

I'm really not ready for another round of Brooke and Bill. I'm just so sick of $ Bill Spencer. At this point they should just write the character out. He's been written into a corner a few too many times now.

 

Thorne and Katie already engaged is such bad and lazy writing as well.