Jump to content

YR: Former Bold and Beautiful actress joins the show

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's not too many female legacy characters she could play ... 


She could be a new third party for the dry Mariah/Tessa pairing or you think she is bringing Sally to GC? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

She is Sarah Horton! No wait, I meant Jennifer Foster.


I hope she is not Sally. The character is a joke and the last thing Y&R needs, is a connection to B&B's stupidity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Soap Opera Network Community? Tell a friend!
  • Posts

    • I agree with y'all, and I guess that's why I'm easier on soaps and other shows if they don't necessarily get it right. I'm not easy on them enough to still watch or support something I don't like, but I do think that "trying" is worth something. After being excited for a short while, I ended up absolutely HATING Luke/Noah on ATWT and thought they were embarrassing. But other gay men, especially the older ones who'd been watching the show for years and years, loved them. So while they just made me roll my eyes, I understood that they meant more to others. Still wanted that relationship blown to smithereens for something more fun, but y'know. GLEE. I hated it. But what it did for many gay youth can't be denied. I know that someone will reply that there were other majorly problematic things with the show, but my point is that it served tons of gay kids who otherwise would not have gotten that confidence boost or feeling of community.
    • Entering April and...   ...GOOOD this show reeks of propping. I cannot with the loops the writers are writing in to keep Peter around, Why is Dr. O who has went toe to toe in hand combat with Anna...IN A MASK TO BOOT or Carly who has pulled every trick in the book or even Maxie who has fake a pregancy and used to be the crafty schemer herself so scared of this nothing burger of weaksauce son of a GH villain I like? Uh...NO!!!   Yeah, that scene of Cameron picking on Jake was a bad one. WL has done better. That said, I do like there is family conflict in Liz's family. Those boys have gotten along for too long.   So is the next event we are building up to is the opening of Curtis's club? There is enough story building going on at least to have things happen.   I am just sadden that a month ago, there was momentum going on and climaxes and it fell flat in two weeks.     
    • I am shocked at you.  LVP is cohosting that new dog show with Rebel Wilson, has VPD still in the works, and at least has one more project in the works I believe if memory serves. And VPR is still in the air...especially now that Kandi is about to start filming that OLG spinoff show. It's why I had to post that tweet. No matter how things go, LVP STAYS hustling. Kyle could NEVER.    And Andy Cokehead's ratings are not much better at times so Twitter can stay pressed. Please register in order to view this content 
    • I suppose the premise of “LGBTQ” as this hodgepodge community is what I’m questioning. That one letter of the acronym is interchangeable with the other. I understand it from a political coalition standpoint—strength in numbers—and there’s certainly been overlap in term of cultural spaces, but for the most part, the only thing these letters have in common is that they transgress commonly accepted ideas of gender roles and identities. EDIT: I know they aren’t discrete, mutually exclusive groups. Trans people can be gay, lesbian, bi, etc. as well.   But in general I agree. Soaps are broadcast TV vehicles and have to be as broadly appealing and narratively nimble as possible. It’s why streaming services (or smaller cable networks) that can nurture niche-oriented content are so groundbreaking. A gay-male soap on Netflix or Hulu wouldn’t have to cater to a mass audience and could take more risks.
    • Well on the other hand, if the logic is the community is very broad and diverse so you can't represent it in its diversity, the notion that all that is needed is that there would be *some* representation takes precedence hence the logic here. We also have, frustrated as we may be, to understand the tough spot they are in. If they have budget for thirty contract players and the number of pairings LGBTQ character can have is necessarily limited, LGBT character have a lower return-on-investment in terms of story for a producer. So expecting every strand of LGBT being represented is setting the bar unrealistically high.
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Create New...

Important Information

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