-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Tell a friend
-
Posts
-
Ding, ding, ding. lol. Well thankfully, someone was kind enough to do an article about this and I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post from that site so let me see if I can break down what happened: During the height of BLM and Bravo firing people right and left, Bravo was going to open a dialogue about race. Problem? They were only going to do it by streaming/Intrasgram. KANDI, who was wanting to talk to Bravo about changes about how the network dealt with race, got wind of this and emailed them, saying they should do it in prime time as a special to reach a wider audience. She also suggested they used Bravolebrities. Bravo agreed. The result? The RACE IN AMERICA specials that Bravo aired. Meanwhile, Kandi asked Bravo to work with more black owned production companies and hire more from well known black universities. Basically what we have been saying in other threads on these boards about how representation...true representation...should be in front of AND behind camera. That way people get to experience what it was like to be around other races and have diversity. Kandi told Porsha, Tanya, and Marlo about reaching out to Bravo. And they...did not take kindly to that. Kandi was shocked, especially since it seem they were mostly annoyed that Kandi reached out to Bravo without discussing it first. So Kandi got annoyed...especially at Porsha who at that point was very active in the BLM movement as well. The disagreement supposingly got leaked to the press. So FILMED ON THE SHOW Kandi confronted Porsha about all of this. BUT...that scene WAS CUT. The problem? A lot of Kenya's actions after that was filmed since she walked into the middle of the conversation when it was filmed WAS NOT CUT OUT OF THE SHOW, making it seem like she was just 'being the villain.' Said scene would have revealed her motivations for all she said in the first place, giving the slow burn needed to that bachelorette party I've said months ago. Kenya had already discussed this scene (even on one of Kandi's SPEAK ON IT I believe) and accused Porsha of begging producers to cut the footage per the image she was showing this season since the conversation put Porsha in a not nice light since it seem clear she was jealous of Kandi for being active in BLM as well. I believe you mentioned the interview Kandi did with Vulture above. Well so did Porsha. Last night. On her LIVE. Before last night, people have asked her about this before now. But she has been mute. Last night she defended her part in the situation. However she also admitted YES SHE ASKED PRODUCTION TO CUT THE SCENE. aka KENYA WAS RIGHT. aka UH OH. Porsha also confirmed that Kandi and Porsha had cleared up this disagreement but it went left when Kenya walked over and Kandi and Porsha fell out. So Porsha knew how it would look...BAD...so she went to them to take it out. Thus, Kenya who was right does not like being made to look like a liar and the running rumor is that she brought this up at the reunion...AND WE MIGHT SEE THE SCENE TOO...and she brought receipts to back this up. She really felt that Porsha must be using BLM for personal reasons if she is going to be pressed about Kandi also supporting BLM...and if as they are all black women supporting the same cause...why is Porsha pressed? Why does she not own it? And THAT brings us to what you said above...cuz if that comes out...that brings us back to a few months ago when some of us here were debating if Porsha's activism was real or not...and that answer would become murky I suspect with the new scene in question. I knew Porsha was already marching before filming so I feel she was being real and raising awareness. But being jealous of Kandi for doing the same...is not a good look. She could have pivot from that, but kinda chose not to per her constant rivalry with Kenya. Bad form. And thus mess. I feel like I forgot something but that is the basis I believe. -
By RavenWhitney · Posted
Amazing cast. But with many Marland episodes I felt like I needed a tranquilizer after watching. This show was on speed. Too many characters and chaos in many of these scenes. -
Please no Connor, and mostly please don't ever let him sing again https://youtu.be/nZKrkpRa4EA?t=70 -
By Jackie Zeman's Insta I think they filmed the episode today -
I was reading the weekly synopses of the introduction to the character of Stuart Chandler and it got me thinking. I don't want to use the term "offensive" because I did not feel that way. However, in retrospect, it was not just politically incorrect, but also poorly written and acted. First, it seems like a choice that Stuart's "mental problems" were always obtuse. Was he psychotic? Well, there were no hallucinations or delusions. Did he have Autism? Well, he maintained romantic relationships with two women, which would suggest that he did not have delays in socialization, and he did not display any restrictive interests or repetitive movements. Was he intellectually deficient? Well he seemed capable of taking care of his adaptive skills such as cooking and cleaning himself. The lack of diagnosis seemed to be in the service of not having to advocate for any specific disease, but it left many open questions. Second, his portrayal as being cute and immature was disrespectful of people with brain injuries. Most men with brain injuries do not indicate their level of impairment by wearing crewneck sweaters. And men with structural damage to their cortex don't speak like little boys or want to play with toys. Writing and acting the character of Stuart as lovable because he seemed younger than his age was problematic. Could he consent to a sexual relationship with Marion given his level of functioning? Who knew, because it was so ill defined. As I recall AMC got accolades for the portrayal of Stuart and fans enjoyed his romances with Cindy and Marion. But, given my own experiences knowing people with head injuries, Autism, and chronic mental illness, it was just grossly out of touch. AMC tried again with the characters of Lily Montgomery and Jonathan Lavery but the acting in both cases was atrocious. Jonathan's miraculous recovery from a brain injury was worse than when soaps have people spontaneously walk after paralysis, or see after temporary blindness, because Jonathan inexplicably had to act as if he was still delayed in order to maintain his relationship, and then was found out when Jackson heard him speak "normally." On what planet would that be considered sensitive or tasteful story telling? I guess we should applaud the efforts to show intellectual diversity. However, when the only stories for people with disabilities are either about being abused or trying to find love, writers have missed the opportunity to mine the real dramas in the lives of people with neurological differences and their families.
-
-
Recent Status Updates
-
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.