Jump to content

B&B: Bold from the beginning


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Sally Spectra arrives in December 1988 and it's a turning point. Building a business and family around her was genius. The Spectra gang pretty much replaces the Logans by 1991.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

The show should have tried Bill and Stephanie, at least for a brief affair, particularly as Eric begins his May/December relationship with Brooke.

And yeah, loads of wasted characters. Nick and Donna barely scratched the surface and Katie was forever wasted in one deadend story or another. I was more than ready for Beth and Steven to go to Paris when they did as it was obvious that the show had waning interest in Beth since the recast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Maybe I see it in a different way, but I find 1987, 1988, 1989 and onwards... I am now up to 1992...1993... incredibly balanced. Every show has missed opportunities. But I think they chose the right ones. I think Caroline dying really did something good to the show... it started to breathe better and be more real. I am not opposed Caroline, I just think it's better written after her death. Taylor is incredibly interesting the first 2-3 years... before she becomes the maniac with the hysteric moving head.

I just adore Stephanie in every scene and I wish more and more Stephanie every time I watch. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I can understand the writers going in the direction they did, especially in a half hour show where they wanted to keep the cast roughly the same size.

And there wasn't the burden/obligation to hang on to characters as they were beloved vets (a problem that haunts today's Y&R)

The overall push in the 80's was towards wealthier characters. The Forrestors had taken the spotlight and unless they could find a way to integrate the Logans, they became islanded, whereas the Spectra clan were directly involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I recently read parts of the "Rags" bible and, please, nobody hound over it.

I'm curious if this happened:

So, in it, Stephanie is sexually frustrated and her daughter, Kristen, is frigid. Kristen starts seeing a man who wants to be with her sexually. They are at the pool and she refuses his advances and then runs to her room and sobs.

Stephanie, who is sex starved, was watching and offers to be used by him when he is needing to, well, have sex with Kristen -- she encourages the relationship between the two SO she can be with this guy.

I do know Stephen wasn't on the show in the beginning but he is critical to the  initial story-line.

Bell originally wanted Ridge/Caroline for the first 3 weeks or so and then write her (and the entire family) out after the wedding is called out. The Logan's were very prominent and Stephen/Eric was going to have a Rich Dad/Poor Dad feel. Stephen wasn't a deadbeat but he was a man who, though reeking with ambition, had many failed businesses. Beth's catering service she worked for, though, was the bread and butter of the family (so to speak).  However, Bill Bell makes it VERY clear that Stephanie IS NOT worthy of Eric and Stephen IS NOT worthy of Beth and for Eric/Beth to be end game.

Brooke is called Jessica. Forrester, the last name, is Chandler. Beth's mom was supposed to be on and serve as a Nancy Hughes of sorts. He GREATLY emphasized on needing a LOT of senior-citizen story lines. And Forrester Creations is called Ingenue Designs.

 

I'm sure I know the answer to this and I feel like an idiot for asking. Was there some mentioning on the show of Thorn being gay? It's stated that other characters think he is as he showed very little, if any, interest in women. And that a rumor was going to start in which everyone feels it's fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Fascinating. I don't think they ever suggested Thorne was gay (but I haven't watched all the retro episodes available). I will note that even back in the early days, the idea of B&B not having a gay character was seen as odd/unrealistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do sense in the early episodes Beth/Eric were end game especially with the original actress playing Beth.

Interesting that in the bible that Caroline was only meant to be short term.

And while I agree with phasing out the Logans, I do think that Brooke being the sole Logan and being focused on did hinder the show.  She was kind of a limited character in terms of story avenues.

On the other hand, Donna had a lot more avenues to have explored with being a model, working briefly at Spencer Publications, and having that pseudo father figure Bill....her story got short shafted by year 3..and becoming tied to Thorne in year 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Donna was probably the most interesting of the Logans to me and the most modern in her day. Her character was openly ambitious, wanted better for herself and it her happiness was never tied to one man. I can't figure out why the decision was made to take the character in the direction she was taken in the third year and beyond.

Question: did Joanna Johnson opt not to renew before Caroline was ended? If so, I could see why. B&B seemed very wedded to the idea of endless love triangles even before the '00s and I can imagine that would become pretty boring after awhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Joanna Johnson announced in December 1989 that she was going to leave when her contract was up in March 1990, but Bill Bell got her to stay until July 1990. Thus Ridge and Caroline's marriage, effectively ending the Ridge/Thorne/Caroline/Brooke quad (which was also derailed by the recasting of Thorne and real-life pregnancy of Katherine Kelly Lang), and later Caroline's illness and death. Around the same time Bill Bell set up Thorne/Macy and Eric/Brooke.

Edited by kalbir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Bill Bell seemed kind of impulsive in his writing.  He probably decided to refocus the show on Spectra vs Forrester... and just dropped the Logan family.  

Only reason he probably kept Donna was because she was more connected to the concept of the show due to her being model, etc... then the other Logans.  I think it was a shame that they dropped Nick and also dropped the Donna/Bill mentor relationship... but I did think it was wise to tie her to the Spectras via her friendship with Macy (fulfilling the void left by Katie) and being a model for their brand.

And it worked to further the dislike Stephanie had for the Logan's because she viewed Donna working for Spectra as another black mark she had against that family.  I just didn't like that the show had her fall for Thorne when I think she could have been viable with her own story/focus over on the Spectra side.

I also don't think Bill Bell was capable of writing a modern woman without tying her to a man.. and I think that's what he tried to do with Donna in year 3 with Thorne before having her just floating around with nothing to do in year 4 except be the talk to for Brooke and a recast Storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You know, considering Bell's history of methodical, some might say "slow" writing, impulsive would not be a term that would normally come to mind when describing him but in this case, I think you may be correct here.  In some subtle ways, B&B was a tad more "experimental" (filming of exterior/interior shots, etc) than Y&R, which had a more staid aura.

With the Writer's Strike the previous year, it's clear why many aspects of the show seemed so uneven then but 1989 was rocky in some aspects that seem inexplicable. Clearly 1989 was a transitional year but the way some situations shift got wild! The way three characters (all happened to be male) got herded off the show in short order was really jarring. I guess there were reasons why the characters diminished or disappeared but the mechanism could have been more artful. I mean, didn't Rocco practically disappear? Nick seemed to have vanished. It was weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

She probably could have had most of Karen's storylines. The only one that wouldn't fit would of course be the initial storyline with Blake finding her at the diner as Faith and discovering that she was Caroline's long lost twin. The rest - triangle with Thorne and Macy, working with Spectra, being Brooke's confidant until they fell out over Connor, her relationship with Connor etc all seem to be storylines that Donna could've had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I'm fighting for my life on another board for my husband Brandon and I'll do it here too lmao
    • I don't expect Lois to be the same person she was 25 years ago, but she's definitely lost a lot of what made Lois unique.  It's clear the show doesn't know how to write for her, and the sole purpose of Lois is to hide this Gio secret.  It's a shame she doesn't interact with more of the canvas.  It's a waste of Rena's talents. I like Brook Kerr most of the time.  She can be hit or miss.  I totally get what you are saying about her line readings too.  I honestly think the character really suffers being stuck in the Curtis pairing.  She's much better than Tanisha Harper's Jordan lol.
    • Friday and yesterday's episode is what daytime television should be. The other shows airing could take a page from yesterday's show.  I loved the rage, hurt and anger Nicole unleashed on Ted.  Daphnee should be up for an Emmy nom for these scenes.  It broke my heart to see how Dana had locked Eva out.  I do feel sorry for Eva.    I am still bumfuzzled as to why Leslie/Dana went to the DuPree's and asked them to accept Kat UNLESS Eva is really Kat's twin (and really Nicole and Ted's daughter that maybe they though they lost or an embryo Dana/Leslie stole??) I loved how Anita and Vernon both shot her down.    Ohhh and let me just say Friday and yesterday was the MOST fire I have seen Martin have since the show started.  Maybe Brandon Clayborn is coming into his own with the role finally.    
    • You've been seeing him all along. You just didn't know it was him, I guess. 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Where to for Dana? She's pissed off the Duprees (most of the cast), alienated her daughter and will she be welcomed by the Have Nots at the diner? Maybe she can befriend Ashley and Derek and liven up their story.
    • Melissa Ordway announced she was moved to recurring back in November but is still credited with the contract cast members.
    • I think of Evan as a smarmy bast*rd. Maybe you'll like that description. You certainly have him pegged correctly since he is just a soldier following "Admiral" Iris's marching orders.  
    • So far the only interest I've seen from Evan to Amanda has been listening to Iris's orders to go and seduce her.  So far he hasn't been successful... but who knows. Amanda is unbearable at times. Entitled, spoiled... idiotic. Iris... so blatantly manipulating her and Amanda takes the bait. But I guess... when she gets in trouble... she'll have a chance to learn. That's what makes these shows so interesting.    Oh, no, don't worry. You haven't ruined a thing. Evan has not been on my radar that much... he was not one of the characters I was caring particularly... so nothing much has been changed for me. I don't think he has the stuff to ruin Rachel's life. He's just a pretty guy that can follow orders. Iris on the other hand... is dangerous. 

      Please register in order to view this content

        P.S Maybe Evan will surprise me. Who knows. 
    • The show has gone back to 10/10 entertainment! I'm glad that I was right in feeling that what were experiencing were growing pains. I'm sure they are not over yet, but I'll know that we always comeback to quality drama. I think it's going to be a hell of ride (in a good way) from this moment on. BTG has that magic that not a lot of shows have. I'll update more... when I'm done catching up.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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