Jump to content

B&B: Bold from the beginning


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

If I hear Bill Spencer refer to Stephanie as a very sensual woman, or Margo as a very sensual woman one more time...

I swear he even said something to the effect of "Well obviously he's a sensual person..." when referring to Mick Savage.

Please register in order to view this content

The writing is wasting Jim Storm's abilities at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Agreed that they totally wasted the character and the possibilities for conflict.  It makes so much more sense that the Forresters would be concerned about reviews in the press rather than competition from other fashion houses, or knock-off firms.  The press can make or break the reputation of a high fashion company, and it is a shame that B&B has rarely capitalized that source of conflict. 

I mean Versace doesn't care if someone if knocking off their prints at TJ Maxx (despite that one scene in House of Gucci), but they put a lot of resources into getting good press at WWD, W, and Vogue.

That being said, it also feels like a missed opportunity that they've never done a story about licensing agreements.  Halston and Bill Blass lost so much clout when their licenses were sold to lower price manufacturers, and I think that is an easy concept to convey to an audience.  So, it seems like a shame that there was never a story about someone trying to make a Logan perfume.  Rather than the unrealistic stories about them spinning off their own teen and swimwear divisions, it should have been how to hold onto the FC image in an expanded market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Until recently, I would say this was the case. Over the past several years, though, luxury brands have been really vocal about their contempt for counterfeiters.

https://jingdaily.com/lvmh-lawsuit-chinese-against-counterfeiters/

I am even seeing stories that some brands are looking to incorporate block chain to try to thwart the counterfeiters. Don't ask me how that works.

I do agree that, there should have been at least one court case, possibly involving Forrester Creations vs. Spectra over a collection or some design. Then again, B&B is absurd in the myriad ways it chooses to ignore many obvious aspects of the fashion industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

Having missed certain storylines, particularly going into 1990, would it be a fair guess that the introduction of Mick Savage marks the beginning of the exit storyline for Kristen? It’s beginning to feel rushed in certain aspects. For some reason it almost feels like the show doesn’t have enough time to build stronger chemistry between Kristen and Mick, which is somewhat odd because I felt as if I saw chemistry between Margo and Mick in the first scene where it was just the two of them. And I saw chemistry between Macy and Mick almost immediately but don’t see much of it between Kristen and Mick. Maybe that changes at some point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree there's not a lot of chemistry between Kristen and Mick. But it seems to me Mick is a short term character and was never intended to be a romantic lead. He was needed to move the plot along. I think the show needed to cut Clarke away from Forrester and align him firmly with the Spectras in order to set up a long term rivalry between the two fashion houses. Having Kristen dump him for Mick achieved that, and gave Clarke a bitterness towards the Forresters that he wouldn't have had if he had been the one to cheat.

Mick also served a secondary purpose in developing Macy's character and bringing Sally and Macy closer together. (Especially Macy having her heart broken by him was important because it both paved the way for her and Thorne, and made her rely heavily on her mother for comfort - possibly Macy's two most character-defining factors.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, that makes sense @Videnbas.

It’s kind of “plotty” though, in the sense that so many plot points are predicated on this relationship happening between two characters that don’t seem to have much romantic chemistry. What a tenuous link. I guess with Grease’s popularity, it was likely seen as a coup in getting Conaway, so they had to try to make it work with the two principle characters who were supposed to be still carrying a torch for one another. It’s kind of dubious  though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

Continuing my post from page 17 ...

Contract Changes between episodes 501 and 630:
Note: Full closing credits are not shown regularly. Usually, they appear every 5th episode, but sometimes there aren't any credits for up to 10 episodes.

Episode 509:

  • Josef Rainer – Dr. Todd Powell (added)

Episode 524:

  • Judith Borne – Angela (removed)
  • Bobbie Eakes – Macy Alexander (added)
  • Josef Rainer – Dr. Todd Powell (removed)

Episode 544:

  • Jeff Conaway – Mick Savage (added)

Episode 624:

  • Judith Borne – Angela (re-added)
  • Schae Harrison – Darla (added)
  • Clayton Norcross – Thorne Forrester #1 (removed)
  • Jeff Trachta – Thorne Forrester #2 (added)

Episode 630:

  • Karen Moncrieff – Dr. Michelle Brookner (added)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I think Hotel would have the similar demos as Dynasty W 19-49 would have been strong. St Elsewhere survived b/c it attracted wealthier/urban viewers and The Equalizer was probably stronger with men and younger viewers. So each had their own niche-good counter-programming. As for Aaron Spelling's influence over ABC in terms of scheduling, I don't know if he would have been happy with Charlie's Angels moving to Sunday, The Colbys scheduled on Thursdays or Matt Houston moved to Fridays. I think he just had to roll with the punches.
    • Thank you @Broderick. That information was so helpful. I watched the first episode of the "Mansion of the Damned" storyline. I was extremely confused by Margaret Colin's Paige and her relationship to other characters. Your post helps me understand what's happening. The rest of the show was easy to understand and I'm enjoying it. Hunter's Nola is a good character for me since I know Kim Hunter from other work.  I must have seen clips of Edge of Night before because I remember seeing April. 
    • How is it back tracking when it was in fact the word I originally used? It's not.
    • You know what is a great way to stop these unclear "rumors"?  Just stop posting them and then back tracking with words like "apparently".   Anyhow, I didn't find the Tracy/Lois scenes as good as I hoped.    
    • Jason, in thinking this over, I realize that we look at this space, differently. To me it is a potentially collaborative space. Now that I've realized this, what I should have said, "I'm having a problem because what I'm seeing is not matching up with your descriptions. Maybe these files I just got are misdated. Maybe it's something else. I will keep you posted. Meanwhile this episode, its edit, is ready, even though I might have to issue a corrected date later. But, people can enjoy the performances now. 
    • Thank you for the constructive suggestion. 
    • But how is it "apparent" that she signed a new 3-year contract? Your wording had a voice of authority -- as if you knew it was true. A better way to post about it? Say you read online that she signed a new contract, but have no idea if that's true.
    • This interview actually reminds me a bit of Kim Zimmer’s press during the infamous clone storyline on Guiding Light, or Deidre Hall during the possession story on Days. All three were seasoned daytime veterans who made it clear they valued airtime for their characters, not just being part of a romantic pairing. It seems that idea was part of the pitch behind these bigger-than-life plots. They all took big swings in their performances. When I read Kim Zimmer’s memoir, I thought she captured it best — she wanted to be respected for being willing to take those risks. To paraphrase her, she knew it was ridiculous for Reva to think she was pregnant after menopause, but she still threw herself into those scenes and made them real. That’s what really struck me about Victoria Wyndham’s interview too. She responded like a real person. It felt like she was telling Michael Logan that she knew Justine — and a geriatric pregnancy with twins — was totally preposterous, but that she still deserved credit for trying to keep the show alive and entertain the audience. And honestly, I think that's more than fair. Logan is looking for a reductive answer for who is to blame.  And, she's telling him to accept that they were all well-meaning.  Which is not a defense of bad storytelling.  But, I understand that she's frustrated because she interpreted Logan's critique as a lack of commitment, and she wants him to know that she was committed! (maybe not for the best, but committed).
    • Fine, you only had to say so. It's not a problem to me NOT to post this. I have no idea what this means. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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