Jump to content

B&B June 2022 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

So today's episode (June 13) illustrates everything that is wrong with the current writing.

Last week they achieve a real surprise twist by bringing back Mike Guthrie (in my opinion a more rewarding twist than this whole Finn-is-dead-no-he-isn't stuff).

This week Sheila is suddenly out of jail and we didn't even get to see Sheila and Mike having a single conversation, or see how he helped her escape, or anything. I was waiting all weekend for a Sheila/Mike scene where he helped her break out of prison and where we'd get some of that old witty back and forth between them, and now suddenly it all happened OFF SCREEN? This story has so many missed beats it needs a pacemaker.

I guess it's still possible that we get to see what actually happened through flashbacks, or that we'll get more scenes with Mike down the road, but it's just as likely this was only a brief cameo and the writers once again failed to see the true potential in what could have been with Sheila and Mike back as partners in crime.

This is what they ALWAYS do - big surprise, fantastic potential, no payoff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

So I'm glad I didn't continue tuning in.  I pretty much made that decision when Sheila turned around to a guard and called him by his name.  I didn't watch back then to even know who it was - but it all boils down to the same thing.  Sheila knows all and knows everyone and will get out of everything at all times - very quickly.  To the stupidity of everyone/all characters.  It wouldn't shock me to read that Sheila actually has the "real" Finn stowed away somewhere, and the woman (Li?)?? only thinks she has the "real" Finn.  The show is beyond at some points.  I said in another post a long time ago - maybe this was normal with Soaps all along (well, partially I know that to be true - suspending reality)....but I don't think it was this bad.  I think I'm too old now and outgrew this kind of thing.  I watch old clips of World Turns or Guiding Light and think about how we slammed the show when we thought they were bad - but damn, knowing the timeframes and things and to look at old clips I think....damn that was a company of actors.  Damn that wasn't bad at all - in fact it's quite GOOD compared to this.  I saw some clips of Susan and Kim on World Turns going at each other - and the Divas on a Bus scenes...things in their latter years.  I don't know why I was disinterested at the time.  Makes me wistful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In this case, though, it could have been a great use of history. Sheila and this particular guard go back almost 30 years. He was her faithful sidekick for a very long time. But the big letdown was not letting us see them interact or letting us see how they pulled off the prison break.

The "right" way to do this would have been to build up to the prison break slowly - letting us see Mike and Sheila reconnecting, plotting in secret, almost getting caught, figuring out a plan and carrying it out with a real possibility of failure. That would have been a riveting storyline. Not just letting all that happen off screen over the weekend and then going "oh, well, Sheila escaped".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm guessing the writers thought the shock of Sheila showing up at Li's was a bigger 'bang' for the audience rather than adding more scenes that would result in the obvious. Considering B&B's tendency to over-dialogue 'why did I drink???' and repetitive scenes that don't advance the story, it's not a bad call.

And, for the record, I totally loved the Mike/Sheila friendship back in the day - especially when Mike spun the blood tests, which was an unexpected twist, because the audience never knew if the results would hold. Further proof that Sheila as a pot-stirrer for a normally bland show works far better than Sheila as psycho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, but my main objection to this "shock" approach is that choosing the surprise of Sheila at Li's (which they diluted anyway by having Baker tell the audience first) over showing her and Mike plotting her escape robs us of Sheila's POV. And that kind of turns her into a more two-dimensional villain than if we had got to see her in scenes with her old pal Mike, which would have been better in terms of character development.

Skipping the entire escape just tells me the writers don't really care about Sheila as a character beyond the shock value of having her pop up somewhere and be scary.

Link to comment
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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.



  • Recent Posts

    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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