Jump to content

GH: February 2024 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Then the show should change to fit her, lol. I wouldn't normally say that but honestly, there is little to nothing in the current show that is so worthwhile that I would not overhaul to accommodate better characters, actors and stories. Fortunately that may be coming.

"Blaze" remains a passable recurring player I liked a bit in the very stupid Chase/Dr. Luke storyline but knew I would not find very interesting in major story if it came to her. Here we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You have a good point about changing the show.  I think I am more frustrated the show has managed to screw it up so bad thus far.  I really don't care about Lois/Olivia and Lois supporting Brook Lynn in her snooze worthy wedding nonsense.  Of course at least we have hope things will change.

I like Blaze.  I like her and Kristina.  I think the story has some potential.  Of course, if she left I wouldn't miss her or anything, but I think the character and actress are pleasant enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Does the occasional older actress look good with long hair? Yes. Still, as a rule, long hair doesn't work on an older actress, and that's why we call it a rule.

I'm not suggesting that Genie Francis should go short, but she'd look better with a shoulder cut. So would Lynn Herring.  It seems like GH lets actors call their own shots, from hair to wardrobe. How else to explain that constant Grandma bun on Jane Elliot? I can see her wearing that once in a while, but all the time? It's aging.

While I'm at it, I'll add that Laura Wright should ditch at least half the extensions in her head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Laura Wright's hair is all hers. And she always mentions how she misses her shorter hair. As for Jane Elliot & Lynn Herring, both look fine, and I'm fairly certain because Herring is recurring she has more control, and I doubt anyone is going to tell Elliot what to do with her hair. She always mentioned, upon her retirement, she couldn't wait to stop dyeing it. If it's anything like primetime, then I assume a lot of actresses require permission from production when it comes to changing their hair.

I'd love to see you tell Meryl Streep or any non-daytime actress of a certain age what she should do with her hair, because of her age and this so-called "rule".

And more to that point, Judge Judy even stated she grew her own hair out because it was easier for her to maintain. It's all situational. If a woman of a "certain age" wants to keep her hair long, then that's her decision to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm no expert on hair but I think that mane is all Laura's. Yes, all that hair is hers. Remember it takes two hairdressers working together to blow it out straight? 

And, Finola isn't wearing either extensions or pieces. But, Genie does use pieces. 

Edited by Donna L. Bridges
more info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If that's all Laura Wright's hair, then she needs to get someone to thin it LOL The volume is crazy.

I never suggested Jane Elliot dye her hair. It's not the color that doesn't work, it's the style.

You do understand these are my opinions, right? I'm not "telling" any actress what to do, I'm not ordering them to get a cut and style. It's pretty clear than anyone -- woman or man -- can have any hairstyle they wish. Doesn't mean I can't offer my opinion on them.

If these actors were on primetime or in a film, they would be TOLD what to do with their hair. They would not have control over their hair or their wardrobe. Daytime has a load of problems, and this is one of them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And all of that is your opinion. And it's one that, from my POV, is a very shallow and judgmental one to have, especially on women. 

Please register in order to view this content

 It's like telling men they can't have longer hair because they're men, in my opinion. And I know plenty of women Laura Wright's age who would kill to have the volume she has.

Edited by Liberty City
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I won't deny my hair comments are judgmental and even shallow. And???

Others on this board have been judgmental about wardrobe, hair, styling, and more. Kirsten Storms' styling gets shredded on the regular. We're allowed to share opinions here.

And men? I can offer my opinions on them, too, if you'd like. I didn't in my previous post because I wanted to avoid making my post too long LOL

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

    • 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.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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