Jump to content

B&B: September 2024 Discussion Thread


Maxim

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 273
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Lunacy has been a real pleasure + as I predicted when Zende returned to do Brooke Bedroom, Brad already had a rewrite to undo that awful choice and undeserved injustice to Zende's character. Thank goodness.

Finn turns down Bill's offer to get his people to find Steffy ... so he can go back to the office to have his mother drop by? They're really stretching it so that strong, independent woman Steffy can be rescued by a man. Yuk. Steffy tricks Luna into opening the cage and clocks her. Finn can then rush in. Same SINN reunion, just a better way of reaching it, unless you're stuck in the 1950s.

From the mouths of Babes: Finn putting all the pieces together reminded me of how Charlie announced that Maya was transgendered after some pills fell out of her purse.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not buying the rewrites at all.

They might as well have made all the murders a dream of Poppy. A la Dallas dream season. That way the real story intended was still on the table. 

Again Li hates Poppy so much because she's a whore? I guess she hates Brooke too with a passion. Poppy doesn't even come off as some pill popping whore.

Bradley's writing is just awful. 

RJ, Poppy and Luna have all been a bust.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Haha, It's days like these in soap world, that I do miss a JER style writer...minus the mess that was the last 4 years of Passions. He would definitely make good use of of B&B's campiness if he were still alive, and somehow got to become HW within the last 15 years or so....

Steffy and Hope at this point for me, are kind of in Gwen/Theresa territory....Steffy being Gwen of course and Hope Theresa,especially if Thudley wants to keep making her a colossal screw up.....Maybe Hope will accidentally poison Finn with Guacamole for November sweeps! 

Please register in order to view this content

Edited by YRfan23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Once again Bradley Bell unintentionally (I don't think he's even capable of being intentional) has send a horrific message to all the viewers, especially the girls. A message that says - a woman can be raped... we can see her being tormented about having sex with a man for months, cry and be in panic mode of the idea that she may be pregnant, to then all of a sudden, rewrite everything and call her a psychotic b-tch that had the best sex of her life. I don't think Bradley knows or understands that A LOT of abusers have this exact defense - that she was crazy, wanting it, enjoyed it. Men use this all the time - calling women borderline or psychotic or manic. 

And all of this is done, because his initial plan was not working and the public was not buying it. He forgot about all the scenes where Luna had flashbacks and was crying. Or are we supposed to be idiots? 

 P.S One thing I should say - I am not saying that a woman can't fake a rape. It does happen. But it didn't happen like that in this case. We saw Luna distressed in her room, ALONE. It's ludicrous to believe what we are being sold right now. It's crazy... It's LUNACY.

The whole show should be called The crazy and the delusional. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

All of this reminds me of the stupid - Bill is working with Ridge to take Sheila down  rewrite (while f-cking Sheila multiple times a day, Ooops). And earlier this year...the bizarre Sheila murder-resurrection-Sugar-toe fiasco.

I don't know what is going on, but this show has never been THIS BAD. It used to be a soap about forbidden sex and triangles and repeated boring dialogue (it still has that)... but at least it was similar to what the original Bold was in terms of themes and vibe. 

2024 has been a low budget version of a low budget Lifetime thriller-horror movie.

We had so many cringe moments, from Sheila being stabbed to death in I know what you did last summer montage, to Deacon googling what is Sugar... to the disgusting MINTS storyline... to the TOE reveal in the morgue... to the bizarre serial killer out of nowhere storyline, that was written like a rom-com in parts. And now we have an Orphan sequel...

Please register in order to view this content

What is next... Texas Chainsaw Massacre with Taylor being Leatherface and Brooke the victim in some dungeon? 

 

 

Edited by Maxim
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

    • I have very detailed synopses of all 1976 storylines for the soaps from the Daytime Serial Newsletter. Please let me know if you are interested in a particular show and I will post it in the appropriate thread. As I stated they are very detailed, so I don't want to clutter up threads if posters are not interested.
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Surely we (and Billy Flynn) are not going to be saddled with a character named Aristotle Dumas? This isn't 1970's Edge of Night.
    • What annoys me a little bit about the "day players" is they sound a bit too "Brooklyn-ish" sometimes.  Obviously, the show was taped in New York City, and the actors are all New York actors, but Monticello is supposed to be located in Illinois or Ohio.  Occasionally, they grab actors and actresses for small roles who have VERY distinct New York accents, which contrasts sharply with the main cast, none of whom have noticeable accents (except for our dashing European gigolo, Eliot Dorn, of course).  The heavy Brooklyn accent works fine if the character is a bookie, or the owner of a pawn shop, or a guy who's selling stolen guns on the street corner.  But when it's a steadily recurring character -- such as the first Mrs. Goodman, who worked for Miles and Nicole -- it's pretty jarring to me sometimes.  And you'll see it often -- such as an "under-five" character who witnesses a car accident, or a character who witnesses a shooting, or the occasional desk clerk, or waiter.  
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • I'm screaming at those clips and gifs.  THIS IS PURE GOLD.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • That's always been my thought. I can't imagine that the show would play up the unseen AD so far in advance without them casting a *star*. After today's episode, I wonder if he'll somehow be connected with Diane. It was strange that Diane mentioned her very distant family today. I can't recall Diane ever talking about her backstory. Maybe he's her much younger brother?  It's also possible he's connected to Diane during her time in LA. Sally's already said she crossed paths with him. OC, I think Dumas is Mariah's mistake.... As a side note, it was good to see some mixing it up - Adam with Clare/Kyle and Sharon with Tessa.
    • Here's the place to share some memorable criticism. You don't have to agree with it, of course (that's often where the fun starts). Like I mentioned to @DRW50, Sally Field was a favorite punching bag in the late '80s and early '90s.   Punchline (the 1988 movie where she and Tom Hanks are stand ups): "It's impossible to tell the difference between Miss Field's routines that are supposed to be awful, and the awful ones that are supposed to be funny." -- Vincent Canby, New York Times. "It's not merely that Field is miscast; she's miscast in a role that leaves no other resource available to her except her lovability. And (David) Seltzer's script forces her to peddle it shamelessly." -- Hal Hinson, Washington Post. "As a woman who can't tell a joke, Sally Field is certainly convincing. ... Field has become an unendurable performer ... She seems to be begging the audience not to punch her. Which, of course, is the worst kind of bullying from an actor. ... She's certainly nothing like the great housewife-comedian Roseanne Barr, who is a tough, uninhibited performer. Sally Field's pandering kind of 'heart' couldn't be further from the spirit of comedy." -- David Denby, New York   Steel Magnolias: The leading ladies: Dolly Parton: "She is one of the sunniest and most natural of actresses," Roger Ebert wrote. Imagining that she probably saw Truvy as an against-type role, Hinson concluded it's still well within her wheelhouse. "She's just wearing fewer rhinestones." Sally Field: "Field, as always, is a lead ball in the middle of the movie," according to Denby . M'Lynn giving her kidney to Shelby brought out David's bitchy side. "I can think of a lot more Sally Field organs that could be sacrificed." Shirley MacLaine: "(She) attacks her part with the ferociousness of a pit bull," Hinson wrote. "The performance is so manic that you think she must be taking off-camera slugs of Jolt." (I agree. If there was anyone playing to the cheap seats in this movie, it's Shirley.) Olympia Dukakis: "Excruciating, sitting on her southern accent as if each obvious sarcasm was dazzlingly witty," Denby wrote. Daryl Hannah: "Miss Hannah's performance is difficult to judge," according to Canby, which seems to suggest he took a genuine "if you can't say something nice ..." approach. Julia Roberts: "(She acts) with the kind of mega-intensity the camera cannot always absorb," Canby wrote. That comment is so fascinating in light of the nearly 40 years Julia has spent as a Movie Star. She is big. It's the audience who had to play catch up. And on that drag-ish note ... The movie itself: "You feel as if you have been airlifted onto some horrible planet of female impersonators," Hinson wrote. Canby: "Is one supposed to laugh at these women, or with them? It's difficult to tell." Every review I read acknowledged the less than naturalistic dialogue in ways both complimentary (Ebert loved the way the women talked) and cutting (Harling wrote too much exposition, repeating himself like a teenager telling a story, Denby wrote). Harling wrote with sincerity and passion, Canby acknowledged, but it's still a work of "bitchiness and greeting card truisms." The ending was less likely to inspire feeling good as it was feeling relieved, according to Denby. "(It's) as if a group of overbearing, self-absorbed, but impeccable mediocre people at last exit from the house."
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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