Jump to content

B&B: January 2025 Discussion Thread


Maxim

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Bradley is writing it in such a way, that it's pretty obvious this infiltration attempt will not be successful. If he were not that obvious, I would think Steffy and Ridge had a chance of getting the company back. But the way it's being plotted, it's quite clear it won't succeed and it's just a filler drama... before some hardcore family stuff. He's done it before in 1993 when they had a snake trying to manipulate Brooke posing as her masseuse. It didn't work then, it won't work now.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

LAUGHABLE. The dramatic direction was ridiculous, and that actress playing Daphne made a bad first impression.

This must be The Season Of The Handbag on Bold. We've been getting Elektra wearing that stupid crossbody bag for days, and how Daphne shows up pimping her purse. This show is so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Days was awful and so was Bold.

That whole perfume oooooooo she's coming was ridiculous!

Luna just beyond stupid. Another bad idea from Bradley.

The best part was the ending with Steffy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

OMG, I watched Monday and Tuesday back to back.

 

Monday was gold. All the applause for Brooke. Didn't think I could be so invested still in 2025! The way she tossed Taylor aside...

Please register in order to view this content

 

And then on Tuesday, Steffy is literally SNIFFING this new character like a dog. What the actual eff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Just as predicted, it looks like Lunatic is obsessed with Nick Newman Jr. 

Daphne Rose…? WTF was that lol?

Please register in order to view this content

Only Thudley can go from a fiery Monday to the most lackluster of Tuesdays ending in a “thud” as always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You missed the worst part with the toss of the scarf in the air lmaoooo.

It's crazy because this is the kind of character Bill Bell Sr would have nurtured and made us care for. Us knowing already day 1 Daphne's motivation makes this story a dud before it even begins. 

 

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