Jump to content

BTG: March 2025 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Members

 I've never heard a thing like... She was a child when she was taken in... Or that she grew up in that household. Absolutely never heard a thing like this.

And I'm watching very carefully. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members
Posted (edited)

We might need to apply this sentiment to Ted too! I don't know, but the masquerading of being an upstanding man while paying off some nutty woman to keep quiet about the sleazy tryst you had with her seems extra skeevy. Too bad for Ted that the money payoff didn't stick because now she's baaaaack.

Edited by Vanguardian53
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I want to add couple of things to this.

We know that:

Hayley befriended the family and Naomi was her best friend. 

We know that she became Bill's assistant... And Dani actually encouraged this. 

That's when the real issue began. They "fell in love".

The strange and bizarre claim that he took advantage of someone who was raised in that family or underaged... Not full grown woman... To me... At this point... Is absurd. Yes... she is a young woman, but she is not a child or underaged. 

If that had happened that way...  we would have heard Dani accuse Bill of being a sicko like one million times by now. And we would have commented 10029290 million times about that. Because that would have really been sick.

Let's not twist reality into these dangerous assumptions. We have no reason to believe Bill was a child molester. None of us would find him attractive if that was the case!!! I take offense to anyone thinking I will ever find an actual monster like that... Sexy. 

Bill is a lot of things... But what is being said right now... Is not the reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You know, as we talk about what we want from the Ashley/Derek storyline, I just thought of something else I want to see. We've heard through the dialogue that Nicole and Vanessa are close friends but I don't think we've had even one scene of them together. I do think Nicole could benefit from a friend so I'd like to see them start to develop that relationship. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Something unfavorable I think is going to happen in the Derek/Ashley/Andre camp. Probably not an actual rape, but consensual sex between Andre and Ashley that somehow gets depicted that he went too far with her. Derek finds out and his concussion has him pulling a "Vivian Alamain" on Andre. Lol.

Lastly, Martin's nightmares of something that he doesn't remember reminds me of the device that soaps used back in the day to depict childhood sexual abuse. The sounds of the gunfire might've been him killing his abuser as a child. He's blocked it all out but his grandparents and Bill know all of the gory details.

 

Edited by Vanguardian53
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This seems like something they obviously rewrote when they cast Cady as Pamela. I'm not sure we'll get more scenes from Vanessa / Nicole until we get to the point where they didn't reshoot (which we don't know when that happened). I suspect that the lunch they had to establish their friendship was one of those scenes they inserted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Until further notice changes things, I will continue to think this about Bill, and I know others who think this also & people making strange & absurd accusations about this, my stated opinion, better knock it the hell off. It is news to me that some of you don't think this. I must admit that I am more than a little offended. And, so this is where we leave it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Honestly I don't think it's been stated in the dialogue how old Hayley was when Bill and Dani met her.

I gave details on my perceptions of the situation in my post on the previous page. (but of course they are only my perceptions and not proven truths).  I tried to be openminded and look at various ways it could be perceived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Are we here y'all?!! Are we ready to see the lunatic hit yet another rock bottom? 

Please register in order to view this content

Waiting for Bold to end! NOW. 

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