54 minutes ago, Broderick said:

While most of us here were complaining that the "Chelsea is Kidnapped" story arc came out of nowhere practically, skipped most of the beats, and ended too quickly, I stumbled into a Facebook discussion where everyone agreed that it should have been completed in ONE day instead of five.  lol.  

The "short attention span issue" definitely is at play. 

A lot of viewers now seem to want a solution to every issue in an hour.  

 

LOL that is wild. I guess it really is true that they need to figure out a way to appeal to both generations of soap watchers. I definitely wanted another week of Chelsea being chained up  

2 hours ago, Faulkner said:

I can’t imagine anyone but MVJ writing this, even though she doesn’t have a long stint as a HW on her resume. It’s not like we have a strong back bench of trained head writers left who could handle this type of material. Lorraine Broderick? The Cullitons? Nope. Maybe as a co-HW? Tracey Thomson doesn’t instill confidence IMO.

Yeah, it's just not realistic for anyone to expect MVJ to step down from the show bearing her name that she started less than a year ago lol. It would also be a PR debacle. Nor do I think she should, but I do think the dialogue staff needs an overhaul. I think a lot of the grand pronouncements and expository dialogue are straight out of the Bell school (or worse, Brad Bell), as I've said many times. It seems to work for a lot of audience that's either used to that house style or not used to soaps at all, but it doesn't work for me. I also am not impressed by Thomson, but hopefully she will surprise me.

That said, I also think Guza's influence shows in what is easily one of the deepest and most richly characterized stories and arcs, namely Vanessa and her descent into crime with Joey and Doug. Unlike a number of other core characters, Vanessa is fully fleshed out in a way that reminds me a great deal of Guza's better work even as the underworld stuff is also very much in his wheelhouse. It's one key reason I don't have the issue with it other people do. Because it actually feels cohesive, well-performed and often decently scripted, even if the Golden Corral casino is hilarious to me.

1 hour ago, Broderick said:

While most of us here were complaining that the "Chelsea is Kidnapped" story arc came out of nowhere practically, skipped most of the beats, and ended too quickly, I stumbled into a Facebook discussion where everyone agreed that it should have been completed in ONE day instead of five.  lol.  

The "short attention span issue" definitely is at play. 

That really sums up the show's dilemma, which Ducksworth laid out explicitly a few months ago in an interview. BTG has actually succeeded in gaining a new audience for daytime and is cultivating it. The problem is a lot of that audience has no experience with watching a 5-day daytime soap, and expects one fast pace while the classic audience wants something else. BTG is struggling to marry these two audiences' tastes onscreen and it hasn't figured it out yet. Despite my issues with the show, I sympathize with that a lot. It's a totally new frontier - a good one for the future of soaps, but a very tricky situation.

4 hours ago, dragonflies said:

TBH I think MVJ needs to step down and let others take over HW duties, I think she has her moments but IMO she's not cut out to be a HW. Let her just be the show runner and write scripts  now and then 

What is this connection between Vanessa and Jan? They cant be family bc Vanessa comes from money and Jan is a brokey. There has never been any indication that htey knew each other let alone were friends

1 hour ago, Broderick said:

While most of us here were complaining that the "Chelsea is Kidnapped" story arc came out of nowhere practically, skipped most of the beats, and ended too quickly, I stumbled into a Facebook discussion where everyone agreed that it should have been completed in ONE day instead of five.  lol.  

The "short attention span issue" definitely is at play. 

A lot of viewers now seem to want a solution to every issue in an hour.  

 

Most of the stories MVJ has told have missed many beats. There are holes everywhere in them.

 

Killing characters off-screen is another no-no for me.

4 minutes ago, Cheap21 said:

What is this connection between Vanessa and Jan? They cant be family bc Vanessa comes from money and Jan is a brokey. There has never been any indication that htey knew each other let alone were friends

I thought the same thing too, but they just said she works for her at the house - so guessing maybe her housekeeper?  I like that they're developing more relationships/friendships though.

I like that Leslie is giving Peaches some of the money - the right thing to do for sure.

10 minutes ago, alwaysAMC said:

I thought the same thing too, but they just said she works for her at the house - so guessing maybe her housekeeper?  I like that they're developing more relationships/friendships though.

I like that Leslie is giving Peaches some of the money - the right thing to do for sure.

I hadnt thought of her being a maid but that makes this make more sense.

 

I also got the indication that Jan may have met Joey before. Maybe he is Ashley's father after all as Ive seen speculated before

Edited September 26, 2025Sep 26 by Cheap21

4 hours ago, dragonflies said:

TBH I think MVJ needs to step down and let others take over HW duties, I think she has her moments but IMO she's not cut out to be a HW. Let her just be the show runner and write scripts  now and then 

NO!  I like most of her story arcs.

Keep MVJ. Change some of the breakdown writers.

date: Friday, September 26, 2025 | Teresa Zimmerman, Judy Tate | Michael V. Pomarico

• Nicole, sweetie, read the room and notice that your bestie is clearly hurting. My poor Vanessa.
• Jan and Mona continuing to gossip about Dana and those that live beyond the gates is amazing. Over some delicious-looking food, too! We love to see it. But Mona, she is actually building a "shouse", not a mansion.
• Dana is moving out already? Honey, your "shouse" is not even built yet. Eva does not even look like she is happy about "mawmuh" moving in.
• It is good to see Ashley and Shanice getting along and for Shanice to be more level-headed, too.
• Poor Vanessa is going through the "what ifs", "the warning signs", etc. Poor dear.
• So, Dana, instead of being financially dependent on Ted, you would rather she be dependent on you?
• I cannot help but cackle with Marcel thinking he can just walk away from Joey. Sir, you know who you are working for. You really think he would just let you walk away like that?
• Shanice, girl, you flat-out gave the brick away... do not go backtracking now.
• For once I agree with Dana. Katherine is a spoilt bitch, and Eva is the right woman for him. He deserves someone better than Katherine.
• Well, Peaches showed up real quick, but that looks like doubt and guilt all over her face. Did she lie about Barbara being Dana's mother? Got me thinking.
• Jacob is spitting some hard faces, and Derek is crashing out. I love it.
• That is it, Andre... claim your true lady: Ashley!
• So, Dana is renting out her own apartment for Peaches? Wow. That is some heart from Dana. True heart.
• Well, Vanessa, you have been caught, and now you have a full car ride ahead of you. Good luck.

Notes:

• Another round of applause to Lauren Buglioli (Vanessa), who has given two out of two performances that have been knocked out of the park. A dynamic actor that we are very lucky Kim Coleman found.
• Judy Tate's talents shine in the scripts she writes, and today is proof of that.
• So, instead of Jan working at the Duprees, now she works at the McBrides. That is an interesting change of story. I like it, though.

Edited September 26, 2025Sep 26 by Liberty City

13 hours ago, Antoyne said:

I hope the kids show up and hear all about Vanessa and resent her. I don’t want them trying to humanize this ho.

She believed Joey didn’t have Doug killed after literally two seconds of convincing.

Agree completely. If the writers think Vanessa is a sympathetic character, they're crazy.

 

14 hours ago, kalbir said:

Vanessa is a nasty ho. She makes Brooke Logan look angelic.

Yep. She's been a ho since Week One. At least then she was getting Prime D from Diego.

 

 

Little Doug got some cajones.  I like him already 

13 hours ago, Jdee43 said:

The Doug/Vanessa/Joey story is such third rate Sopranos, without the budget, the lighting, the acting, the nuance. All characters involved act so stupid. 

Joey is the biggest fail. He's always mugging the camera, his demeanor screaming "hey, I'm a mobster." His character should have more humor and charm; there should be some question as to how evil he is. To have him so quickly resort to murder and get away with it twice now is the biggest fail. There is no point to having him be such a monster.

Exactly. I'm all for having a villain in town, but does he have to twirl his mustache in every scene?

And why are so many Fairmont Crest residents playing ball with this Dollar General mobster?

 

5 hours ago, Faulkner said:

The dialogue on this show is rough, very paint-by-numbers with an occasional one-liner or pop-culture reference to break up the monotony, and some of the actors really struggle to make it sound natural

"Rough" doesn't describe all the dialogue, but does describe enough to make it valid. I do love the pop culture references, but throwing in "Cardi B would love that song!" does not save bad dialogue.

 

4 hours ago, kalbir said:

Flaws and all, BtG is still more enjoyable than the hot garbage that's Y&R.

NO QUESTION.

 

-- As others have said, we want (and even expect) BTG to be better than Y&R, B&B, and DAYS. (For me, only GH can be considered good soap). Those shows (especially the Bell shows) would get A LOT more criticism if board members here cared about them at all and hadn't given up on them. They're SO BAD that no one cares.

-- Do I criticize BTG a lot? Yes, because I care about the show. I see the potential. I've seen what they can do. I see a very good cast with only a couple duds.

-- But I am not going to come here and pretend all is well, because it's not. I'm actually heartened to see posters here who are seeing the same things I'm seeing -- it makes me feel that I am being fair-minded and objective.

-- I am not going to post "Vanessa is fire! What a woman!" just because she's on BTG. If she were a character on Y&R, I'd trash her to death. Any soap that skips over this many beats deserves to be called out on it.

-- The comments here about Hayley are spot on. All the promise of her initial impact on the story has evaporated. Why? GATES seems to pace things differently so that these "story impacts" come up later and really aren't gone. I don't think this works -- not when it's done over and over for SO many storylines.

-- I appreciate the struggle to bring in young, short-attention span viewers while keeping traditional soap watchers. However, when that causes problems we see on the screen, we need to point them out.

-- I DO NOT think MVJ should leave as HW or step even one step away from the show. Nope. This is her baby and she gets to ride it.

-- Even with all my criticism, I'm hooked on BTG and am going nowhere. 

-- If you're a total fanboy/fangirl for this show, try to see the positive: that this show is getting SO much more attention than the other soaps.

 

 

29 minutes ago, ranger1rg said:

-- I appreciate the struggle to bring in young, short-attention span viewers while keeping traditional soap watchers. However, when that causes problems we see on the screen, we need to point them out.

I don't think I ever suggested otherwise. I've been pretty pointed on what I feel are the show's major issues. But I do think they also have something that is simultaneously a unique advantage and a unique struggle given their new and 'untrained' audience. I don't think it will be solved by importing more of the B&B or off-brand Bell house style for the dialogue. I applaud having a majority Black dialogue staff, but I would be leaning towards more the GH voice vs. modern CBS. The scripts wildly vacillate between hypermodern that's either fresh and fun or at the point of cringe/therapyspeak, and just stuff that may be goodhearted but creaky, or ancient as the hills exposition.

We completely disagree on Vanessa, but that's fine. I think she's one of the most well-realized and dimensional characters even when she's being terrible and I think LB plays every facet to the hilt. And while Joey is (intentional) scum, I think JL plays it well enough these days and Joey at least moves plot. Unlike a number of characters on the show. The storyline may not be to everyone's taste but Vanessa has had a real character arc onscreen that has been both externalized and discussed in her character building dialogue, with an actor who can meet the moment. Not every character can say the same. Many are static, and some have just done 180s. As for Hayley, I just don't think there was ever intended to be the kind of character there that people imagined for her sight unseen. She's always been just this. Could she be more, sure, but she's kind of an afterthought and plot device to me atm. I'm focused on the characters I feel have actual layers and strong performances, including Bill, Eva, Dani, Kat, Vanessa, etc. I think Martin has evolved too.

And yes: No way CBS dumps the first Black creator of the first majority Black soap opera. There aren't enough MAGA trolls bothering with it (they have bigger fish to fry atm), let alone angry gooners. Nor should they. But I do think the writing staff and several stories need major changes, and I would not say no to another strong co-head. I remain unconvinced by Tracy Thomson. Hopefully she'll surprise me.

Edited September 26, 2025Sep 26 by Vee

On an unrelated note: June (a.k.a. Eve, apparently) and Samantha now look the same age. Especially with Samantha's hair up.

47 minutes ago, ranger1rg said:

Exactly. I'm all for having a villain in town, but does he have to twirl his mustache in every scene?

And why are so many Fairmont Crest residents playing ball with this Dollar General mobster?

 

"Rough" doesn't describe all the dialogue, but does describe enough to make it valid. I do love the pop culture references, but throwing in "Cardi B would love that song!" does not save bad dialogue.

 

NO QUESTION.

 

-- As others have said, we want (and even expect) BTG to be better than Y&R, B&B, and DAYS. (For me, only GH can be considered good soap). Those shows (especially the Bell shows) would get A LOT more criticism if board members here cared about them at all and hadn't given up on them. They're SO BAD that no one cares.

-- Do I criticize BTG a lot? Yes, because I care about the show. I see the potential. I've seen what they can do. I see a very good cast with only a couple duds.

-- But I am not going to come here and pretend all is well, because it's not. I'm actually heartened to see posters here who are seeing the same things I'm seeing -- it makes me feel that I am being fair-minded and objective.

-- I am not going to post "Vanessa is fire! What a woman!" just because she's on BTG. If she were a character on Y&R, I'd trash her to death. Any soap that skips over this many beats deserves to be called out on it.

-- The comments here about Hayley are spot on. All the promise of her initial impact on the story has evaporated. Why? GATES seems to pace things differently so that these "story impacts" come up later and really aren't gone. I don't think this works -- not when it's done over and over for SO many storylines.

-- I appreciate the struggle to bring in young, short-attention span viewers while keeping traditional soap watchers. However, when that causes problems we see on the screen, we need to point them out.

-- I DO NOT think MVJ should leave as HW or step even one step away from the show. Nope. This is her baby and she gets to ride it.

-- Even with all my criticism, I'm hooked on BTG and am going nowhere. 

-- If you're a total fanboy/fangirl for this show, try to see the positive: that this show is getting SO much more attention than the other soaps.

 

 

Can I say Amen?  I'm so glad that someone GETS what I wanted to say earlier.