Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted

Getting caught up. 

I said that Tomas needs to be replaced with a young Kamar de los Reyes but I finally realized that Ashley is meant to be a Reiko Ailesworth type.

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members
Posted

That is my biggest complaint about BTG, and I don't expect it to change.  

Historically, if a MALE is the headwriter and executive producer, we end up with these larger-than-life male protagonists (such as Victor Newman) who possess an almost toxic masculinity and who make all the ladies on the show wet with desire.

BTG, of course, is run by women.  For their premier, they trotted out Sheila Ducksworth, Julie Hanan Carruthers, and Michele Val Jean --- and everyone in the cast cooed excitedly they were thrilled to be working for such "strong, powerful women". 

This was our first clue that BTG would be going the "Lifetime movie route", with exceptionally strong female characters, surrounded by weak, emasculated men whose only purpose is to cheat on their wonderful female partners and inflict unjustified amounts of pain on their perfect, long-suffering wives.  It's the only way today's female executives know how to structure a movie or a TV show, just as the male writers go overboard with weak women and strong men. 

How often has Anita Dupree reminded Nicole, Dani, Naomi, Chelsea, and Kat that they are "Dupree women, and therefore you are strong"??  At least once a week, probably.  How often has Vernon reminded Martin that he's a Dupree man and therefore strong?  Never.  Not once.  This is a woman's world.  

Wish today's writers were a bit more versatile than the 1950s, but they ain't.  

  • Members
Posted (edited)

I’ve been feeling this way since about the third week, when I realized we weren’t getting to know the men the same way we were getting to know the women. And it went downhill from there in that regard.

Edited by katie_9918
  • Members
Posted

The biggest issue is that there seems to be a huge disconnect with the actress and the actual character. Both Ashley and Derek comes across as being in somewhere in their 30s, but are written as if they've just gotten out of college and it's their first real relationship. Add the whole propping up of Ashley as a character that reached ridiculous levels at one point... it's a case where I think they should've rewritten the character(s) slightly if they wanted to cast Jen Jacobs and Ben Gavin in the roles. 

  • Members
Posted

If Ashley and Derek absolutely have to continue to exist on canvas I would've recast both long ago. Someone like Josh Kelly could've only made Derek work so far if he wasn't such an idiotic simp on the page, but he could at least add some spice on his own.

I'd sooner just see them cut these two and introduce other people.

  • Members
Posted (edited)

Just the sheer numbers of the Dupree women vs. men also tell that story. It’s like the Cramer women or the Kane women or GH’s Davis girls, but those families weren’t/aren’t the only game in town. It’s also telling that they made one of two male scions of the family a gay man and the other his adopted son. I want to celebrate that as a Black gay man myself, but they also made Martin a long-suffering, mentally fragile, almost childlike victim and placed him with a supportive, morally upright white husband whom he has deceived. There’s no sense of him as a competent leader who was considering a presidential run. I’m just waiting for the skeletons to fall out of Vernon’s closet. Jacob the Boy Scout is so underwritten and weakly portrayed as to be meaningless. 

Edited by Faulkner
  • Members
Posted

Yes, it's often occurred to me that Martin & Smitty seem "exempt" from the Matriarchal Society of Fairmont Crest, by virtue of their household not containing an adult female.  I find those two the most refreshing men on the show, simply because they're not constantly taking marching orders from a domineering lady.

Jacob and Naomi (so far) have been somewhat "exempt" from Matriarchal Rule as they've been presented thus far as Frank Hardy and Nancy Drew from the detective stories --- not much going on with either of them.  Again, they're refreshing for that reason.  She ain't bossing him around every second, lol.    

  • Members
Posted

That's probably why I like the Joey and Vanessa scenes because you have two strong willed and driven people interacting... keeping one another on their toes.  

I've been saying since almost the beginning that the level of misandry on this show is through the roof, and it's an extreme over-correction from what other soaps have been doing.   

If you look at soaps from the 80s and the first half of the 90s, you had a great balance of strong and interesting male and female characters.   Even on BTG, though the female characters are somewhat better defined... they also seem to lack any layers nor complexity (unless the actress is injecting something into the part).   Characters like Vanessa and Dani tend to be one note characters... but the two actresses have injected layers into both characters that isn't on the page... same with TT with Anita (who is very one note, but TT is such a good actress that she makes Anita more layered).

It's why female characters such as Hayley, Ashley, Naomi, and Chelsea have been hit or miss... because the characters provided to them are pretty paint by numbers and all four actresses are not strong enough to inject layers into them.  For petes sake, Hayley is the worst written of the four characters so the actress probably is wondering how she's supposed to play most of her scenes (especially in regards to the phantom pregnancy and miscarriage).

  • Members
Posted

What in the fresh hell is this Vegas stuff?  Is that supposed to be a drag impersonator for Anita? Are they really serious about them getting married?  This is silly.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • No.  I recall there was also a mention about how distracting it was EOB's Gwen wasn't wearing nail polish as well.  That it was someone's pet peeve. And, yes, the fact characters can have a manicure in prison is the wildest continuity issue here.
    • Can anyone remember Mary Ellen Stuart's run as Jenny? I'm trying to fill in the cracks for missing stuff that we overlooked.  Bulletpoints:  * Dated Ross * Rusty's police partner * Directly responsible for Dinah coming forward about George Stewart (Cam's father)
    • But that's not weird... nail polish is allowed in prisons via commissary. Same with general makeup, haircuts, and hair colouring products.
    • This is DAYS, the show that said you could brainwash anyone with simple kitchen appliances.  An actor's nail polish or lack thereof should be the least of our concerns, lol.
    • It was not that she wasn't wearing nail polish, it is that she managed to get a manicure in prison
    • "We're Knot Done Yet": the name of this lovely podcast AND what JVA tells her plastic surgeon at every appointment. In other news, Michele Lee is reminding me more and more of my old music teacher from elementary school, and I couldn't STAND that bitch.
    • I apologize if this has been covered already, but does anyone know whether Douglas Marland was HW'ing by that point?  If he was, then I see what he meant when he said (in so many words) that he had inherited a mess when he started at GH.  Aside from Alan and Monica, none of that material seems very promising.  The story with Mark Dante and the Corbins is the wrong kind of predictable (y'know, the kind where you know what's going to happen, but you just don't give a crap?), the stuff with Scotty and Laura is cute but toothless, I don't know WHAT the hell Gina and Steve Carlson's character are arguing about and Rick Webber has to be the dumbest man alive not to see David Hamilton twirling his invisible moustache over how to make a killing off Lamont Corbin's declining health.  (By the way, "LAMONT CORBIN"?  What is this, "The Shadow"?  And "Corbin Limited" sounds like some jive I'd hear over on Y&R.) In a way, it's kind of like watching today's GH, right down to the dialogue that's serviceable and pushes plot along but says nothing about the characters' inner lives.
    • It absolutely was; the narrative was there, and they followed it promptly. Maybe that's back when women had babies at young ages?!?!?
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Thanks for asking that!  Back when we had another major event upcoming (a party or the concert), I had intended to ask what everyone here was planning to wear.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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