Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: MarkH <MarkH_sliprwet@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 May 2007 11:22:16 -0700
On May 31, 12:28 pm, Diva <c.fril...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 31, 9:26 am, Shirl <Xmnusha...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Those are specifically the reasons why John needed to stay alive. Y&R
needed at least ONE character to be the decent older, wiser voice of
reason that the patriarch of a core family can be. And John WAS that.
I mean, I guess I too would have preferred John alive...but then we'd
just see constant scenes of Gloria bilking him. Not so interesting...
I am "sated" with ghost-John. Of course, we all know this will end
eventually (he's just recurring, and eventually they'll run out of
ghost ideas...so I think some of this was planned just to reduce
outrage....), but for now, I'm liking his visits, and I'm liking them
in other-worldly form.
While Jack seldom listened to John's advice when he was alive, we're to
believe that now, just because he's dead, Jack is suddenly listening?
Does LML think that a character with that kind of wisdom can't be
interesting if he's ALIVE? Why can't an older, LIVE character have that
kind of wisdom that results from their years of life experiences? ...
some people DO reach some level of knowledge and understanding while
they're still ALIVE! Do we have to have a huge element of disbelief tied
to anything that makes a little sense just to make it interesting? I
don't think so.
Well, but there is a certain delicious ambiguity here. Is Jack really
listening to John? Or, even though we keep hearing that Jack is not
the man his father was, is this really reflecting the fact that John
DOES live in Jack--he left his mark--and Jack is a better man than he
even realizes...if he'd just listen more to his own internalized John-
nature?
In that sense, Jack is listening to his own awakening conscience.
That's plausible and fun to watch.
God, this show has become SUCH a disaster!
Shirl (yeah, yeah ... IMO)
We're on the same page about some of the real weaknesses about the
show right now. For example, I HAVE NO CLUE WHY BRAD RECANTED HIS
TESTIMONY, THEREBY GETTING ACCUSED OF PERJURY. I haven't a clue...and
I haven't missed a day. That is more than "you've got to
watch" (which I have defended)...that is plain bad storytelling.
BUT...I can't yet use the word disaster. I'm having too much fun on a
day-to-day basis...the good still outweighs the bad for me, although I
have to use the Ravl approach: Enjoy each episode for it's own sake,
and let go of the broader expectations of continuity and consistency.
I'm not saying that's a good thing! I'm saying that, if I minimize my
expectations on the long haul, and enjoy each day as it come. (or
don't enjoy).
And who was first on the block to predict it when Mark was busy
weaving his intricate garlands of praises?
You all get credits for prescience. I happened to REALLY like the
blend of old-and-new methodology. Even yesterday and the day before,
I LOVED the humor and the pacing. But, the consistency and good
storytelling is way off, and the premises are increasingly wild. I
can buy wild premises (heck...I even can get into Passions the once-a-
year I tune it in)...but that is not sticking to the strengths of Y&R
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Shirl
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Diva
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- References:
- Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Java
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Diva
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Ryka
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: MarkH
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Shirl
- Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- From: Diva
- Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- Prev by Date: Re: GL Wednesday episode 5.30.07-no spoilers
- Next by Date: Re: GL Wednesday episode 5.30.07-no spoilers
- Previous by thread: Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- Next by thread: Re: Y&R-I THOUGHT NICK WAS BACK
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
