|
Post by Jayman on Feb 18, 2017 4:32:39 GMT
Does anybody else remember this one? I thought that was really well done and eery. Especially at the costume party when he turned around and shot Nina and Cricket which in the end turned out to be blanks.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Mar 19, 2017 23:02:14 GMT
Does anybody else remember this one? I thought that was really well done and eery. Especially at the costume party when he turned around and shot Nina and Cricket which in the end turned out to be blanks. Didn't he meet his end in a trash compactor?
|
|
|
Post by Jayman on Mar 20, 2017 3:57:13 GMT
Yes he did. That was pretty brutal
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2017 11:24:55 GMT
Yes, that was one of my favorite story lines. David Kimbel was an awesome villain. I'm surprised they haven't been able to replicate that kind of slow-moving drama, where it takes years to gradually play out. The actor was very convincing in that role.
|
|
|
Post by Jayman on Mar 22, 2017 16:22:57 GMT
Yes, that was one of my favorite story lines. David Kimbel was an awesome villain. I'm surprised they haven't been able to replicate that kind of slow-moving drama, where it takes years to gradually play out. The actor was very convincing in that role. THat's right and unlike most stories they were doing around that time period, this one actually had a payoff.
|
|
|
Post by jarrodmcdonald on Apr 6, 2017 16:53:27 GMT
Yes, that was one of my favorite story lines. David Kimbel was an awesome villain. I'm surprised they haven't been able to replicate that kind of slow-moving drama, where it takes years to gradually play out. The actor was very convincing in that role. THat's right and unlike most stories they were doing around that time period, this one actually had a payoff. I remember being frustrated with the story-- it took too long to play out. The first year he was on the show he was not a villain, he was just a recurring character-- he was Jill's secretary and they had on-going trysts in her office. Then they upgraded him to a contract role and had him marry Nina, and that's when all his evil manipulations began. Nina looked pretty dumb throughout the whole storyline, being married to a mustache-twirling bad guy and not even having the first clue what he was up to.
It was never even properly explained why he didn't just set his sights on Jill, since he worked for her, knew all her secrets and she obviously had more money than Nina. But suddenly Nina was his target. So we had three years of this, with him pulling the wool over her eyes. It was very repetitive and dragged out. At one point she finally caught on and shot him, and went on trial. But of course he survived, then he had a new face (plastic surgery) and romanced her mother. Certainly very far-fetched, because he still had the same voice and his new face did not look all that different, except for the hairpiece he used as part of the disguise.
It was kind of like watching a cartoon some days. And still they never explained why David went after Nina, why she fell for him when she was supposed to still be grieving her late husband Phillip III-- nor was it explained why Jill never figured out what David was up to. If this plot was done now, it would only take six months to a year to play out and it would have to be more clearly defined-- the audience wouldn't tolerate a dragged out story where the motives are never properly established.
|
|
|
Post by Jayman on Apr 6, 2017 21:12:20 GMT
I had stopped watching the show for a few years at this point and this story got me back into the show. I started at the point around where Nina was hiding in the closet while he was hooking up with Diane. Y&R was notorious for dragging out the littlest and most meaningless things for months on end for no rhyme or reason. This is why I had to stop watching this show a few years after this story. You'd see stuff dragged out for over a year with little to no payoff at all. But granted they were slow with the story it played out well I thought.
|
|
|
Post by jarrodmcdonald on Apr 7, 2017 0:00:55 GMT
I had stopped watching the show for a few years at this point and this story got me back into the show. I started at the point around where Nina was hiding in the closet while he was hooking up with Diane. Y&R was notorious for dragging out the littlest and most meaningless things for months on end for no rhyme or reason. This is why I had to stop watching this show a few years after this story. You'd see stuff dragged out for over a year with little to no payoff at all. But granted they were slow with the story it played out well I thought. And that was another thing confusing-- the name Diane. Earlier in the 80s there was a model at Jabot named Diane Jenkins who was involved with Jack and later married Victor. But during the years when she was off the show they introduced this other Diane (named Diane Westin), and she was clearly just a plot device to enable David to get away with fooling Nina. Of course she didn't last long and was disposable. After she was written out, the other Diane was written back in.
In those days I think viewers accepted a lot more, they didn't have computers and phones to post about the soaps like we do now. If the story was attempted now, message board posters would be all over it, finding all the plot holes and criticizing the vague character motives. It really wasn't a good storyline for showing Nina in a positive light. She was completely stupid the whole time then risked everything she had by shooting him. I think the story would have played better if he had not been introduced as Jill's secretary, and if he had been someone Jill hired to gaslight Nina to get Phillip IV, Jill's grandson, away from Nina. Then there would have been a stronger reason for it all to happen. But instead, he was just a cartoon villain without any clear motivation put in a story to make Nina appear like a hapless victim.
|
|
|
Post by Jayman on Apr 7, 2017 0:16:55 GMT
I didn't see him as a cartoonish villain, but you brought up some points that I wasn't aware of and a few I had forgotten. I can't think of a story on the show that I liked better than this one that was in the same type of theme. They did the whole Sheila thing after this, but that did nothing for me. But as I said before, I stopped watching a bit after this and enjoyed the other cbs soaps more. There were no message boards or anything, but at least you could read a lot of the viewers letters in soap opera magazine, soap opera weekly, and soap opera digest.
|
|
|
Post by jarrodmcdonald on Apr 7, 2017 21:21:10 GMT
I didn't see him as a cartoonish villain, but you brought up some points that I wasn't aware of and a few I had forgotten. I can't think of a story on the show that I liked better than this one that was in the same type of theme. They did the whole Sheila thing after this, but that did nothing for me. But as I said before, I stopped watching a bit after this and enjoyed the other cbs soaps more. There were no message boards or anything, but at least you could read a lot of the viewers letters in soap opera magazine, soap opera weekly, and soap opera digest. Yes, we had the soap mags in those days-- they kept us up to date. Sheila was another cartoonish villain, way over the top-- and that story ran on too long also, across two shows. If I had to choose my top favorite storylines from the Bell era (1987 to 1997, because that was when I started watching until Bell retired ten years later), my selections would be:
1. The Cassandra Rawlins Mystery-- though they kind of botched it at the end by adding someone named Adrian and then having Cassandra marry Brad; but the beginning and middle sections were sensational and she was the most alluring actress ever on daytime (Nina Arvesen).
2. The early romance of Victoria and Ryan-- to me that is when Victor was his best, before he became a brute, and he was concerned about protecting his kids. Heather Tom was remarkable in those years, and she played the teen rebellion stuff perfectly.
3. Jessica's AIDS storyline-- though I think they botched the end of that story too. She should have stayed married to John Abbott until her death, instead of dumping him to reunite with Chris' father.
4. The introduction of Cassie. She should never have been killed off. The beginning years with her and Sharon were very well written and played, when Sharon was still a very endearing character.
5. I also liked the comedy relief they did with Leanna (Barbara Crampton) and Jack, when he was still played by Terry Lester. I looked forward to them, and they were a big reason I got hooked on the show. I think Terry was the show's best actor. Nobody's come close to exuding that kind of charm, sex appeal, drama and humor. He had it all.
|
|
|
Post by Jayman on Apr 7, 2017 21:58:09 GMT
Yeah the whole sheila thing, I don't remember there being any payoff to that. I think there was some kind of fire or something and she was thought to be dead. We didn't even get the satisfaction of hearing Lauren tell Paul what happened when after a year she was running into his office to tell him every little thing. Instead we get Paul saying to her "it must've been pretty incredible". Her response was "yeah it was" . and that was it. I wanted to shoot my tv screen.
I missed the entire Cassandra story but I saw her in bits and pieces whenever I flicked it on.
I did see the whole Victoria Ryan thing. I don't know, I just wasn't buying it. I didn't see how a guy like that would fall for some teenager who I felt was nothing that special. Her acting was very good though.
Terry Lester was great though. The first episodes I saw were right after Jack and Jill slept together and Katherine had it on film and showed it to John and he had a stroke. Man they milked that forever. I did see Lester on As the world turns a few years after he left Y&R
I did not see the aids storyline either. I think I remember hearing about it but I missed the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by jarrodmcdonald on Apr 8, 2017 19:21:50 GMT
In those days they were afraid to do an AIDS story with a man (symbolizing a gay male with the disease), so several soaps did AIDS stories with a female who usually got it through a transfusion or drug use.
The Cassandra Rawlins mystery was sort of a ripoff of the old film noir flicks of the 40s, but it was great fun to watch at the beginning, before they wrote themselves into a corner. Originally she was supposed to be a femme fatale, but they decided to keep the actress on the show and pin her crimes on some guy named Adrian (Mark Derwin) whom we had never heard of before, then Cassandra married Brad. That story didn't work and they ended up killing her off. But if they had just stuck with the early premise that she was a manipulative con artist and wrote her out at the end of the original mystery, it would have been much more satisfying.
Terry Lester went to 'Santa Barbara' for a while between Y&R and ATWT.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Apr 17, 2017 20:28:56 GMT
You're a troll.
|
|