Viewing Single Post From: SC interview
Aug 15 2008, 06:49 PM
- Elite Member
- November 24, 2007
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Santa Barbara
- Favorite Primetime Soap Opera of All Time
- Melrose Place (original)
I think what charmqn means by disgrace is that Doug and Julie had conflict and obstacles. Chan really only has....well I don't know what to call it. There was no falling in love interval. There was no real obstacles, especially at first since the show chose to ignore Nick as an obstacle and the age difference in the beginning. Bo might not like it but he isn't standing in the way. They have already insisted they are in love. They are now together. They haven't even known each other for 6 months and already they have missed out on so many opportunities on creating a real story here. Many people would tell you the most important period of any couple is their falling in love period. Chan didn't have one at all.
- Aug 15 2008, 06:41 PM
- Aug 15 2008, 06:36 PM
- Aug 14 2008, 03:15 PM
I compared them to Doug and Julie and I meant it from how it made me feel. I saw them from the beginning too. No - they aren't alike in that Doug was paid to court Julie and was an ex-con, and hired to get her away from the man she loved until she met him. Daniel has more integrity than Doug did and Chelsea isn't nearly as big of a skank as Julie was. But I still saw the chemistry just like I did with my first favorite couple on Days - Doug and Julie.
really doug and julie? maybe for the age thing, but that's about it...Doug and Julie never made me want to kick my Tv like Chan does....just end this disgrace.
Why are Dansea a disgrace? I don't see that at all. Doug and Julie were not perfect. You mean when he was conning her in the beginning, taking money to win her, that was all roses and violins? Nope, sorry. The rocky start is part of the reason they remind me of each other.
Sorry, Kate was a hooker. 50 was being kind. Until she learns humility and to stop interfering where she doesn't belong, the character will always be a low life IMO. I don't care how many ladders she climbs. I don't dislike her because of Daniel. I didn't like her before that!
As for Kate hooking, well that was a long time ago, we really shouldn't be bringing up past actions and misdeeds of characters should we? Cause we can always bring up how Chelsea is responsible for 2 deaths so by your standards I can now call her a murderer (which I refuse to do, but it's the same reasoning).
Lastly, I still maintain if you compare actions between Kate and Chelsea recently, it would be Chelsea who would fall into the needy and slutty category. YMMV