Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



Hello, soap fans -- and welcome to Daytime Royalty!

For those unfamiliar, we are an uncensored community for fans and lovers of the daytime genre. We have a no-holds-barred atmosphere in regards to the shows, writers, actors etc. but we do not allow member bashing in any form.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member, please log in to your account to access all of our features.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
NBC Weekly Preview 9/30/13
Topic Started: Sep 27 2013, 04:12 PM (4,685 Views)
LanaluvsBroe
Member Avatar


Sevprince
Sep 27 2013, 04:37 PM
Bringing this up as its own story is fine. Bringing it up so JJ can change his attitude towards Dan and except him is not fine.
THIS. Exactly this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bellajewel
Member Avatar
~SIZZLING HOT~

The Scorpion
Sep 27 2013, 04:41 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:31 PM
The Scorpion
Sep 27 2013, 04:29 PM
Seriously, this is pretty low, so it is as I thought they pulled up a 30-year old story for this, hmm not cool.
I think it's awesome when they bring up old stuff. What's the point in being on the air 50 years if you can't reference history?
Yes of course it is good to make use of old stuff history, but this is not cool or rather it feels like bullshit, I can not see that this will be about compelling drama I see it more like the writers has an agenda with this stuff.
I cannot agree more. The PTB have an agenda bringing up the old history of Jack raping Kayla. IMO it's gonna totally destroy JJ's faith in his father
and eventually he'll see Dannifer in a different light, especially Dr. Sleaze.

The Daniel propping needs to end. How many people/relationships will be sacrificed at the altar of the sleazy pervert? At the rate things are going, the whole town will be worshipping him. :soapbox:


Edited by bellajewel, Sep 27 2013, 05:01 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LanaluvsBroe
Member Avatar


lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM
Panda Panda
Sep 27 2013, 04:32 PM
I don't see how having Jack back would help JJ not hate him for what he did? Jack raped Kayla. There's no justification, no "other side", and no explanation behind his assault. And there shouldn't be.

I'm not too fond of the fact that this storyline is skating on the fringes of Fetch break/makeup #267253625362, but if the writers can somehow keep this story about JJ, Kayla, Jack, and Jennifer (ONLY THEM) then I wouldn't mind seeing how everything plays out
I don't think that's the point of having Jack back. It wouldn't keep JJ from hating him, but that is where the drama comes in. I just think having this story without Jack being involved at all is ....just wrong. It's going to all be about Daniel, and how JJ starts to accept him. That isn't at all what this should all be about. But I don't know any other reason to bring this all up when one of the key characters isn't even around. To me, it is a waste of a story without Jack. Sure, it might be a good story for a day or two, but if Jack were actually around....they could milk it for a whole lot more than what it will probably end up being.
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But you're still missing a HUGE emotional beat by not having Jack around. This story should have been told with Jack and Steve back in Salem. Jack went through hell to redeem himself but that part of the story can't be adequately told without Jack around to tell it. That's the first part of the problem. The second part of the problem is their use of history as plot device to advance their glorification of Daniel Jonas. I don't mind them revisiting Jack's history. But leave Daniel the fuck out of it. He wasn't around back then and therefore should not be involved now.
Edited by LanaluvsBroe, Sep 27 2013, 04:56 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lysie
Member Avatar


LanaluvsBroe
Sep 27 2013, 04:55 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM
Panda Panda
Sep 27 2013, 04:32 PM
I don't see how having Jack back would help JJ not hate him for what he did? Jack raped Kayla. There's no justification, no "other side", and no explanation behind his assault. And there shouldn't be.

I'm not too fond of the fact that this storyline is skating on the fringes of Fetch break/makeup #267253625362, but if the writers can somehow keep this story about JJ, Kayla, Jack, and Jennifer (ONLY THEM) then I wouldn't mind seeing how everything plays out
I don't think that's the point of having Jack back. It wouldn't keep JJ from hating him, but that is where the drama comes in. I just think having this story without Jack being involved at all is ....just wrong. It's going to all be about Daniel, and how JJ starts to accept him. That isn't at all what this should all be about. But I don't know any other reason to bring this all up when one of the key characters isn't even around. To me, it is a waste of a story without Jack. Sure, it might be a good story for a day or two, but if Jack were actually around....they could milk it for a whole lot more than what it will probably end up being.
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But you're still missing a HUGE emotional beat by not having Jack around. This story should have been told with Jack and Steve back in Salem. Jack went through hell to redeem himself but that part of the story can't be adequately told without Jack around to tell it. That's the first part of the problem. The second part of the problem is their use of history as plot device to advance their glorification of Daniel Jonas. I don't mind them revisiting Jack's history. But leave Daniel the fuck out of it. He wasn't around back then and therefore should not be involved now.
But that happens. Even in real life. Yes, it's missing a best but there's also a completely different beat that they're hitting BECAUSE he's not there. And it's a beat for JJ. Not Daniel who still hasn't been mentioned as having squat to do with this story.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jwsel
Member Avatar


lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:59 PM
LanaluvsBroe
Sep 27 2013, 04:55 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But you're still missing a HUGE emotional beat by not having Jack around. This story should have been told with Jack and Steve back in Salem. Jack went through hell to redeem himself but that part of the story can't be adequately told without Jack around to tell it. That's the first part of the problem. The second part of the problem is their use of history as plot device to advance their glorification of Daniel Jonas. I don't mind them revisiting Jack's history. But leave Daniel the fuck out of it. He wasn't around back then and therefore should not be involved now.
But that happens. Even in real life. Yes, it's missing a best but there's also a completely different beat that they're hitting BECAUSE he's not there. And it's a beat for JJ. Not Daniel who still hasn't been mentioned as having squat to do with this story.
That's a great point. Part of the reason Jack is such a saint in JJ's mind is because he is dead. So the discovery that the dead saint wasn't necessarily perfect is still a major storyline worth exploring even if Jack is not around.

The big issue will be how the show plays out the story once JJ learns the truth. If it is simply a vehicle to JJ hating his father and concluding that Daniel is "better" for Jennifer, that will be a failure. If it is a way for JJ to learn that people make mistakes and Jack did something horrible in the past and it took a lot of work for him to turn his life around and prove himself, I'm all for it.

What does bother me is that the show skipped over the entire storyline of Abby learning. When did that happen? Did it color her view of Jack? Do we have to go back over her interactions when Jack returned and try to figure out if her treatment was influenced by knowing that her dad was a rapist? And if she supposedly has known all along, shouldn't those bonding moments with Kayla have been a little awkward? And if Abby knows, does that means Stephanie knows about what happened as well? Those are huge issues for the Johnson family and it is confusing that Abby would already know when we have seen no sign of it in any other interaction with anyone else.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kriss4


Panda Panda
Sep 27 2013, 04:32 PM
I don't see how having Jack back would help JJ not hate him for what he did? Jack raped Kayla. There's no justification, no "other side", and no explanation behind his assault. And there shouldn't be.

I'm not too fond of the fact that this storyline is skating on the fringes of Fetch break/makeup #267253625362, but if the writers can somehow keep this story about JJ, Kayla, Jack, and Jennifer (ONLY THEM) then I wouldn't mind seeing how everything plays out
Have you seen the story?

It's complicated. Not to in any way excuse Jack or absolve him from responsibility, because he did it, and Kayla suffered when he did. It was despicable. But it was a mess of decision-making, lots of it with good intentions but a lack of wisdom.

Now, figure THAT out, LOL!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lysie
Member Avatar


jwsel
Sep 27 2013, 05:23 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:59 PM
LanaluvsBroe
Sep 27 2013, 04:55 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
But you're still missing a HUGE emotional beat by not having Jack around. This story should have been told with Jack and Steve back in Salem. Jack went through hell to redeem himself but that part of the story can't be adequately told without Jack around to tell it. That's the first part of the problem. The second part of the problem is their use of history as plot device to advance their glorification of Daniel Jonas. I don't mind them revisiting Jack's history. But leave Daniel the fuck out of it. He wasn't around back then and therefore should not be involved now.
But that happens. Even in real life. Yes, it's missing a best but there's also a completely different beat that they're hitting BECAUSE he's not there. And it's a beat for JJ. Not Daniel who still hasn't been mentioned as having squat to do with this story.
That's a great point. Part of the reason Jack is such a saint in JJ's mind is because he is dead. So the discovery that the dead saint wasn't necessarily perfect is still a major storyline worth exploring even if Jack is not around.

The big issue will be how the show plays out the story once JJ learns the truth. If it is simply a vehicle to JJ hating his father and concluding that Daniel is "better" for Jennifer, that will be a failure. If it is a way for JJ to learn that people make mistakes and Jack did something horrible in the past and it took a lot of work for him to turn his life around and prove himself, I'm all for it.

What does bother me is that the show skipped over the entire storyline of Abby learning. When did that happen? Did it color her view of Jack? Do we have to go back over her interactions when Jack returned and try to figure out if her treatment was influenced by knowing that her dad was a rapist? And if she supposedly has known all along, shouldn't those bonding moments with Kayla have been a little awkward? And if Abby knows, does that means Stephanie knows about what happened as well? Those are huge issues for the Johnson family and it is confusing that Abby would already know when we have seen no sign of it in any other interaction with anyone else.
ITA on all points. And in a couple of weeks if this story turns to focus on Daniel, then I'll agree with other points. But at this point, the story is about JJ and isn't any of the things people fear...yet.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PALMommy
Member Avatar


lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:31 PM
The Scorpion
Sep 27 2013, 04:29 PM
Seriously, this is pretty low, so it is as I thought they pulled up a 30-year old story for this, hmm not cool.
I think it's awesome when they bring up old stuff. What's the point in being on the air 50 years if you can't reference history?
They use history when it pleases them. Them being TIIC! I think they should trot out how Kristen was almost Brady's stepmommy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
annie21


lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM
Panda Panda
Sep 27 2013, 04:32 PM
I don't see how having Jack back would help JJ not hate him for what he did? Jack raped Kayla. There's no justification, no "other side", and no explanation behind his assault. And there shouldn't be.

I'm not too fond of the fact that this storyline is skating on the fringes of Fetch break/makeup #267253625362, but if the writers can somehow keep this story about JJ, Kayla, Jack, and Jennifer (ONLY THEM) then I wouldn't mind seeing how everything plays out
I don't think that's the point of having Jack back. It wouldn't keep JJ from hating him, but that is where the drama comes in. I just think having this story without Jack being involved at all is ....just wrong. It's going to all be about Daniel, and how JJ starts to accept him. That isn't at all what this should all be about. But I don't know any other reason to bring this all up when one of the key characters isn't even around. To me, it is a waste of a story without Jack. Sure, it might be a good story for a day or two, but if Jack were actually around....they could milk it for a whole lot more than what it will probably end up being.
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But a lot of things happened back then. And many of those things were interconnected. I am concerned that if these writers only pull out part of the story for their own purposes, there will be a tendency for many to be misled by the new telling (or the inadequate telling).

Let's look at this way. We all know that Jack raped Kayla. Many of us actually saw that played out onscreen. It was wrenching and horrible. We saw the act (well, kind of), and we saw the aftermath as it affected both Jack and Kayla -- and others around them. It definitely "happened."

We also saw the events leading up to it, including when Kayla was shown to carry on an affair with Steve behind her husband's back, and lying to Jack for months. This also "happened."

Now, let's say that a few years from now, a new writing team decides to kill off Kayla and later tell a coming of age story about her son Joey. And let's say they decide he finds out that his mom was a lying, cheating woman who cuckolded her first husband -- perhaps because the writers want to diminish Kayla in the eyes of her son.

I would be incensed and enraged that a writing team would cynically take something that was so powerful and exploit it and twist it like that.

I am NOT excusing what Jack did. I am NOT saying that JJ shouldn't find out the truth. But what I am saying is that I don't want these writers to be the ones to bring it back up. They have given me no confidence whatsoever that they can handle the kind of complexity this warrants. Worse, I'm concerned that the "accepted canon" of what transpired will be altered by their mucking around in it.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
waterlilly
Member Avatar


In real life these things happen, an idolized father's sins are uncovered by his children after his death. In real life this would push an already troubled young man over the edge. He would be angry, very angry at everyone who was not honest with him. He would be angry at his sainted father, his deceptive mother, his sister and all relatives who he feels kept him in the dark while they all knew the truth. He would not embrace Taniel or anything to do with "let's pretend". But, this is DOOL! Sooooo JJ will probably go into the light of the orange glow.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kriss4


lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:59 PM
LanaluvsBroe
Sep 27 2013, 04:55 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But you're still missing a HUGE emotional beat by not having Jack around. This story should have been told with Jack and Steve back in Salem. Jack went through hell to redeem himself but that part of the story can't be adequately told without Jack around to tell it. That's the first part of the problem. The second part of the problem is their use of history as plot device to advance their glorification of Daniel Jonas. I don't mind them revisiting Jack's history. But leave Daniel the fuck out of it. He wasn't around back then and therefore should not be involved now.
But that happens. Even in real life. Yes, it's missing a best but there's also a completely different beat that they're hitting BECAUSE he's not there. And it's a beat for JJ. Not Daniel who still hasn't been mentioned as having squat to do with this story.
I'm hoping Daniel isn't part of it at all, in any fashion.

This isn't about him, and it shouldn't be.

This should be about JJ, Jack, and Kayla...and Jennifer and Abby. If Stephanie were here, I'd include her, as I'd think the story should include her thoughts and feelings too...cuz you know she and Abby and JJ would talk about this.

But in NO way should this be about Daniel.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Yoryla
Member Avatar


So firstly, I'm stunned that Jack made a promo. I never thought I would ever see a promo on this show again that would feature Jack, Kayla and JJ. So in that way I'm impressed.

However, then there's the thing that I'm sure will get people's feathers ruffeled, the fact that JJ will turn on his deceased father and start to act out because of this? Which, even though a traumatic incident, is a pretty ancient one considering the scope of this show. I don't really see the point in getting JJ to hate his father now......UNLESS of course it is so that Dan the man can then convince him that Jack isn't such a bad guy after all. Yeap.

Then there's the third thing, that isn't it kind of strange and unorthodox for a show to do the whole week's promo of basically a revisit to a 20 year old, past storyline and which, other than JJ, features one past character and one recurring character? The storyline aside, I'm just wondering if that's kind of weird from a promotional point of view.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kriss4


annie21
Sep 27 2013, 05:50 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM
Panda Panda
Sep 27 2013, 04:32 PM
I don't see how having Jack back would help JJ not hate him for what he did? Jack raped Kayla. There's no justification, no "other side", and no explanation behind his assault. And there shouldn't be.

I'm not too fond of the fact that this storyline is skating on the fringes of Fetch break/makeup #267253625362, but if the writers can somehow keep this story about JJ, Kayla, Jack, and Jennifer (ONLY THEM) then I wouldn't mind seeing how everything plays out
I don't think that's the point of having Jack back. It wouldn't keep JJ from hating him, but that is where the drama comes in. I just think having this story without Jack being involved at all is ....just wrong. It's going to all be about Daniel, and how JJ starts to accept him. That isn't at all what this should all be about. But I don't know any other reason to bring this all up when one of the key characters isn't even around. To me, it is a waste of a story without Jack. Sure, it might be a good story for a day or two, but if Jack were actually around....they could milk it for a whole lot more than what it will probably end up being.
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But a lot of things happened back then. And many of those things were interconnected. I am concerned that if these writers only pull out part of the story for their own purposes, there will be a tendency for many to be misled by the new telling (or the inadequate telling).

Let's look at this way. We all know that Jack raped Kayla. Many of us actually saw that played out onscreen. It was wrenching and horrible. We saw the act (well, kind of), and we saw the aftermath as it affected both Jack and Kayla -- and others around them. It definitely "happened."

We also saw the events leading up to it, including when Kayla was shown to carry on an affair with Steve behind her husband's back, and lying to Jack for months. This also "happened."

Now, let's say that a few years from now, a new writing team decides to kill off Kayla and later tell a coming of age story about her son Joey. And let's say they decide he finds out that his mom was a lying, cheating woman who cuckolded her first husband -- perhaps because the writers want to diminish Kayla in the eyes of her son.

I would be incensed and enraged that a writing team would cynically take something that was so powerful and exploit it and twist it like that.

I am NOT excusing what Jack did. I am NOT saying that JJ shouldn't find out the truth. But what I am saying is that I don't want these writers to be the ones to bring it back up. They have given me no confidence whatsoever that they can handle the kind of complexity this warrants. Worse, I'm concerned that the "accepted canon" of what transpired will be altered by their mucking around in it.

Kayla had reasons for what she did...all the way down the line.

I think she was wrong in some of her decisions, but I understood why she made the decisions she did, even though I didn't agree with them.

If you have access to the whole story, you see Jack is very sick (Hodgkin's Disease), and it's thought that he's dying. Kayla's his friend, but she doesn't love him, because she's already given her heart to Steve. However, Jack's in a bad way, and everyone around Jack, from Harper to Angelica to Mike Horton (Jack's doctor) become very concerned about his attitude and lack of "fight." Even Melissa, who loves Jack, wants Jack to live badly enough that she doesn't say much against the marriage anywhere...because Jack wants Kayla, and if he wants Kayla, maybe he should have her, so he'll live.

Kayla gets a lot of pressure to accept Jack's marriage proposal, from well-meaning people who want Jack to fight harder to live. Jack even tells Melissa that if he doesn't have the hope of a future with Kayla, what's the point of living anyway?

Sometimes I wish Kayla had said to heck with it and disregarded that proposal, friendship or not. Jack never should have proposed to her anyway. He KNEW she loved Steve, and there he was in that hospital bed...How do you say no to a guy who everyone is concerned is going to die?

But she didn't say no. She married him. Her decision. An unhappy one for her...and when she finds out the truth, it becomes even MORE complicated and messy.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kriss4


Yoryla
Sep 27 2013, 06:07 PM
So firstly, I'm stunned that Jack made a promo. I never thought I would ever see a promo on this show again that would feature Jack, Kayla and JJ. So in that way I'm impressed.

However, then there's the thing that I'm sure will get people's feathers ruffeled, the fact that JJ will turn on his deceased father and start to act out because of this? Which, even though a traumatic incident, is a pretty ancient one considering the scope of this show. I don't really see the point in getting JJ to hate his father now......UNLESS of course it is so that Dan the man can then convince him that Jack isn't such a bad guy after all. Yeap.

Then there's the third thing, that isn't it kind of strange and unorthodox for a show to do the whole week's promo of basically a revisit to a 20 year old, past storyline and which, other than JJ, features one past character and one recurring character? The storyline aside, I'm just wondering if that's kind of weird from a promotional point of view.
I don't think so, because Kayla's not your ordinary recurring character. She has a huge history with Days, and has been around long enough that current fans know her...so while this may be a surprise to newer fans, they may find it interesting. Maybe they'll even take a look back...the whole story is kind of complicated.

Edited by Kriss4, Sep 27 2013, 06:14 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kriss4


Well, JJ needs somebody to believe in. He doesn't believe in Jennifer at the moment because he thinks Jennifer's been with Daniel all this time, despite telling him they were over.

His faith in what he thought people were about is being tested, and will continue to be.

That's okay. I find it interesting, and I've watched every part of the story, trying to erase Daniel mentally when he appears. Yes, I admit I watch because Kayla's been in it some...She's my favorite and I make no bones about it...but it's family drama, and I like family drama in my soap.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
annie21


Kriss4
Sep 27 2013, 06:10 PM
annie21
Sep 27 2013, 05:50 PM
lysie
Sep 27 2013, 04:46 PM
supercool74
Sep 27 2013, 04:43 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
The complaint would still be that it's all about Daniel even if Jack were there. Jack being there wouldn't affect that one little bit. It would affect other things, but not that. If they were misrepresenting the history, I could empathize with the outcry over this. But they're not. This is what happened and it's what happened whether Jack is alive or dead. The drama comes not from Jack having to defend himself but from his son learning the truth. And that's what we're getting at this point.
But a lot of things happened back then. And many of those things were interconnected. I am concerned that if these writers only pull out part of the story for their own purposes, there will be a tendency for many to be misled by the new telling (or the inadequate telling).

Let's look at this way. We all know that Jack raped Kayla. Many of us actually saw that played out onscreen. It was wrenching and horrible. We saw the act (well, kind of), and we saw the aftermath as it affected both Jack and Kayla -- and others around them. It definitely "happened."

We also saw the events leading up to it, including when Kayla was shown to carry on an affair with Steve behind her husband's back, and lying to Jack for months. This also "happened."

Now, let's say that a few years from now, a new writing team decides to kill off Kayla and later tell a coming of age story about her son Joey. And let's say they decide he finds out that his mom was a lying, cheating woman who cuckolded her first husband -- perhaps because the writers want to diminish Kayla in the eyes of her son.

I would be incensed and enraged that a writing team would cynically take something that was so powerful and exploit it and twist it like that.

I am NOT excusing what Jack did. I am NOT saying that JJ shouldn't find out the truth. But what I am saying is that I don't want these writers to be the ones to bring it back up. They have given me no confidence whatsoever that they can handle the kind of complexity this warrants. Worse, I'm concerned that the "accepted canon" of what transpired will be altered by their mucking around in it.

Kayla had reasons for what she did...all the way down the line.

I think she was wrong in some of her decisions, but I understood why she made the decisions she did, even though I didn't agree with them.

If you have access to the whole story, you see Jack is very sick (Hodgkin's Disease), and it's thought that he's dying. Kayla's his friend, but she doesn't love him, because she's already given her heart to Steve. However, Jack's in a bad way, and everyone around Jack, from Harper to Angelica to Mike Horton (Jack's doctor) become very concerned about his attitude and lack of "fight." Even Melissa, who loves Jack, wants Jack to live badly enough that she doesn't say much against the marriage anywhere...because Jack wants Kayla, and if he wants Kayla, maybe he should have her, so he'll live.

Kayla gets a lot of pressure to accept Jack's marriage proposal, from well-meaning people who want Jack to fight harder to live. Jack even tells Melissa that if he doesn't have the hope of a future with Kayla, what's the point of living anyway?

Sometimes I wish Kayla had said to heck with it and disregarded that proposal, friendship or not. Jack never should have proposed to her anyway. He KNEW she loved Steve, and there he was in that hospital bed...How do you say no to a guy who everyone is concerned is going to die?

But she didn't say no. She married him. Her decision. An unhappy one for her...and when she finds out the truth, it becomes even MORE complicated and messy.

I completely agree, and that's actually my point. It was complicated and messy. And Kayla had reasons for what she did. We saw it all.

But what if Joey (and the viewers of that hypothetical time) never got to learn about all that complexity? What if it was reduced to a tabloid-style, titillating headline?

That's how I feel about the current regime running the show. In general, I feel they're "tabloid-izing" the show -- both it's past and it's present -- reducing everything to a few sensationalized plot points that go nowhere and signify nothing -- and are done via fact-checking that is lazy to nonexistent.

Have I mentioned I don't like the writing? :)

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
james0479
Member Avatar


Ok I'm gonna give my 2 cents here. I'm with Lysie. While I do understand Jack fans being upset about this, Jack did rape Kayla and while his character did turn around and become a fan favorite legacy character who was thrown under the bus more times than pretty much anyone in Days history, this is an interesting nod TO Days history and I think it's an interesting arc for JJ's troubled teen story. Casey looks like he's giving a HELL of a performance from this short clip and I look forward to it. I don't, however, want this to be a catalyst to have JJ fall into the arms of Daniel and call him poppa....but this is something that hasn't been addressed in forever and Kayla surely thinks of it from time to time. I'm on board for this. I wish someone would remind someone that EJ did the same thing to his favorite princess Samanther at one time but I know we just aren't supposed to talk about that.
Edited by james0479, Sep 27 2013, 06:28 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
annie21


waterlilly
Sep 27 2013, 05:57 PM
In real life these things happen, an idolized father's sins are uncovered by his children after his death. In real life this would push an already troubled young man over the edge. He would be angry, very angry at everyone who was not honest with him. He would be angry at his sainted father, his deceptive mother, his sister and all relatives who he feels kept him in the dark while they all knew the truth. He would not embrace Taniel or anything to do with "let's pretend". But, this is DOOL! Sooooo JJ will probably go into the light of the orange glow.
Not only does this happen in real life, but it happened to Jack when he found out the truth about his adoption and about the exploits of his two dads. Jack was angry for a long time with everyone, and especially with those who had withheld the truth from him "for his own good."

There's no question this is an area ripe for drama. I just hate that all of that potential is in the hands of these particular writers, who don't have a good track record in this area.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
annie21


james0479
Sep 27 2013, 06:27 PM
Ok I'm gonna give my 2 cents here. I'm with Lysie. While I do understand Jack fans being upset about this, Jack did rape Kayla and while his character did turn around and become a fan favorite legacy character who was thrown under the bus more times than pretty much anyone in Days history, this is an interesting nod TO Days history and I think it's an interesting arc for JJ's troubled teen story. Casey looks like he's giving a HELL of a performance from this short clip and I look forward to it. I don't, however, want this to be a catalyst to have JJ fall into the arms of Daniel and call him poppa....but this is something that hasn't been addressed in forever and the Kayla surely thinks of it from time to time. I'm on board for this. I wish someone would remind someone that EJ did the same thing to his favorite princess Samanther at one time but I know we just aren't supposed to talk about that.
I like nods to history, too. What I don't like is exploitation. And sadly that appears to be one of the few things that these writers are good at.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
james0479
Member Avatar


annie21
Sep 27 2013, 06:30 PM
james0479
Sep 27 2013, 06:27 PM
Ok I'm gonna give my 2 cents here. I'm with Lysie. While I do understand Jack fans being upset about this, Jack did rape Kayla and while his character did turn around and become a fan favorite legacy character who was thrown under the bus more times than pretty much anyone in Days history, this is an interesting nod TO Days history and I think it's an interesting arc for JJ's troubled teen story. Casey looks like he's giving a HELL of a performance from this short clip and I look forward to it. I don't, however, want this to be a catalyst to have JJ fall into the arms of Daniel and call him poppa....but this is something that hasn't been addressed in forever and the Kayla surely thinks of it from time to time. I'm on board for this. I wish someone would remind someone that EJ did the same thing to his favorite princess Samanther at one time but I know we just aren't supposed to talk about that.
I like nods to history, too. What I don't like is exploitation. And sadly that appears to be one of the few things that these writers are good at.

I AM worried about that but I'm gonna see how it plays out before I judge it. I'm more interested in how Kayla discusses it than anything else. I've always wondered her feelings about this....praying the writing is what it should be
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply