|
Social Media Posts, Week of May 26
|
|
Topic Started: May 26 2014, 03:46 AM (48,872 Views)
|
|
throughthehourglass
|
Jun 1 2014, 09:32 AM
Post #361
|
- Posts:
- 3,846
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #13,388
- Joined:
- April 19, 2013
|
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:25 AM
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a supercouple. ;) IMO, Ejami is a popular couple, but they are not a supercouple.
If you go by Matt's definition then without a doubt Ejami are a supercouple. I love WilSon and I want them to be happy and in love but I want them to have an exciting s/l. I don't care if they fit some people's definition of supercouple or not.
Between the twin's conception, the Sydnapping, Sami shooting EJ in the head, and the EJabby affair, EJ/Sami definitely don't meet the definition of supercouple no matter how popular they are. I agree. A lot of people think that popularity = supercouple. I guess the "super" part of the name is confusing.
|
|
|
| |
|
blueskies
|
Jun 1 2014, 09:40 AM
Post #362
|
- Posts:
- 9,225
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #7,412
- Joined:
- September 10, 2010
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Days
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Passions
- Twitter ID
- ker08
- YouTube ID
- ker8
|
- am103
- May 31 2014, 11:10 PM
- Supergirlx2
- May 31 2014, 07:22 PM
Looking at this picture, and all I can think of is that all but one of them have slept with Nicole. And all but two of them with Kate. Lol. i'm still surprised that Rafe and Nicole haven't slept together.
Edit: How many men in Salem are there currently that Nicole hasn't slept with? It can't be many. Ben, Stefano, and Rafe. Is that it?
|
|
|
| |
|
six
|
Jun 1 2014, 09:48 AM
Post #363
|
- Posts:
- 13,427
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #1,842
- Joined:
- February 12, 2008
|
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 08:11 AM
- Matt
- May 31 2014, 11:45 PM
I don't think a lot of the younger viewers quite understand the concept of "supercouple" in relation to soap opera couples. It seems as if soaps have been so determined to jettison the whole supercouple concept that it's now just a generic term for a soap couple that you happen to really, really, really like. A true supercouple has to adhere to a very strong guideline of INTENSE fan devotion (and corresponding front burner status) while haven't nothing but one obstacle after another thrown in their way to keep them apart (i.e. misunderstandings, sacrificing their own happiness for the other, a scheming/crazy ex, a suddenly pregnancy with the wrong person, a sudden marriage to the wrong person, etc.). In truth, a TRUE supercouple typically spends more time apart and longing to be together (either openly or secretly) than they do together. Bless Will & Sonny's little hearts, but I have never once seen longing from them. lol And their road to romance & domestic bliss has been a fucking cakewalk in the park, imo.
How can two people be called a supercouple when they are always apart and not even a couple? Color me confused. PS. Thanks for calling me a younger viewer ;) Too bad is isn't true. :P Because the term is more about them being soulmates who long for each other and who belong together than about them actually being together, living in domestic bliss. If you're not frustrated for most of your ship's stories, while they're young and in the spotlight, you're not shipping a supercouple. And you might not necessarily be shipping a supercouple even if you are frustrated.
Edited by six, Jun 1 2014, 09:51 AM.
|
|
|
| |
|
blueskies
|
Jun 1 2014, 09:54 AM
Post #364
|
- Posts:
- 9,225
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #7,412
- Joined:
- September 10, 2010
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Days
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Passions
- Twitter ID
- ker08
- YouTube ID
- ker8
|
- six
- Jun 1 2014, 09:48 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 08:11 AM
- Matt
- May 31 2014, 11:45 PM
I don't think a lot of the younger viewers quite understand the concept of "supercouple" in relation to soap opera couples. It seems as if soaps have been so determined to jettison the whole supercouple concept that it's now just a generic term for a soap couple that you happen to really, really, really like. A true supercouple has to adhere to a very strong guideline of INTENSE fan devotion (and corresponding front burner status) while haven't nothing but one obstacle after another thrown in their way to keep them apart (i.e. misunderstandings, sacrificing their own happiness for the other, a scheming/crazy ex, a suddenly pregnancy with the wrong person, a sudden marriage to the wrong person, etc.). In truth, a TRUE supercouple typically spends more time apart and longing to be together (either openly or secretly) than they do together. Bless Will & Sonny's little hearts, but I have never once seen longing from them. lol And their road to romance & domestic bliss has been a fucking cakewalk in the park, imo.
How can two people be called a supercouple when they are always apart and not even a couple? Color me confused. PS. Thanks for calling me a younger viewer ;) Too bad is isn't true. :P
Because the term is more about them being soulmates who long for each other and who belong together than about them actually being together, living in domestic bliss. If you're not frustrated for most of your ship's stories, while they're young and in the spotlight, you're not shipping a supercouple. And you might not necessarily be shipping a supercouple even if you are frustrated. true. I can't think of any Days "supercouple" in the last decade really. They tried with Eric/Nicole so they're probably the closest but still they don't count (yet).
I'm not sure if any soap has done them in a while. Passions might be the last? Only b/c of JER.
|
|
|
| |
|
six
|
Jun 1 2014, 09:56 AM
Post #365
|
- Posts:
- 13,427
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #1,842
- Joined:
- February 12, 2008
|
- blueskies
- Jun 1 2014, 09:40 AM
- am103
- May 31 2014, 11:10 PM
- Supergirlx2
- May 31 2014, 07:22 PM
Looking at this picture, and all I can think of is that all but one of them have slept with Nicole. And all but two of them with Kate. Lol.
i'm still surprised that Rafe and Nicole haven't slept together. Edit: How many men in Salem are there currently that Nicole hasn't slept with? It can't be many. Ben, Stefano, and Rafe. Is that it? Add Abe, Aiden, and JJ to the list. And wilson, of course, although I assume they're off the table...
|
|
|
| |
|
six
|
Jun 1 2014, 10:06 AM
Post #366
|
- Posts:
- 13,427
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #1,842
- Joined:
- February 12, 2008
|
- blueskies
- Jun 1 2014, 09:54 AM
- six
- Jun 1 2014, 09:48 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 08:11 AM
- Matt
- May 31 2014, 11:45 PM
I don't think a lot of the younger viewers quite understand the concept of "supercouple" in relation to soap opera couples. It seems as if soaps have been so determined to jettison the whole supercouple concept that it's now just a generic term for a soap couple that you happen to really, really, really like. A true supercouple has to adhere to a very strong guideline of INTENSE fan devotion (and corresponding front burner status) while haven't nothing but one obstacle after another thrown in their way to keep them apart (i.e. misunderstandings, sacrificing their own happiness for the other, a scheming/crazy ex, a suddenly pregnancy with the wrong person, a sudden marriage to the wrong person, etc.). In truth, a TRUE supercouple typically spends more time apart and longing to be together (either openly or secretly) than they do together. Bless Will & Sonny's little hearts, but I have never once seen longing from them. lol And their road to romance & domestic bliss has been a fucking cakewalk in the park, imo.
How can two people be called a supercouple when they are always apart and not even a couple? Color me confused. PS. Thanks for calling me a younger viewer ;) Too bad is isn't true. :P
Because the term is more about them being soulmates who long for each other and who belong together than about them actually being together, living in domestic bliss. If you're not frustrated for most of your ship's stories, while they're young and in the spotlight, you're not shipping a supercouple. And you might not necessarily be shipping a supercouple even if you are frustrated.
true. I can't think of any Days "supercouple" in the last decade really. They tried with Eric/Nicole so they're probably the closest but still they don't count (yet). I'm not sure if any soap has done them in a while. Passions might be the last? Only b/c of JER. Yeah, I think Passions was the last. Days pretty much abandoned the formula. I think Carrie and Austin were on their way to getting that writing, but the writers didn't follow through.
|
|
|
| |
|
Laura B
|
Jun 1 2014, 10:16 AM
Post #367
|
- Posts:
- 263
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #13,352
- Joined:
- April 12, 2013
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Days Of Our Lives
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Days and Another World
- Favorite Current Primetime Soap Opera
- Revenge
- Twitter ID
- Mozilla2008
|
- thepadange
- Jun 1 2014, 04:47 AM
Ahhhh! Thank you, such a nice view that is :wub2:
|
|
|
| |
|
Laufeyson
|
Jun 1 2014, 10:21 AM
Post #368
|
- Posts:
- 1,818
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #12,746
- Joined:
- November 28, 2012
- Mood
- Cynical
|
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
- iheartwilson
- May 30 2014, 11:10 AM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Why does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple. They don't need to be split up 10 times to be a super couple. They have angst and I like what's been shown. They have had third parties try and break them up... the biggest one being Adrienne. Triangles are overdone and they're boring. They aren't treated equal, but I think it's with the love scenes. Okay, I said something instead of just using the thumbs down button. Opposing view stated. ;)
No. WilSon is an extremely popular couple with a huge fanbase (and one that I also happen to like). That said, they are NOT a supercouple. Supercouples are written with a very specific formula that WilSon does not have. If WilSon were a supercouple, they would have been wrenched apart about 4 times by now, they would not have been married yet (and maybe not even have slept together yet), and they'd be angsting after each other so hard that no one would be able to stand seeing them onscreen without yelling at the TV for them to kiss already, dammit. People would be writing/emailing/tweeting/hiring airplanes with banners begging TPTB for them to be together, and in the meantime, we would watch them day after day (and potentially year after year) in relationships of one kind or another with interlopers whose purpose would be to keep Sonny and Will apart. And mainly, the people keeping them apart would actually be each other for some noble and selfless reason. Anyway, the moral of the story is that popular, even hugely popular, does not equal supercouple.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a supercouple. ;) IMO, Ejami is a popular couple, but they are not a supercouple.
If you go by Matt's definition then without a doubt Ejami are a supercouple. I love WilSon and I want them to be happy and in love but I want them to have an exciting s/l. I don't care if they fit some people's definition of supercouple or not. Supercouples only existed in the 80s and maybe even the 90s when the writing was spectacular in pairing people together. We didn't question it or even have these back and forths, it was (almost always) a universal understanding by the fans/actors/writers that person A belonged with person B no matter what nonsense was thrown at them to keep them apart. In my understanding this is not Wilson and it definitely is not Ejami and according to this show supercouples are now only good for one thing, destruction: Marlena&Roman(WN)/Jarlena/Bope/J&J/Steve&Kayla. The only couples in recent history that have even come close to true supercoupledom were Ericole 1.0/Lumi/Austin&Carrie but today's writing has just about ruined them. The only surviving supercouples are Julie&Doug and Kim&Shane but they are off screen so we have practically forgotten about them.
|
|
|
| |
|
iheartwilson
|
Jun 1 2014, 10:39 AM
Post #369
|
- Posts:
- 1,148
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #14,618
- Joined:
- January 8, 2014
- Mood
- Thinking
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Days of Our Lives
- Favorite Current Primetime Soap Opera
- How to Get Away with Murder
- Twitter ID
- @iheartwilson3
|
- throughthehourglass
- Jun 1 2014, 09:32 AM
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:25 AM
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple.
If you go by Matt's definition then without a doubt Ejami are a supercouple. I love WilSon and I want them to be happy and in love but I want them to have an exciting s/l. I don't care if they fit some people's definition of supercouple or not.
Between the twin's conception, the Sydnapping, Sami shooting EJ in the head, and the EJabby affair, EJ/Sami definitely don't meet the definition of supercouple no matter how popular they are.
I agree. A lot of people think that popularity = supercouple. I guess the "super" part of the name is confusing. I say the definition doesn't match the name "supercouple" at all.
|
|
|
| |
|
stormymac
|
Jun 1 2014, 10:54 AM
Post #370
|
- Posts:
- 765
- Group:
- Member
- Member
- #9,836
- Joined:
- July 8, 2011
|
- Laufeyson
- Jun 1 2014, 10:21 AM
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a supercouple. ;) IMO, Ejami is a popular couple, but they are not a supercouple.
If you go by Matt's definition then without a doubt Ejami are a supercouple. I love WilSon and I want them to be happy and in love but I want them to have an exciting s/l. I don't care if they fit some people's definition of supercouple or not.
Supercouples only existed in the 80s and maybe even the 90s when the writing was spectacular in pairing people together. We didn't question it or even have these back and forths, it was (almost always) a universal understanding by the fans/actors/writers that person A belonged with person B no matter what nonsense was thrown at them to keep them apart. In my understanding this is not Wilson and it definitely is not Ejami and according to this show supercouples are now only good for one thing, destruction: Marlena&Roman(WN)/Jarlena/Bope/J&J/Steve&Kayla. The only couples in recent history that have even come close to true supercoupledom were Ericole 1.0/Lumi/Austin&Carrie but the today's writing has just about ruined them. The only surviving supercouples are Julie&Doug and Kim&Shane but they are off screen so we have practically forgotten about them. I've always considered Justin and Adrienne a supercouple.
|
|
|
| |
|
Kaha
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:03 AM
Post #371
|
- Posts:
- 4,406
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #14,268
- Joined:
- November 3, 2013
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Days of Our Lives
|
If we only go by Matt's definition then many of the ingredient can apply to Ejami. Yes, they've hurt each other but they can be described as soulmates and they've yearned for each other and they were separated by multiple obstacles. They're not my ship but I cannot deny the smoldering hotness that was Ejami when they were fighting and we're using all their arsenals against each other. I don't think Matt said anything about a healthy or conventional love.
As for WilSon, I am not even interested in the supercouple label. I just want a front and center s/l for them. I want them to lead the young set and I think they have the connections and the rich history the writers can tab into to make that happen, but I guess they're cautious for whatever reason.
|
|
|
| |
|
S loves EJ
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:04 AM
Post #372
|
- Posts:
- 2,387
- Group:
- Elite Member
- Member
- #13,383
- Joined:
- April 19, 2013
|
- throughthehourglass
- Jun 1 2014, 09:32 AM
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:25 AM
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple.
If you go by Matt's definition then without a doubt Ejami are a supercouple. I love WilSon and I want them to be happy and in love but I want them to have an exciting s/l. I don't care if they fit some people's definition of supercouple or not.
Between the twin's conception, the Sydnapping, Sami shooting EJ in the head, and the EJabby affair, EJ/Sami definitely don't meet the definition of supercouple no matter how popular they are.
I agree. A lot of people think that popularity = supercouple. I guess the "super" part of the name is confusing.
Ejami hasnīt gotten supercouple writing so they are not a supercouple by the old definition of supercouple, but their fans are crazy about them so they are a supercouple to them.
I remember when I saw the live version of this promo and people were screaming of joy when Ejami kissed at the end. They felt like a supercouple to me then to be able to have that reaction even though the writers had tried their hardest to destroy them with the awful Rafe2 storyline and the rest of their history. Plus it was the most passionate kiss I ever seen. I was jumping up and down for days. They overcame it all which is a real achievment, but ultimately I think Iīm more or less are over them, Iīm tired of their history being a problem for them and realizes they probably isnīt gotten get the writing and ending that I would want.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9Np-C5hywI
|
|
|
| |
|
esp13
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:06 AM
Post #373
|
- Posts:
- 8,247
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #676
- Joined:
- December 20, 2007
|
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 10:39 AM
- throughthehourglass
- Jun 1 2014, 09:32 AM
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:25 AM
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple.
Between the twin's conception, the Sydnapping, Sami shooting EJ in the head, and the EJabby affair, EJ/Sami definitely don't meet the definition of supercouple no matter how popular they are.
I agree. A lot of people think that popularity = supercouple. I guess the "super" part of the name is confusing.
I say the definition doesn't match the name "supercouple" at all. That's because you are misinterpreting "super". It's not super as in happiest. It's super as in soap couple on steroids. More obstacles, angstier angst, much longer falling in love stories, cheesier cheese, and more romantic fairytale weddings. It's a style that worked in a particular period of time and which you either loved or rolled your eyes at. But it's not Wilson.
|
|
|
| |
|
jam6242
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:08 AM
Post #374
|
- Posts:
- 5,934
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #3,305
- Joined:
- December 31, 2008
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- The Doctors
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Days of Our Lives
- Favorite Primetime Soap Opera of All Time
- Peyton Place
|
It's not an insult to say a couple isn't a "supercouple." There have been many couples on Days and other soaps who were good couples but do not meet the definition of "supercouple" in soap terms.
|
|
|
| |
|
esp13
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:12 AM
Post #375
|
- Posts:
- 8,247
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #676
- Joined:
- December 20, 2007
|
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 11:03 AM
If we only go by Matt's definition then many of the ingredient can apply to Ejami. Yes, they've hurt each other but they can be described as soulmates and they've yearned for each other and they were separated by multiple obstacles. They're not my ship but I cannot deny the smoldering hotness that was Ejami when they were fighting and we're using all their arsenals against each other. I don't think Matt said anything about a healthy or conventional love.
As for WilSon, I am not even interested in the supercouple label. I just want a front and center s/l for them. I want them to lead the young set and I think they have the connections and the rich history the writers can tab into to make that happen, but I guess they're cautious for whatever reason. Well I'm not sure Matt was writing the definitive definition. But, supercouple is not just about hotness or obstacles. And it is very much conventional love - just written fairytale large. It may not be "healthy" because this is soap, but it's not supposed to be destructive or vindictive. That's where (among other things) EJ and Sami fail the test.
|
|
|
| |
|
Restless84
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:17 AM
Post #376
|
- Posts:
- 21,466
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #14,685
- Joined:
- January 19, 2014
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- Days of Our Lives
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- The Young and the Restless
- Favorite Primetime Soap Opera of All Time
- Dallas
|
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:25 AM
- Kaha
- Jun 1 2014, 08:12 AM
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?WilSon is a supercouple.
We'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of a supercouple. ;) IMO, Ejami is a popular couple, but they are not a supercouple.
If you go by Matt's definition then without a doubt Ejami are a supercouple. I love WilSon and I want them to be happy and in love but I want them to have an exciting s/l. I don't care if they fit some people's definition of supercouple or not.
Between the twin's conception, the Sydnapping, Sami shooting EJ in the head, and the EJabby affair, EJ/Sami definitely don't meet the definition of supercouple no matter how popular they are. I'll add also sending a stranger (Fake Rafe) into Sami's bed and allowing him to be around the children. Essentially that was EJ (and Stefano) raping Sami a second time.
|
|
|
| |
|
thepadange
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:18 AM
Post #377
|
- Posts:
- 19,424
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,186
- Joined:
- March 3, 2013
|
IMO it makes no sense to have a discussion if X or Y is a supercouple or not, if there's no agreement on the "concept"/meaning of "supercouple". (Because there's no misinterpretation or right answer here, it's just a matter of agreement)
|
|
|
| |
|
esp13
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:27 AM
Post #378
|
- Posts:
- 8,247
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #676
- Joined:
- December 20, 2007
|
- thepadange
- Jun 1 2014, 11:18 AM
IMO it makes no sense to have a discussion if X or Y is a supercouple or not, if there's no agreement on the "concept"/meaning of "supercouple". (Because there's no misinterpretation or right answer here, it's just a matter of agreement) Fair enough. But some of us believe there is a concept/meaning/definition of supercouple. So there really isn't an agreement that there should be disagreement about the term. And, beyond that, discussions would be boring if we could only talk about things that we all actually agreed upon. People are free to make their cases as to why they believe Wilson or EJami or any other couple is a supercouple. And I'm free to explain why I disagree with that classification. It might not change anybody's mind, but it serves to pass the time.
|
|
|
| |
|
SoapGal1
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:31 AM
Post #379
|
- Posts:
- 7,284
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #659
- Joined:
- December 20, 2007
- Mood
- None
|
I think supercouples are a thing of the past. They don't write like that for couples anymore.
I think Ericole was the closest in recent history & then they blew that all to bits.
I liked Ejami alot back in the day but they never got true supercouple writing, IMO.
I don't think Wilson is either. It's like tptb are too scared to really give them any obstacles. Plus, I think GW & To a lesser extent FS would really have to step their game in the acting dept.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:32 AM
Post #380
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- Supergirlx2
- May 31 2014, 07:22 PM
You would never guess that GV on screen on Days just alone, is as small as he is in real life.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|