|
Social Media Posts, Week of May 26
|
|
Topic Started: May 26 2014, 03:46 AM (48,871 Views)
|
|
nananana7
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:37 AM
Post #381
|
- Posts:
- 25,412
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #12,620
- Joined:
- October 17, 2012
|
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
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.
- 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.
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 08:11 AM
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
- six
- Jun 1 2014, 09:48 AM
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.
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:23 AM
"stable, committed to each other and a unit of sorts"'is everything a super couple is not. A true and traditional super couple is anything but stable. And, for a good portion of the time, they aren't even necessarily committed to each other or a unit of any kind.
A super couple is certainly deeply in love, but the ability to acknowledge that is usually limited to brief intervals of happiness in between the eons of unrelenting angst. The stability comes only after at least two years of a roller coaster ride and then generally only lasts for a brief period after the wedding before the long lost spouse, child, or enemy shows up to blow things up again. True stability and happiness are the death knell of a super couple (generally signaling that one half is about to die and/or the couple is about to leave) not a hallmark.
As others have said WilSon is a very popular couple, but nothing about their story has fit the traditional super couple model. If you doubt this, go watch the first two years of Bo and Hope, Shane and Kim, Steve and Kayla, or Jack and Jennifer and compare for yourself.
- Laufeyson
- Jun 1 2014, 10:21 AM
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.
- 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.
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 11:12 AM
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.
- 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)
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 11:27 AM
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.
Looking at all the above definitions -- none of them matches these from wikipedia and tvtrope:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercouple
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuperCouple
I think there are many different ideas!
(editing later to clarify that they don't match the first paragraph of the wikipedia article but they might partially match later paragraphs)
|
|
|
| |
|
blueskies
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:39 AM
Post #382
|
- 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
|
- 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. i don't think so, b/c one of the main things is that "everyone knows person A belongs with person B" and that is not true for EJ and Sami in the least.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:41 AM
Post #383
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- Yoryla
- Jun 1 2014, 07:30 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
- iheartwilson
- May 30 2014, 11:10 AM
- cryin4days
- May 30 2014, 10:50 AM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?
WilSon is not dull. 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.
But on a larger scale, there are no supercouples anymore. And in that context Wilson imo is the nearest thing of a supercouple these days we can have. They're stable, they clearly love each other, are committed and they're a unit of sorts. They are a couple. That's all.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:43 AM
Post #384
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 07:59 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
- iheartwilson
- May 30 2014, 11:10 AM
- cryin4days
- May 30 2014, 10:50 AM
Quoting limited to 4 levels deepWhy does Ari "need" to stay with Will and Sonny?
WilSon is not dull. 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. I agree. They are the furthest thing from being a supercouple. And Will/Sonny are eons from being a supercouple.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:45 AM
Post #385
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- 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 Read Matt's post again. Or tape it to your fridge. It is about the longing to be together and being torn apart. It doesn't mean they have to literally BE a couple.
|
|
|
| |
|
Restless84
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:48 AM
Post #386
|
- 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
|
I agree with the notion they don't really write for supercouples anymore. To me the most recent pairing that came close to supercouple status was Lumi.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:48 AM
Post #387
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- 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. Maybe if you only define supercouple by fan devotion, but it's much more. Sami and Elvis haven't really been torn apart by outside forces, more by their own neurosis and I wouldn't think you could say they have always longed to be together when apart.
|
|
|
| |
|
Matt
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:49 AM
Post #388
|
Classic Soap Fan
- Posts:
- 27,900
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #214
- Joined:
- August 5, 2007
- Mood
- None
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- The Doctors
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Another World
- Twitter ID
- kyleo71
- YouTube ID
- xxxpartydog
|
Also, another thing to factor in, is that typical soap opera supercouples traditionally have a 3-5 year shelf life from introduction/launch until one or both of the partners leaves the show (be it by the actor's own choice or by a storyline dictate). It is very, very, VERY rare for a supercouple to hang around on a show indefinitely (especially front burner) while still getting supercouple style writing. John/Marlena are probably the longest term supercouple still on the show, but they're currently apart (after having been sent off the canvas for a couple of years) and their later stories became more and more outlandish (IMO). Also, as mentioned above, with true supercouple writing, there was never any doubt who each 1/2 belonged with even when there was an interloper. We were never led to believe that there MIGHT be a chance Roman wanted Anna. Larry or Diane was ever implied to be a TRUE rival to Bo & Hope's love. It was never written that fans should've ever rooted for Jack & Kayla. No one EVER thought that Justin might legitimately end up with Anjelica or Adrienne with Emilio (or Jennifer with Emilio, for that matter). Over the last 15 years or so, it seems the pattern has been "How many different couple configurations can we come up with for the same characters, how many different fanbases can we cultivate, how long can we string each of them along making each one of them think that their couple is the one who should be together by throwing them crumbs, & how viciously & bitterly can we make them fight against one another". Not supercouple writing.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:51 AM
Post #389
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- throughthehourglass
- Jun 1 2014, 09:13 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.
Because even when the couple was apart, the writers made sure that the audience never doubted that these two people belonged together. Like John & Marlena. Bo & Hope. And Days' last supercouple, in my opinion: Sami & Lucas. I think the last one could have been Austin & Carrie, but they ruined them. They didn't quite make it. I don't think Lucas and Sami could be called one, but they had a chance. I just never felt that in the long run Sami could ever be a part of any supercouple. Her obsession with Austin and self centered personality made that impossible.
|
|
|
| |
|
Rosebud
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:53 AM
Post #390
|
- Posts:
- 20,178
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,563
- Joined:
- June 13, 2013
- Mood
- None
|
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:23 AM
- Yoryla
- Jun 1 2014, 07:30 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.
But on a larger scale, there are no supercouples anymore. And in that context Wilson imo is the nearest thing of a supercouple these days we can have. They're stable, they clearly love each other, are committed and they're a unit of sorts.
Except that "stable, committed to each other and a unit of sorts"'is everything a super couple is not. A true and traditional super couple is anything but stable. And, for a good portion of the time, they aren't even necessarily committed to each other or a unit of any kind. A super couple is certainly deeply in love, but the ability to acknowledge that is usually limited to brief intervals of happiness in between the eons of unrelenting angst. The stability comes only after at least two years of a roller coaster ride and then generally only lasts for a brief period after the wedding before the long lost spouse, child, or enemy shows up to blow things up again. True stability and happiness are the death knell of a super couple (generally signaling that one half is about to die and/or the couple is about to leave) not a hallmark. As others have said WilSon is a very popular couple, but nothing about their story has fit the traditional super couple model. If you doubt this, go watch the first two years of Bo and Hope, Shane and Kim, Steve and Kayla, or Jack and Jennifer and compare for yourself. And John and Marlena.
|
|
|
| |
|
six
|
Jun 1 2014, 11:54 AM
Post #391
|
- Posts:
- 13,427
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #1,842
- Joined:
- February 12, 2008
|
- nananana7
- Jun 1 2014, 11:37 AM
- somuchwhatever
- May 31 2014, 08:21 PM
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.
- 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.
- iheartwilson
- Jun 1 2014, 08:11 AM
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
- six
- Jun 1 2014, 09:48 AM
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.
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 09:23 AM
"stable, committed to each other and a unit of sorts"'is everything a super couple is not. A true and traditional super couple is anything but stable. And, for a good portion of the time, they aren't even necessarily committed to each other or a unit of any kind.
A super couple is certainly deeply in love, but the ability to acknowledge that is usually limited to brief intervals of happiness in between the eons of unrelenting angst. The stability comes only after at least two years of a roller coaster ride and then generally only lasts for a brief period after the wedding before the long lost spouse, child, or enemy shows up to blow things up again. True stability and happiness are the death knell of a super couple (generally signaling that one half is about to die and/or the couple is about to leave) not a hallmark.
As others have said WilSon is a very popular couple, but nothing about their story has fit the traditional super couple model. If you doubt this, go watch the first two years of Bo and Hope, Shane and Kim, Steve and Kayla, or Jack and Jennifer and compare for yourself.
- Laufeyson
- Jun 1 2014, 10:21 AM
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.
- 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.
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 11:12 AM
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.
- 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)
- esp13
- Jun 1 2014, 11:27 AM
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.
Looking at all the above definitions -- none of them matches these from wikipedia and tvtrope: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercouplehttp://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuperCoupleI think there are many different ideas! You don't see the similarities between the quotes you posted and:
"Other Soaps, most notably Days of Our Lives quickly sought Super Couple pairings of their own, eventually leading to a standard formula for the phenomenon that was repeated endlessly during the 1980s. For example Alice and Bob, a pair of Star-Crossed Lovers, would fall in love after a short period of Will They or Won't They? but a misunderstanding would drive them apart. One of the couple (usually Alice, but sometimes Bob and occasionally both) would then marry the Romantic False Lead. This marriage would quickly fall apart and after some more adventures Alice and Bob would reunite and marry."
"Luke and Laura's popularity resulted in fictional supercouples generally being regarded as soulmates.[2] The pairings have typically overcome numerous obstacles or significant strife in order to be together."
"Their existence takes form in various incarnations, and interest in the pairings is usually due to a combination of chemistry, physical attractiveness, and a seemingly "meant-to-be" union, the latter of which provides the public with a love story to live vicariously through."
To pull out a couple of quotes?
Edited by six, Jun 1 2014, 11:56 AM.
|
|
|
| |
|
lysie
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:07 PM
Post #392
|
- Posts:
- 64,320
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #4,604
- Joined:
- May 20, 2009
|
Wikipedia, entertainment magazines, etc. have no idea what a supercouple is. It was a writing style that mostly involved one specific writer. Days has abandoned it, and while I enjoyed it at one point, it's not a bad thing at all that they've abandoned it. It's very limiting to the characters and the actors, and is a lot of the reason Days struggles to write for its vets. For some reason people seem to think that being labeled a supercouple is the end all be all for a soap couple, and it really just isn't. Not being a supercouple doesn't mean the couple isn't good or popular.
IMO, it's not even the horrible things Ejami have done to each other that keeps that label from applying to them. They're different kinds of characters than are used in the traditional formula, so I think they could have still been one even with that (if things had happened slightly differently at the end of 2007/beginning of 2008, I think there'd be a strong argument for them). IMO, what keeps them from being one is the fact that they haven't actually been trying to be a couple for the last 8 years, and then when they did actually get together, there wasn't a real story.
But again. People get all kinds of pissed and defensive when someone says that a couple isn't a supercouple. It's not an insult. And if you want them onscreen in this decade, it's really a blessing. Every now and then a couple (sometimes even not overly popular ones) will get a few months worth of supercouple writing, but it doesn't last. Even the supercouples don't get supercouple writing anymore because it's not 1986. Ericole did have it very briefly. I think even Safe had it briefly in 2010 (the writing...not the other stuff) and Victor/Maggie even had it briefly during the buried alive redux. I don't think it's a very good formula for today's audience, though.
|
|
|
| |
|
blueskies
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:10 PM
Post #393
|
- 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
|
If anyone's interested in Mary Beth's interview on Martha's show,
http://tradiov.com/la/videos/soap-box-with-lilly-and-martha-with-mary-beth-evans-and-michael-bruno-5-29-14/
They talk about plastic surgery (MBE says it's weird being in scenes w/older ppl who have no lines on their faces but they've had good work done not bad).
MM said after she was fired from Days she put out feelers and Brian Frons came back and said he didn't want her on his network b/c she was matronly and overrated as an actress (24 mins in).
Hmm, Michael Bruno said he had to talk to one of his clients b/c an EP said if they didn't stop doing work they wouldn't have a job anymore. Wonder who he's talking about?
|
|
|
| |
|
Matt
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:12 PM
Post #394
|
Classic Soap Fan
- Posts:
- 27,900
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #214
- Joined:
- August 5, 2007
- Mood
- None
- Favorite Current Daytime Soap Opera
- The Doctors
- Favorite Soap Opera of All Time
- Another World
- Twitter ID
- kyleo71
- YouTube ID
- xxxpartydog
|
- lysie
- Jun 1 2014, 12:07 PM
I don't think it's a very good formula for today's audience, though. Ahem.
I respectfully disagree. :$
|
|
|
| |
|
six
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:12 PM
Post #395
|
- Posts:
- 13,427
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #1,842
- Joined:
- February 12, 2008
|
I wonder who the person was who was told not to get any more plastic surgery. MM seemed to know who it was, so it made me wonder if it was a Days cast member.
|
|
|
| |
|
blueskies
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:13 PM
Post #396
|
- 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, 12:12 PM
I wonder who the person was who was told not to get any more plastic surgery. MM seemed to know who it was, so it made me wonder if it was a Days cast member. yeah, i just got to that part. Only person I could think of is LK or possibly Lisa Rinna. Everyone else looks pretty normal.
|
|
|
| |
|
six
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:14 PM
Post #397
|
- Posts:
- 13,427
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #1,842
- Joined:
- February 12, 2008
|
- lysie
- Jun 1 2014, 12:07 PM
I don't think it's a very good formula for today's audience, though. I sort of agree. One supercouple would be fine, but we don't need four or five at the same time. I think the current crop of shippers should be glad their couples aren't supercouples.
|
|
|
| |
|
concerned
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:17 PM
Post #398
|
- Posts:
- 17,611
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #11,925
- Joined:
- May 13, 2012
|
- 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? She's the anti - abby.
|
|
|
| |
|
concerned
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:18 PM
Post #399
|
- Posts:
- 17,611
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #11,925
- Joined:
- May 13, 2012
|
- six
- Jun 1 2014, 09:56 AM
- 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... and Nick before his untimely demise.
T.
|
|
|
| |
|
thepadange
|
Jun 1 2014, 12:21 PM
Post #400
|
- Posts:
- 19,424
- Group:
- Veteran
- Member
- #13,186
- Joined:
- March 3, 2013
|
Ken Corday is quoted in Wikipedia:
- Quote:
-
Days of our Lives executive producer Ken Corday said that while he feels that "love in the afternoon" is still important to the genre, he takes exception with the supercouple title. "It disappeared from my vocabulary when Al Rabin left the show," he said.[14] Rabin, Corday's former supervising producer, had continually credited the word as the secret to the show's success.[14] "By definition, supercouple excludes others on the show," said Corday. "Every time they walk into a room, every other character, no matter how important, becomes window dressing, I've never believed in it. Either people are involved in a good story or they're not. They're an interesting couple or they're not."
Hmm... ? I'm kinda confused. What did he mean? It was ok to have supercouples and other characters as window dressings under Rabin but post-Rabin it's not ok anymore?
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|