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 suffering succotash 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:
Locked Topic
Social Media Posts, Week of May 26
Topic Started: May 26 2014, 03:46 AM (48,869 Views)
jam6242
Member Avatar


badaddiction
Jun 1 2014, 01:17 PM
Halloween Family
Jun 1 2014, 12:30 PM
I view Matt's definition as "super couple writing" but to me a super couple is a pairing that has made an impact in pop culture. For example, I don't watch General Hospital but I know who Luke and Laura are. IMO WilSon have the ability to be a super couple, they have made an impact outside of the soap world.

JMO Ejami have never had super-couple writing.
Are you confusing pop culture with subculture? L&L were a phenomenon. They were on the cover of Time magazine. Pop songs were written about GH during the height of their reign. Songs climbed the charts after being played on the show.
Small point but Doug and Julie were on the cover of Time Magazine; Luke and Laura were on the cover of Newsweek.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
S loves EJ


I find it strange that Ejole never got super couple writing. I think I would
have liked them a lot more if I just gotten to see EJ lounging and wanting
Nicole.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sillibella
Member Avatar


lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:14 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:07 PM
I'm sorry, absolutely no disrespect to anybody but the fact that to supposedly be a "supercouple" you have to follow all these rules and guidelines is just amusing me. "You don't get to join this group because you haven't suffered enough." It's just has me thinking that there are some clinging to old traditions and that's perfectly fine, obviously, but I certainly don't care about a favorite couple of mine being held to an old set of rules. Supercouple or not it's all just somebody else's opinion no matter if the label gets used or not.
It's a word. It's a word with a meaning. I have pillows on my bed. As much as my t-shirt may want to be a pillow, it's still a t-shirt because words have meanings.

Again. It's not an insult. It's not a group to join. It's not a comparison of good and bad.
Except that there apparently isn't a universal definition for this word. The fact that I can ask multiple soap fans for their definition of this word and get multiple answers means that it is obviously open to interpretation. Pretty sure that tangible items such as your pillow and t-shirt aren't going to be seen as interchangeable. When the term supercouple is agreed upon in a very large scale and enters some sort of legit dictionary somewhere, because apparently supercouples arent just found on soap operas, then I might begin to take it seriously. Until then, it's all a matter of opinion.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
badaddiction
Member Avatar


jam6242
Jun 1 2014, 01:22 PM
badaddiction
Jun 1 2014, 01:17 PM
Halloween Family
Jun 1 2014, 12:30 PM
I view Matt's definition as "super couple writing" but to me a super couple is a pairing that has made an impact in pop culture. For example, I don't watch General Hospital but I know who Luke and Laura are. IMO WilSon have the ability to be a super couple, they have made an impact outside of the soap world.

JMO Ejami have never had super-couple writing.
Are you confusing pop culture with subculture? L&L were a phenomenon. They were on the cover of Time magazine. Pop songs were written about GH during the height of their reign. Songs climbed the charts after being played on the show.
Small point but Doug and Julie were on the cover of Time Magazine; Luke and Laura were on the cover of Newsweek.
Thanks for the correction. :smile:
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
jam6242
Member Avatar


sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:26 PM
lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:14 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:07 PM
I'm sorry, absolutely no disrespect to anybody but the fact that to supposedly be a "supercouple" you have to follow all these rules and guidelines is just amusing me. "You don't get to join this group because you haven't suffered enough." It's just has me thinking that there are some clinging to old traditions and that's perfectly fine, obviously, but I certainly don't care about a favorite couple of mine being held to an old set of rules. Supercouple or not it's all just somebody else's opinion no matter if the label gets used or not.
It's a word. It's a word with a meaning. I have pillows on my bed. As much as my t-shirt may want to be a pillow, it's still a t-shirt because words have meanings.

Again. It's not an insult. It's not a group to join. It's not a comparison of good and bad.
Except that there apparently isn't a universal definition for this word. The fact that I can ask multiple soap fans for their definition of this word and get multiple answers means that it is obviously open to interpretation. Pretty sure that tangible items such as your pillow and t-shirt aren't going to be seen as interchangeable. When the term supercouple is agreed upon in a very large scale and enters some sort of legit dictionary somewhere, because apparently supercouples arent just found on soap operas, then I might begin to take it seriously. Until then, it's all a matter of opinion.
So what factors do you think Wilson have that make them a "supercouple?"
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Halloween Family
Member Avatar


badaddiction
Jun 1 2014, 01:17 PM
Halloween Family
Jun 1 2014, 12:30 PM
I view Matt's definition as "super couple writing" but to me a super couple is a pairing that has made an impact in pop culture. For example, I don't watch General Hospital but I know who Luke and Laura are. IMO WilSon have the ability to be a super couple, they have made an impact outside of the soap world.

JMO Ejami have never had super-couple writing.
Are you confusing pop culture with subculture? L&L were a phenomenon. They were on the cover of Time magazine. Pop songs were written about GH during the height of their reign. Songs climbed the charts after being played on the show.
No I'm not. Daytime soaps will never be to that level where L&L were, they just don't have the viewership or interest like they used to. This is why I said "ability" but in all likelihood they won't even scratch the outside surface of L&L but WilSon are closer than the other couples.

(Subculture can absolutely make an impact on culture, look who's on the cover on TIME magazine right now.)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
jam6242
Member Avatar


blueskies
Jun 1 2014, 12:10 PM
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?
I've often wondered how distracting it was for other actors to work opposite people who have altered their faces so drastically, or whether they're just so used to seeing it that it doesn't faze them. I once had a supervisor who had a really bad hair transplant (the plugs still showed) and it was hard not to stare at the top of his head when he was talking to me. :blulaugh:
Online Profile Goto Top
 
lysie


sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:26 PM
lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:14 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:07 PM
I'm sorry, absolutely no disrespect to anybody but the fact that to supposedly be a "supercouple" you have to follow all these rules and guidelines is just amusing me. "You don't get to join this group because you haven't suffered enough." It's just has me thinking that there are some clinging to old traditions and that's perfectly fine, obviously, but I certainly don't care about a favorite couple of mine being held to an old set of rules. Supercouple or not it's all just somebody else's opinion no matter if the label gets used or not.
It's a word. It's a word with a meaning. I have pillows on my bed. As much as my t-shirt may want to be a pillow, it's still a t-shirt because words have meanings.

Again. It's not an insult. It's not a group to join. It's not a comparison of good and bad.
Except that there apparently isn't a universal definition for this word. The fact that I can ask multiple soap fans for their definition of this word and get multiple answers means that it is obviously open to interpretation. Pretty sure that tangible items such as your pillow and t-shirt aren't going to be seen as interchangeable. When the term supercouple is agreed upon in a very large scale and enters some sort of legit dictionary somewhere, because apparently supercouples arent just found on soap operas, then I might begin to take it seriously. Until then, it's all a matter of opinion.
You can ask multiple people their definition for anything, and you'll get different answers. Where you're confounded by the different definitions and people sticking to an old set of rules, I'm confounded by the need to distribute the label to any and every couple. The label has proven to be a pretty negative thing, so why try and force on to a new couple? I know who I fully believe are supercouples (and I have the support of their writer who also was pretty much at the helm of the whole supercouple craze, lol) and it's because they were supercouples that they can't get real story now. I WISH they'd have put Sami in a damn supercouple so she could have faded into the background a decade ago.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
sillibella
Member Avatar


jam6242
Jun 1 2014, 01:27 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:26 PM
lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:14 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:07 PM
I'm sorry, absolutely no disrespect to anybody but the fact that to supposedly be a "supercouple" you have to follow all these rules and guidelines is just amusing me. "You don't get to join this group because you haven't suffered enough." It's just has me thinking that there are some clinging to old traditions and that's perfectly fine, obviously, but I certainly don't care about a favorite couple of mine being held to an old set of rules. Supercouple or not it's all just somebody else's opinion no matter if the label gets used or not.
It's a word. It's a word with a meaning. I have pillows on my bed. As much as my t-shirt may want to be a pillow, it's still a t-shirt because words have meanings.

Again. It's not an insult. It's not a group to join. It's not a comparison of good and bad.
Except that there apparently isn't a universal definition for this word. The fact that I can ask multiple soap fans for their definition of this word and get multiple answers means that it is obviously open to interpretation. Pretty sure that tangible items such as your pillow and t-shirt aren't going to be seen as interchangeable. When the term supercouple is agreed upon in a very large scale and enters some sort of legit dictionary somewhere, because apparently supercouples arent just found on soap operas, then I might begin to take it seriously. Until then, it's all a matter of opinion.
So what factors do you think Wilson have that make them a "supercouple?"
I never said that I considered them a supercouple and I wouldn't even know which definition to even begin to hold them to. Personally I couldn't care less if they're given that label. Their importance isn't held by ones defition of an old-school belief, imo. All I was saying is that "supercouple" is just a term made up by soap fans (that I'm pretty sure doesnt get used by all that many non-soap fans) and the fact that there are multiple definitions to the word, depending on who you ask, just shows me that it just can't be taken too seriously because it's all just a matter of opinion.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
lysie


sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:40 PM
jam6242
Jun 1 2014, 01:27 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:26 PM
lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:14 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
Except that there apparently isn't a universal definition for this word. The fact that I can ask multiple soap fans for their definition of this word and get multiple answers means that it is obviously open to interpretation. Pretty sure that tangible items such as your pillow and t-shirt aren't going to be seen as interchangeable. When the term supercouple is agreed upon in a very large scale and enters some sort of legit dictionary somewhere, because apparently supercouples arent just found on soap operas, then I might begin to take it seriously. Until then, it's all a matter of opinion.
So what factors do you think Wilson have that make them a "supercouple?"
I never said that I considered them a supercouple and I wouldn't even know which definition to even begin to hold them to. Personally I couldn't care less if they're given that label. Their importance isn't held by ones defition of an old-school belief, imo. All I was saying is that "supercouple" is just a term made up by soap fans (that I'm pretty sure doesnt get used by all that many non-soap fans) and the fact that there are multiple definitions to the word, depending on who you ask, just shows me that it just can't be taken too seriously because it's all just a matter of opinion.
You keep referring to it as an old school belief, and that's kind of the point. It's old school and doesn't really apply to anything current. That's kind of been the point of the conversation.

Meanwhile, there are different definitions because some of them are wrong. ;)
Online Profile Goto Top
 
badaddiction
Member Avatar


Halloween Family
Jun 1 2014, 01:30 PM
badaddiction
Jun 1 2014, 01:17 PM
Halloween Family
Jun 1 2014, 12:30 PM
I view Matt's definition as "super couple writing" but to me a super couple is a pairing that has made an impact in pop culture. For example, I don't watch General Hospital but I know who Luke and Laura are. IMO WilSon have the ability to be a super couple, they have made an impact outside of the soap world.

JMO Ejami have never had super-couple writing.
Are you confusing pop culture with subculture? L&L were a phenomenon. They were on the cover of Time magazine. Pop songs were written about GH during the height of their reign. Songs climbed the charts after being played on the show.
No I'm not. Daytime soaps will never be to that level where L&L were, they just don't have the viewership or interest like they used to. This is why I said "ability" but in all likelihood they won't even scratch the outside surface of L&L but WilSon are closer than the other couples.

(Subculture can absolutely make an impact on culture, look who's on the cover on TIME magazine right now.)
Yes, I get that someone designated as a member of subculture can make the cover of a pop culture magazine. But I don't believe WilSon as they are, can.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
sillibella
Member Avatar


lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:45 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:40 PM
jam6242
Jun 1 2014, 01:27 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:26 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
So what factors do you think Wilson have that make them a "supercouple?"
I never said that I considered them a supercouple and I wouldn't even know which definition to even begin to hold them to. Personally I couldn't care less if they're given that label. Their importance isn't held by ones defition of an old-school belief, imo. All I was saying is that "supercouple" is just a term made up by soap fans (that I'm pretty sure doesnt get used by all that many non-soap fans) and the fact that there are multiple definitions to the word, depending on who you ask, just shows me that it just can't be taken too seriously because it's all just a matter of opinion.
You keep referring to it as an old school belief, and that's kind of the point. It's old school and doesn't really apply to anything current. That's kind of been the point of the conversation.

Meanwhile, there are different definitions because some of them are wrong. ;)
lol Well there ya go. :) Just remember that what is popular is not always right and what is right is not always popular. ;)

I think where some people might be going astray is that they are taking the "super" part of it and thinking that if their couple doesn't meet these supposed guidelines or rules then ultimately their couple isn't worth a damn because they think that "super" is meant to be a really positive thing when apparently, according to some, it most definitely is not because it isn't about positives or negatives. Like I've said before, going by a couple definitions I've seen posted here I will be very happy if my favorite couples never get labeled as a supercouple.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
lysie


sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:55 PM
lysie
Jun 1 2014, 01:45 PM
sillibella
Jun 1 2014, 01:40 PM
jam6242
Jun 1 2014, 01:27 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep
I never said that I considered them a supercouple and I wouldn't even know which definition to even begin to hold them to. Personally I couldn't care less if they're given that label. Their importance isn't held by ones defition of an old-school belief, imo. All I was saying is that "supercouple" is just a term made up by soap fans (that I'm pretty sure doesnt get used by all that many non-soap fans) and the fact that there are multiple definitions to the word, depending on who you ask, just shows me that it just can't be taken too seriously because it's all just a matter of opinion.
You keep referring to it as an old school belief, and that's kind of the point. It's old school and doesn't really apply to anything current. That's kind of been the point of the conversation.

Meanwhile, there are different definitions because some of them are wrong. ;)
lol Well there ya go. :) Just remember that what is popular is not always right and what is right is not always popular. ;)

I think where some people might be going astray is that they are taking the "super" part of it and thinking that if their couple doesn't meet these supposed guidelines or rules then ultimately their couple isn't worth a damn because they think that "super" is meant to be a really positive thing when apparently, according to some, it most definitely is not because it isn't about positives or negatives. Like I've said before, going by a couple definitions I've seen posted here I will be very happy if my favorite couples never get labeled as a supercouple.
Well, yes. Several of us have tried to point that out. Super doesn't mean better. I think espy's explanation was good when she said it mostly means OTT. And I think you should be happy if they never get that writing. It's awesome while it's happening, but it ends up being incredibly limiting.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Kaha
Member Avatar


SoapGal1
Jun 1 2014, 11:31 AM
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.
If acting skills determined supercoupledom then many people would be out. Take for example, Drake Hogestyn who has zero acting range.

I watched GW on other shows and his acting is good. I think he's been given bad direction but also he's getting used to the soap format and even then I have no problem with his acting. Granted, he looked stiff and somewhat nervous in the beginning but he stepped up. He would probably be good as an edgy and sarcastic guy with an attitude. I think Freddie is great and does good job with the crapy material he gets.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ShaneDOOLFan
Member Avatar


Apparently James Scott (EJ) mentioned to someone at the event that the next 4 months are EJAMI fantastic and that there is the most fucking fantastic twist in soaps coming up. Ill believe that when I see it.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kaha
Member Avatar


Let me add to my previous post lest I get misunderstood, that I never classified WilSon as a supercouple nor do I even care for the designation. I love certain couples and some I can't stand, or I love one part and I root for that person to win or achieve what they want.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kaha
Member Avatar


ShaneDOOLFan
Jun 1 2014, 02:07 PM
Apparently James Scott (EJ) mentioned to someone at the event that the next 4 months are EJAMI fantastic and that there is the most fucking fantastic twist in soaps coming up. Ill believe that when I see it.
Be afraid. Be very afraid!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
concerned
Member Avatar


S loves EJ
Jun 1 2014, 01:25 PM
I find it strange that Ejole never got super couple writing. I think I would
have liked them a lot more if I just gotten to see EJ lounging and wanting
Nicole.
Don't get me started on one of my favourite topics.

I'm going to put this all behind a spoiler tag so you can all ignore me.

Spoiler: click to toggle
Edited by concerned, Jun 1 2014, 02:13 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
IIttu
Member Avatar


Supergirlx2
Jun 1 2014, 01:14 PM
Matt
Jun 1 2014, 11:49 AM
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.
Very true. And even if you look back to the Bo/Hope/Carly triangle, after a brief initial "let's try to get the fans to like & want Bo to be with Carly" arc (and boy did Tomlin try his hardest to force that pairing on people), it was obvious to everyone that Bo still deeply cared about Hope and that Hope wasn't ready to fully let Bo go. We saw it first in the hospital scenes where Hope had been admitted after having boxes fall on her during Vivian's escape (this was the same day as Melanie & Philip's wedding). There were quite a few conversations between Bo & Carly about Hope, again showing that Bo still cared deeply. And then there was a large shift after the NT Hope reveal where everything in Bo's life started to revolve around trying to keep Hope (a) out of prison (which wasn't gonna happen since Hope was determined to pay for the crimes her physical body had committed), (b) in prison for the shortest amount of time (which took quite a bit of effort from Bo, especially since Hope was determined to take a plea deal with a 10 year prison sentence), and (c) safe while in prison (since she was a cop & would potentially run into inmates she'd helped put there). Even Carly's realization that Bo still loved Hope and that they were meant to be together was written into the script.
This is an example of that "supercouple formula" that Bo & Hope's triangle stories had always followed.
I quit watching when Deidre and Drake were fired, but I would always catch up on Bope scenes on Youtube thehe :wub2:

I'm a relatively young viewer compared to many of you and I thank(blame) Youtube for my Days viewership as I originally came across classic Jarlena clips on Youtube, followed by clips of Bope, Kim&Shane, Patch&Kayla, Jack&Jen.. I'm a sucker for supercouples, and that's what I'd still like to see on Days.

It wouldn't have to be old, beloved supercouples like Jarlena and Bope front and center all the time (but an actual well-written story every now and then wouldn't hurt.....). If new pairings were written as supercouples, I believe I could highly enjoy them as well. I do enjoy supercouples in primetime and they're usually the main reason for me to start watching primetime shows.. It's stupid for Corday to think that being a supercouple is limiting for the characters; there are countless ways to keep two people apart & angsty and still maintain the supercouple writing. And by the time one supercouple reaches their happiness and steps aside from the center spotlight, there should already be several new supercouples in the making, ready to melt viewers' hearts. Shouldn't be too complicated a formula to execute...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
jam6242
Member Avatar


ShaneDOOLFan
Jun 1 2014, 02:07 PM
Apparently James Scott (EJ) mentioned to someone at the event that the next 4 months are EJAMI fantastic and that there is the most fucking fantastic twist in soaps coming up. Ill believe that when I see it.
Every time James says something is fantastic I usually think the opposite. Also did he mean the best twist in soap history, really? :rolleyes:
Online Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »
Locked Topic