Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
LeftPhalange

Unpopular Opinions

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

Sami declared war on Lucas and Kate first.  Sami blackmailed Kate with her past a prostitute. Not to mention, she robbed Lucas of two years with his son Will. I know that Sami truly believed that Austin was the father, but, once she found out the truth, she suppressed the information. Then, she would not let Lucas around him, Lucas was always drawn to Will, even before he found out the truth.  Once the truth came out, she did everything in her power to continue to keep him from Lucas by encouraging Will to only want Austin as his dad. Will did reject Lucas and this led to the infamous helicopter scene, where a drunken Lucas dropped Will accidently, hurting him. Sami lied and said that Lucas hit Will to get her hooks into Austin. Austin the idiot fell for it, due to his horrific past with his dad Curtis. Eventually, she did win sole custody of Will and would not let Will see him.  Kate set up Sami for Franco's murder as a desperate act to get Lucas his son. Ultimately, it backfired on then, when Lucas and Kate were forced to give up all rights to Will, to avoid prison for murder and obstruction of justice. Sami was never an innocent victim of Kate and Lucas.

I agree with you. Sherry wrote the dynamic between Sami and Marlena. Other writers took up the mantle, but, nobody wrote it with as much sensitivity and care as she did. Remember she gave Sami an eating disorder to cope with the stress of  keeping quiet about Marlena's affair. That was what I always loved about Sherry's writing, everything had a purpose and consequences.

I never said Sami was an innocent victim of Kate and Lucas, just that she was one of the players in all their war, BUT they were the other two players. They were all pretty nasty to each others..particularly Kate..Sami: her weapon was blackmail but Kate it was framing for murder, Sami was put on death row and almost died as a result and attempting murder using Will for it..well a doll looking like Will..creepy..really creepy..And Lucas was Kate's minion in all these schenanigans..not much better..Well there was no innocent victim in these stories..However Will always played the narrative "Sami is the problem..Kate and Lucas are innocent"..there goes my frustration in Will's characterisation about these issues.

I agree with you about Sami and Marlena's dynamic..Marlena was particularly compelling/endearing at the beginning of their conflict, during Sami's bulimia phase..you saw how Marlena suffered from Sami's rejection, how she loved her daughter who was so hurt by her affair..it was heartbreaking to watch.

After that, i found her too much focused on John and Sami went in circle and began her fixation on Austin being the perfect guy/answer to her problems and resentment towards big sister Carrie..

Edited by pau
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

21 minutes ago, pau said:

I never said Sami was an innocent victim of Kate and Lucas, just that she was one of the players in all their war, BUT they were the other two players. They were all pretty nasty to each others..particularly Kate..Sami: her weapon was blackmail but Kate it was framing for murder, Sami was put on death row and alost died as a result and attempting murder using Will for it..well a doll looking like Will..creepy..really creepy..and Lucas was Kate's minion in all these schenanigans..not much better..Well there was no innocent victim in these stories..However Will always played the narrative "Sami is the problem..Kate and Lucas are innocent"..there goes my frustration in Will's characterisation about these issues.

I agree with you about Sami and Marlena's dynamic..Marlena was particularly compelling/endearing at the beginning of their conflict, during Sami's bulimia phase..you saw how Marlena suffered from Sami's rejection, how she loved her daughter who was so hurt by her affair..it was heartbreaking to watch.

After that, i found her too much focused on John and Sami went in circle and began her fixation on Austin being the perfect guy/answer to her problems and resentment towards big sister Carrie..

I agree, but, I do think that Will seeing his mother hurting other people took a toll over the years. Whereas, Lucas and Kate hid their vile acts much better.  For example: nobody knows about the truth about Franco's murder. Only Mickey, Lucas, Austin, Nicole's brother, Kate and Sami know the truth.  I am sure Will heard about the stories about Kate and Lucas growing up, but, there is a difference between hearing about something, than living it yourself..  As far as he could remember, he saw his mother being humiliated, punished and exposed before the world for her schemes. Will did get bullied at school for her shenanigans.

I think JER who took over from Sherry took Sami too far and made Marlena too obsessed with John for my liking.  She became all about John.. It actually is a part of their dynamic, there has always been a level of desperation and intense yearning with John/Marlena and it is what sparked their affair on the plane where they conceived Belle. It was her deep mourning for Roman that drew her to John who was believed to be either Roman or Stefano.  I think about her running up the hill in desperation and glee to tell John that he was Roman after she found the pictures of him as Roman before his plastic surgery. The John/Marlena dynamic is at times too intense even for them to comprehend, yet, they cannot stay away from each other.. It makes sense that John fell in love with Diana after Marlena died, there was a lot of playfulness and fun associated with them.  They laughed a lot and just enjoyed each other without any reservation.

Edited by Apprentice79
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

I agree, but, I do think that Will seeing his mother hurting other people took a toll over the years. Whereas, Lucas and Kate hid their vile acts much better.  For example: nobody knows about the truth about Franco's murder. Only Mickey, Lucas, Austin, Nicole's brother, Kate and Sami know the truth.  I am sure Will heard about the stories about Kate and Lucas growing up, but, there is a difference between hearing about something, than living it yourself..  As far as he could remember, he saw his mother being humiliated, punished and exposed before the world for her schemes. Will did get bullied at school for her shenanigans.

 

Which is ironic because the fact that Sami suffered from her bad actions/deeds is what made her character compelling imo..she schemed but almost always paid for it in one way or another..far more realistic (although the stories were everything but realistic..haha) and compelling than someone who always get away with it..In a way it made her a character you could root for..the underdog who do not get away with her terrible actions..however at times she could be too much a punching bag, being humiliated at all her weddings got old.. After that they decided to change that with her union with Rafe..it was awful, suddenly she could be smug and do nasty things but it was for the greater good so alright and Rafe gave his approval or even orchestrated..so she could get away with it...

Thankfully in her last years she got back to a bit mature version of the compelling schemer she could be..a soap antiheroine in a way.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, pau said:

Which is ironic because the fact that Sami suffered from her bad actions/deeds is what made her character compelling imo..she schemed but almost always paid for it in one way or another..far more realistic (although the stories were everything but realistic..haha) and compelling than someone who always get away with it..In a way it made her a character you could root for..the underdog who do not get away with her terrible actions..however at times she could be too much a punching bag, being humiliated at all her weddings got old.. After that they decided to change that with her union with Rafe..it was awful, suddenly she could be smug and do nasty things but it was for the greater good so alright and Rafe gave his approval or even orchestrated..so she could get away with it...

Thankfully in her last years she got back to a bit mature version of the compelling schemer she could be..a soap antiheroine in a way.

Sami as a heroine never worked for me. She was better as an anti-heroine. I wanted her to end up with Lucas. Their green wedding should have sealed them as a forever couple..

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Apprentice79 said:

Sami as a heroine never worked for me. She was better as an anti-heroine. I wanted her to end up with Lucas. Their green wedding should have sealed them as a forever couple..

Well i loved her with Ej..because to me he was her equal...Lucas was not enough powerful as a character for her and i did resent a lot how he always took her down..

That being said Ej suffered from inconsistent writing and very often writers went too far with his actions..but we also saw Ej showing real admiration for Sami..i never saw that from Lucas..Moreover i admit i loved Ej and Sami's actors chemistry..it was a saving grace for many years because the writing was horrible and destructive most of the time, sadly..

Share this post


Link to post

I liked that Marlena didn't know how to deal with Sami, and that Sami, Eric, and Carrie all had very different personalties.  That was more realistic than them getting over the parents dead/not dead John/Roman stuff.  What I did not like was the writers throwing away all of the progress Sami made with Marlena, John and Carrie.  Then the stupid "Will is just like Sami" idiocy.  And I will always be annoyed that Sami and Kate didn't get to finish destroying the Dimeras.

Edited by TigerLynx
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I was happy EJ came into the picture because I was so tired of the Sami, Lucas, Carrie and Austin shenigan and thought there would be a fresh start for Sami with a new man, but lo and behold they ruined EJ right from the start to make Lucas look good.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

When Carrie and Austin returned to Salem and John was arrested, Sami and Carrie believed John was innocent.  Rafe and Austin thought John might be guilty.  The writers had the perfect opportunity to have Sami/Carrie working together to help John, and instead they threw it way to resurrect the Sami/Carrie feud because {sarcasm} that SL hadn't been done to death yet {sarcasm}.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

One of the reasons I never bought Will's supposed transition into a schemer character (rumoured to be Ken's idea of making him the "new Sami"?) was that his mother's schemes (and Kate's) were at the bottom of most (though not all) of his childhood upheavals -- he always distrusted and disliked his mother's tendency to use underhanded means to get what she wanted. I never saw it as "My mother sucks," but "Why is she doing this again?" It didn't make psychological sense for him to suddenly become a manipulator himself. (Also, he was pretty bad at it, it must be said.) The less said about Elvis, the better, in my view.

Edited by Sandman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Sandman said:

One of the reasons I never bought Will's supposed transition into a schemer character (rumoured to be Ken's idea of making him the "new Sami"?) was that his mother's schemes (and Kate's) were at the bottom of most (though not all) of his childhood upheavals -- he always distrusted and disliked his mother's tendency to use underhanded means to get what she wanted. I never saw it as "My mother sucks," but "Why is she doing this again?" It didn't make psychological sense for him to suddenly become a manipulator himself. (Also, he was pretty bad at it, it must be said.) The less said about Elvis, the better, in my view.

Will was written several times as a little schemer far before Corday wanted to make him the 'new Sami' (he could never be the new Sami since he is not the same character and does not have the same history..it was ridiculous) : when he wanted to spend times with Lucas whereas he lived with Sami and Brandon..he did not like Brandon by the way..who never did anything to him..and was quite nasty to his futur 'favorite' cousin Abby..quelle ironie..And when he came back from a long summer with Lucas..who badmouthed Sami at every opportunity in front of Will..as a result Will became really rude and disrespectful to Sami as a way to mimic Lucas (a thing children are doing..) and then when Sami and Ej began to date and Lucas used Will to break them up..Will really enjoyed himself as a schemer at this time..he found his silly antics with Lucas really 'cool'..

So Will characterisation was quite inconsistent..he became the sensible (awkward..he was already awkward and insecure) young man when Chandler Massey was cast and they built the young awkward fragile man who struggles with his sexuality story..he also only became close to Marlena with the coming out story..he never was before..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Not to excuse plainly inconsistent characterizations, but I've noticed a tendency in a lot of soaps (and maybe in Days in particular?) to treat a recast character as something of a blank slate -- in other words, to treat the Will Roberts played by Dylan Wossname (Patton?) as a different person from the Will Horton played by Chandler Massey, and different again from the Will Horton(-Kiriakis?) played by Guy Wilson. I find this is somewhat the case with Marci Miller's Abigail as compared with Kate Mansi's version, but maybe not to the same extent. Abigail's characterization is also muddied by the fact that what the other characters tell us about Abigail doesn't always, uh, align completely, shall we say? with her behaviour as shown onscreen (ahem).

Also, Julie is apparently supposed to be a good person, which seems a somewhat random and wildly counter-factual assertion -- and she's only ever (I think) been played by one (exhaustively over-praised, but I digress) actress.

Edited by Sandman
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Sandman said:

Not to excuse plainly inconsistent characterizations, but I've noticed a tendency in a lot of soaps (and maybe in Days in particular?) to treat a recast character as something of a blank slate -- in other words, to treat the Will Roberts played by Dylan Wossname (Patton?) as a different person from the Will Horton played by Chandler Massey, and different again from the Will Horton(-Kiriakis?) played by Guy Wilson. I find this is somewhat the case with Marci Miller's Abigail as compared with Kate Mansi's version, but maybe not to the same extent. Abigail's characterization is also muddied by the fact that what the other characters tell us about Abigail doesn't always, uh, align completely, shall we say? with her behaviour as shown onscreen (ahem).

Also, Julie is apparently supposed to be a good person, which seems a somewhat random and wildly counter-factual assertion -- and she's only ever (I think) been played by one (exhaustively over-praised, but I digress) actress.

I so agree, I think Soaps in general do this.  I also think there is an inconsistency by TPTB to supply a lot of information to the recast about who the character is.  I remember when Marci Miller was on Dishin Days, she revealed that she was given almost zero history on who Abigail really was.  She also revealed that it was other actors who would give her context and history between them, often telling her after her scenes that they were related.  I remember when she was telling the guys about her first scenes with Melissa Reeves and it wasn't until after that Missy explained that mental illness ran in the family for the character and Marci remarking that she wished she had known that before she shot the scenes to add character and nuance.

Funny you mention Julie considering that Julie was the "Sami" of Days during her reign.  It's unfortunate that she doesn't get anything really meaty to work on, David's death/Eli notwithstanding, because she was the poster child (cover of Time) for Soaps and how influential they were back in the day.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

3 hours ago, Sandman said:

she's only ever (I think) been played by one (exhaustively over-praised, but I digress) actress.

Actually Julie the character has been on the show since literally the first scene of the first episode, but Susan Seaforth didn't join the show till three years after the show started.  Julie had been played by three other actress in the first three years.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I was wondering why we didn't get a flashback to 1st Episode Julie when they were doing the 50th and she watched Ciara consider stealing a jacket in a store window. Different Julie! Thanks!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, JBC344 said:

I so agree, I think Soaps in general do this.  I also think there is an inconsistency by TPTB to supply a lot of information to the recast about who the character is.  I remember when Marci Miller was on Dishin Days, she revealed that she was given almost zero history on who Abigail really was.  She also revealed that it was other actors who would give her context and history between them, often telling her after her scenes that they were related.  I remember when she was telling the guys about her first scenes with Melissa Reeves and it wasn't until after that Missy explained that mental illness ran in the family for the character and Marci remarking that she wished she had known that before she shot the scenes to add character and nuance.

Funny you mention Julie considering that Julie was the "Sami" of Days during her reign.  It's unfortunate that she doesn't get anything really meaty to work on, David's death/Eli notwithstanding, because she was the poster child (cover of Time) for Soaps and how influential they were back in the day.

That might explain why MM was acting like such a blank slate when she first came on the show. Unbelievable that Days can't even give the actors a little background. Too cheap to assign someone for that job probably.

Share this post


Link to post

There often isn't a ton of time to do the proper research.  I remember Vanessa was on set within a couple of days when she signed on to play Valerie. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

On 9/1/2017 at 2:50 PM, Silver Raven said:

Actually Julie the character has been on the show since literally the first scene of the first episode, but Susan Seaforth didn't join the show till three years after the show started.  Julie had been played by three other actress in the first three years.

The actress in that first episode, Charla Doherty, died young, per Wiki, at only 41 in 1988. Wow. (The first episode was about 7 years before I was born! But when SoapNet existed, it showed that first episode also on November 8th years ago to honor the show's anniversary, and I finally saw it then. Got a kick out of it. And Mickey was doing his lawyer bit for his niece and John Clarke looked so young. So did Tom and Alice/Mac Carey and Frances Reid, for that matter!)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/1/2017 at 2:26 PM, JBC344 said:

It's unfortunate that [SSH] doesn't get anything really meaty to work on, David's death/Eli notwithstanding, because she was the poster child (cover of Time) for Soaps and how influential they were back in the day.

I think the argument could be made that Doug and Julie were the first soap "super-couple," though the term itself emerged, I think, around the time of Luke and Laura's huge popularity, that pushed General Hospital into the forefront of pop culture. Doug and Julie became a phenomenon before the home VCR, remember. I don't know of any other pairing earlier than or contemporaneous with them who had the same effect outside of the bubble of soaps (you should pardon the expression). Maybe Steve and Alice from Another World came close?

But while I can acknowledge that Doug and Julie were A Thing, and possibly The Thing, I've seen nothing in her more recent work that suggests to me she was ever a very good actress, and I'm just as happy that she's not given very much substantial material. I think she'd just make a bigger mess out of it.

Edited by Sandman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Sandman said:

I think the argument could be made that Doug and Julie were the first soap "super-couple," though the term itself emerged, I think, around the time of Luke and Laura's huge popularity, that pushed General Hospital into the forefront of pop culture. Doug and Julie became phenomenon before the home VCR, remember. I don't know of any other pairing earlier than or contemporaneous with them who had the same effect outside of the bubble of soaps (you should pardon the expression). Maybe Steve and Alice from Another World came close?

Phil and Tara from AMC, as well, and ATWT's Jeff and Penny.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, WendyCR72 said:

The actress in that first episode, Charla Doherty, died young, per Wiki, at only 41 in 1988. Wow. (The first episode was about 7 years before I was born! But when SoapNet existed, it showed that first episode also on November 8th years ago to honor the show's anniversary, and I finally saw it then. Got a kick out of it. And Mickey was doing his lawyer bit for his niece and John Clarke looked so young. So did Tom and Alice/Mac Carey and Frances Reid, for that matter!)

Wish I could see it online. Would be cool.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks. Is that the original Horton living room Tom and Alice were in?  I thought the one we have now was there since Day 1.

Edited by DisneyBoy

Share this post


Link to post

17 hours ago, DisneyBoy said:

Thanks. Is that the original Horton living room Tom and Alice were in?  I thought the one we have now was there since Day 1.

Yes, that is the original living room. I think the overall set is still the same set. But I think it had makeovers through the years, maybe so as to keep it modern.

ETA: Re-watching the clips of that first episode, I'm reminded how much longer scenes used to be. Tom and Alice had an actual in-depth conversation! It's the little things.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Just realized Kristian Alfonso was born two months before Days premiered. I get a kick out of that, somehow.

To bring this back to the UO topic, I think maybe soaps should have stayed at half an hour since they now pad an hour with so much filler.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

MyUO

I like Claire and think she is pretty.  Like that she can go from sweet, bratty, smart and caring all in one scene.  It's like she has all the best and worst qualities of her family.   And I totally buy her as Belle and Shaun's daughter.  

Another one 

I don't miss the character of EJ at all.  I now feel I liked the actor more than the character. 

Edited by tribeca
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

If a different actor had been playing EJ, he would have died back in 2007 as was originally planned.  It's to bad the writing was so terrible.  I like James Scott, but detest EJ.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, DisneyBoy said:

People definitely liked the actor more than the character. I like that he was Susan's son, but sadly they never did much with that angle.

I too wish they had done more with that. I remember the couple of episodes when Susan came back before EJ "died" and Sami was remarking how protective he was of his mother. How Edmund had lead by example of how to "deal" with and love Susan's quirkiness.  I really wish that had been explored more.  It would of been nice to see more of the "Susan side" of EJ than always seeing the Dimera influence.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, JBC344 said:

I too wish they had done more with that. I remember the couple of episodes when Susan came back before EJ "died" and Sami was remarking how protective he was of his mother. How Edmund had lead by example of how to "deal" with and love Susan's quirkiness.  I really wish that had been explored more.  It would of been nice to see more of the "Susan side" of EJ than always seeing the Dimera influence.

I wish that EJ was not Susan's son, but John and Marlena's 1986 baby. Stefano having raised their son would be the ultimate revenge on Jarlena. I too like James Scott, but EJ was a disgusting, amoral, rapist.  I was never a big Sami fan, but, not even Sami deserved to be saddled by that albatross. I hate that she had kids with him..

Edited by Apprentice79
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Apprentice79 said:

I wish that EJ was not Susan's son, but John and Marlena's 1986 baby. Stefano having raised their son would be the ultimate revenge on Jarlena. I too like James Scott, but EJ was a disgusting, amoral, rapist.  I was never a big Sami fan, but, not even Sami deserved to be saddled by that albatross. I hate that she had kids with him..

No to Ej being John and Marlena's 1886 baby..and since when John and Marlena had a child in 1986 ? And it would not change Ej's characterisation no matter his parenting.. as for him being amoral, disgusting..hello he is not the only one..many other characters were not much better and still viable..in the eye's of tptb and the audience..

The writing for him could be too extreme and inconsistent but JS did the better he could with it..and at least he was a partner who saw Sami as an equal, who wanted her above everyone else..can't say the same for her other partners..so i am still happy she has kids with him, actually i LOVE it.

And i am a fan of Sami..maybe that is the difference..i value her. I wanted for her a partner who value her.

Ej was not an albatross so she was not saddle with an albatross with him..but if you want to talk about some of her other love interests..we can talk about albatross..

Edited by pau

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Apprentice79 said:

I wish that EJ was not Susan's son, but John and Marlena's 1986 baby. Stefano having raised their son would be the ultimate revenge on Jarlena. I too like James Scott, but EJ was a disgusting, amoral, rapist.  I was never a big Sami fan, but, not even Sami deserved to be saddled by that albatross. I hate that she had kids with him..

I hated nearly every minute of EJ and EJ and Sami after he raped her and then got rewarded for it. As nasty as Sami could be at times, she never deserved to be saddled with him, especially after she and Lucas had finally gotten it together and were happy together.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, katie9918 said:

I hated nearly every minute of EJ and EJ and Sami after he raped her and then got rewarded for it. As nasty as Sami could be at times, she never deserved to be saddled with him, especially after she and Lucas had finally gotten it together and were happy together.

Lucas tried to kill her several times..far worse than anything Ej ever did by the way..and always took her down, compared her to her sister and chose her sister over her again and again and for years maybe decades..he was an albatross she was saddle with too long..

Ej paid several times for his bad deeds, he was not really rewarded or if he was, Lucas was too..And he ended being murdered by a dayplayer..

Moreover Lucas was the one who came between Sami and Ej to begin with..when Ej came on the canvas, Lucas was with Carrie, he dumped Sami far before that and trashed her at every opportunity and thought he was so much better than her..Ej and Sami dated and Lucas being a sad bitter jealous ex, who just got cheated on by Carrie,decided to scheme to break them up.

4 minutes ago, pau said:

 

Edited by pau
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, pau said:

No to Ej being John and Marlena's 1886 baby..and since when John and Marlena had a child in 1986 ? And it would not change Ej's characterisation no matter his parenting.. as for him being amoral, disgusting..hello he is not the only one..many other characters were not much better and still viable..in the eye's of tptb and the audience..

The writing for him could be too extreme and inconsistent but JS did the better he could with it..and at least he was a partner who saw Sami as an equal, who wanted her above everyone else..can't say the same for her other partners..so i am still happy she has kids with him, actually i LOVE it.

And i am a fan of Sami..maybe that is the difference..i value her. I wanted for her a partner who value her.

Ej was not an albatross so she was not saddle with an albatross with him..but if you want to talk about some of her other love interests..we can talk about albatross..

I am a Lumi fan, so I don't want to argue with you. I have had my arguments about this with Ejami fans, years ago. It is futile, we can agree to disagree.

Before Marlena "died" in 1986, the show was dropping anvils that she was pregnant for John as Roman. So, a lot of Jarlena fans have always felt that there was a baby and that Stefano or Orpheus took him.. That is the story that should have tied to Marlena's missing years.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

I am a Lumi fan, so I don't want to argue with you. I have had my arguments about this with Ejami fans, years ago. It is futile, we can agree to disagree.

Before Marlena "died" in 1986, the show was dropping anvils that she was pregnant for John as Roman. So, a lot of Jarlena fans have always felt that there was a baby and that Stefano or Orpheus took him.. That is the story that should have tied to Marlena's missing years.

Indeed we can agree to disagree, but at least i am moving undeniable facts happening onscreen and arguments..ha.

And i will never understand being a lumi fan when Sami is not a character you like..it is more being a Lucas fan than a Lumi fan imo..when i am a fan of a pairing, i am a fan of both characters..but whatever..it is your opinion.

And concerning Marlena/John's 1986 child, it is just wishful thinking from their fans..it was never made canon..so..until writers decide suddenly to retcon and write it, John and Marlena do not have any child born in 1986, and certainly not Ej.

Edited by pau
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, pau said:

And i will never understand being a lumi fan when Sami is not a character you like..it is more being a Lucas fan than a Lumi fan imo..when i am a fan of a pairing, i am a fan of both characters..but whatever..it is your opinion.

Lucas made Sami tolerable to me. Not to mention, they were so right for one another, when they were conspiring to break up Austin and Carrie.  They were both blinded by their obsessions with Carrie and Austin to realize that the one that they were meant to be with was each other. Plus, Lumi falling in love with each other, after Sami falling into that glass door was amazing. Sami was mute, Lumi's fantasies about each other, fighting their feelings for each other, after years of acrimony was a thing of beauty. Will scheming to get his parents together was an added bonus.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

Lucas made Sami tolerable to me. Not to mention, they were so right for one another, when they were conspiring to break up Austin and Carrie.  They were both blinded by their obsessions with Carrie and Austin to realize that the one that they were meant to be with was each other. Plus, Lumi falling in love with each other, after Sami falling into that glass door was amazing. Sami was mute, Lumi's fantasies about each other, fighting their feelings for each other, after years of acrimony was a thing of beauty. Will scheming to get his parents together was an added bonus.

I disagree..and Sami was never interested in Lucas for many many years, she did not hide some secret romantic feelings towards the guy..nah..she was all about Austin, she tried to move on with Alan and then she was all about Brandon..Lucas was just a frienemy then an annoying gnat to her ..with Lucas you could see some twisted weird obsession and jealousy from him all over the years but Sami never gave a damn about Lucas in this way until early 2003..

Then suddenly writers got rid of Brandon (whereas Sami and Brandon were a popular pairing..) and decided to built Lucas and Sami as a couple and suddenly Sami began to have romantic feelings for her old enemy/frenemy Lucas Roberts..Their built on love story was alright for a daytime soap and the actors could be fun together as a sort of funny frienemy pairing but at the end of the day Sami deserved better..Sami was alpha as a character, Lucas never was that..as a sidekick he was ok and could even be fun when he did not yell, was nasty and self-righteous/very judgmental..as an equal partner for someone like Sami..he never make it.

I want equality in pairings i like..in fiction and in reality.

ps: and i will not forget how Lucas was the one who did pick on Sami about her weight and as a result was one major reason she developed an eating disorder and at this time Sami never did anything to him..such a 'friend'..

Edited by pau

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, pau said:

I disagree..and Sami was never interested in Lucas for many many years, she did not hide some secret romantic feelings towards the guy..nah..she was all about Austin, she tried to move on with Alan and then she was all about Brandon..Lucas was just a frienemy then an annoying gnat to her ..with Lucas you could see some twisted weird obsession and jealousy from him all over the years but Sami never gave a damn about Lucas in this way until early 2003..

Then suddenly writers got rid of Brandon (whereas Sami and Brandon were a popular pairing..) and decided to built Lucas and Sami as a couple and suddenly Sami began to have romantic feelings for her enemy/frenemy..Their built on love story was alright for a daytime soap and the actors could be fun together as a sort of funny frienemy pairing but at the end of the day Sami deserved better..Sami was alpha as a character, Lucas never was that..as a sidekick he was ok and could even be fun when he did not yell, was nasty and self-righteous/very judgmental..as an equal partner for someone like Sami..he never make it.

I want equality in pairings i like..in fiction and in reality.

Why do you hate Lucas? If anything, he was one of Sami's  victims with her lies. If anything, Lucas has always cared about her. It was never an obsession. I remember when Sami was in a coma and near death, Lucas poured his heart out. It was a very beautiful scene.   Lumi was supposed to be endgame with JER.  The constant change in writing may have delayed that, Lumi was always going to get together. Until the show decided to make Ejami the IT couple..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

Why do you hate Lucas? If anything, he was one of Sami's  victims with her lies. If anything, Lucas has always cared about her. It was never an obsession. I remember when Sami was in a coma and near death, Lucas poured his heart out. It was a very beautiful scene.   Lumi was supposed to be endgame with JER.  The constant change in writing may have delayed that, Lumi was always going to get together. Until the show decided to make Ejami the IT couple..

I don't hate Lucas, i am just objective about the type of character he is. He was never Sami's victim, he was as guilty as she was. There was NO victim in their battles.

Moreover Lucas was never an alpha type, he was secondary..and Sami should be with someone in her league imo.

And yeah he had an obsession about Sami, it was so obvious..he was always in her business, always giving his opinion about Sami's romantic partners, always scheming against her after their frienemy phase was over..it could not be more clear..

Lucas could be in some rare moments a friend to Sami like the moment you cited, when she was in a coma. But most of the time he did not show any care for her, his leitmotif was 'your sister is better than you in every way '..too bad Carrie did not give a damn about him and used him several times..

And i don't know how do you know Lucas and Sami were supposed to be endgame..but anyway that can change..chemistry, better/more interesting characters can change that..thankfully..my favorite prime time tv pairing was not supposed to be the initial main pairing but they became thanks to the writing, the chemistry between the actors, the audience's feedback and the showrunner was smart enough to see it and to capitalize on it.

Edited by pau

Share this post


Link to post

3 minutes ago, pau said:

And i don't know how do you know Lucas and Sami were supposed to be endgame..but anyway that can change..chemistry, better/more interesting characters can change that..thankfully..my favorite prime time tv pairing was not supposed to be the initial main pairing but they became thanks to the writing, the chemistry between the actors, the audience's feedback and the showrunner was smart enough to see it and to capitalize on it.

James E. Reilly who created the alliance between Lucas and Sami dropped hints throughout his tenure that Lumi were endgame...It was clear from his writing that was his goal...Different writers had other ideas...You had Brandon/Sami, Safe and EJami..

Edited by Apprentice79
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I never thought Lumi or Ejami really got to be an IT couple.  It's possible that originally that was the plan, but it didn't really happen.  I think Sami was actually married to Rafe longer than anyone.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, TigerLynx said:

I never thought Lumi or Ejami really got to be an IT couple.  It's possible that originally that was the plan, but it didn't really happen.  I think Sami was actually married to Rafe longer than anyone.

I thought their green wedding was supposed to make Lumi a forever couple.. Kim and Shane were not married for long either and they were a supercouple..

Edited by Apprentice79
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Apprentice79 said:

James E. Reilly who created the alliance between Lucas and Sami dropped hints throughout his tenure that Lumi were endgame...It was clear from his writing that was his goal...Different writers had other ideas...You had Brandon/Sami, Safe and EJami..

Yeah and like i said..'endgame' pairings can change..it is the nature of fiction..

And Ejami were never the 'it couple' in this show, i would have liked that but it never happened..they were wasted again and again in order to prop other pairings..the writing for them was for the most part destructive and Sami and Rafe were very propped during Sami's last years ..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

I thought their green wedding was supposed to make Lumi a forever couple.. Kim and Shane were not married for long either and they were a supercouple..

The idiot writers completely trashed Sami/Lucas after their green wedding, and everything that happened in 2007.  I don't know why.  One minute Sami/Lucas were strong and sticking by each other through everything, and then it was over.  If it was because they were going to put Sami with EJ, that didn't happen either.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, pau said:

Yeah and like i said..'endgame' pairings can change..it is the nature of fiction..

True, however, Days has always been the show about the couples. We all know no matter what happens; Kim and Shane, John and Marlena, Bo and Hope, Steve and Kayla, Justin and Adrienne, Carrie and Austin, Shawn and Belle will always get back together... Whether we like it or not...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, TigerLynx said:

The idiot writers completely trashed Sami/Lucas after their green wedding, and everything that happened in 2007.  I don't know why.  One minute Sami/Lucas were strong and sticking by each other through everything, and then it was over.  If it was because they were going to put Sami with EJ, that didn't happen either.

With Ej's arrival Sami finally could have had an equal partner, mysterious, charismatic, interesting who choose her as his first choice, who accept her..she was finally free of her Austin fixation, free of Lucas abusive dynamic (and yeah he was emotionally abusive at this time)..But nah writers screwed up; they decided Ej should be a new Stephano and used as a prop/interloper for a Sami and Lucas's reunion..and Lucas would become a 'good guy' a la Austin..and Sami a sort of heroine..and then it got even worse with Rafe's arrival..And yet despite all this destructive writing Sami and Ej built a solid fanbase..because the actors were powerful together and some of their scenes showed some serious rooting factor in spite of a total destructive one-note narrative..

Edited by pau

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Apprentice79 said:

thought their green wedding was supposed to make Lumi a forever couple.. Kim and Shane were not married for long either and they were a supercouple..

God I hated the green wedding. Sami actually looked lovely as the bride but the whole concept was stupid. Since when did Sami or Lucas care that much about the environment. Want to have a green wedding, go to the courthouse and then don't have a reception. Then for their honeymoon? They went to New Orleans to help with cleanup if Katrina. Again that was not Sami or Lucas

As for all the crap that they both did to each other, I did not care about that. What I did care was that tried several times to marry before that and he always left her at the altar. Sometimes it was her fault. Sometimes it wasn't. But Kate kept disrupted their weddings (even the green wedding), and he would take his mother's side over the woman he claimed to love.

when the interactions between Lucas'a mother and Sami was more interesting than their relationship, then I find that to be a problem with the couple.

Edited by nilyank
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size