<B>Excellent pics, TK! Excellent portrayal of Paul by RH as well. Todd-like? Only in a sloppy thinkers mind. But you know MD ... oatmeal brains can't think beyond point A. AND ... they are so stupid that they don't realize they are opening the door to the Howarth Haters bashes. No ... when RH's Paul behaves a certain way, it's because RH played Todd and Paul is now Todd-like. Bullshit. Actually, Dusty is far more Todd-like in this Story ... if McCouch was a better actor and if Dusty was an interesting character that is. Bwa. Which brings me to ... CLICK, RANT. -- TODD'S LAIR

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 05:13:03 04/08/09 Wed
Author: tat statler
Subject: Excellent pics, TK! Excellent portrayal of Paul by RH as well. Todd-like? Only in a sloppy thinkers mind. But you know MD ... oatmeal brains can't think beyond point A. AND ... they are so stupid that they don't realize they are opening the door to the Howarth Haters bashes. No ... when RH's Paul behaves a certain way, it's because RH played Todd and Paul is now Todd-like. Bullshit. Actually, Dusty is far more Todd-like in this Story ... if McCouch was a better actor and if Dusty was an interesting character that is. Bwa. Which brings me to ... CLICK, RANT.
In reply to: TK 's message, "SOME MONDAY PAUL SNAPPYS!" on 22:30:19 04/06/09 Mon

Ya know, ever since McCouch waltzed back into the Show (after his failures in Hwood) under the auspices of Goutman and his son, it's been a contrived circle jerk.

The writers have always been intent on making Meg a MORON about cutting Paul's enemies a break and in two cases ... a bang so that Paul could be pushed to misbegotten and ill-considered acts. When I heard McCouch was coming back I HOPED that the paradigm would not continue, but yeah. It did. Because, damn ... golden boy had to screw up yet another of Paul's relationships and be presented as the hero yet again.

You know, Paul is NOT that paranoid. Every time he has concerns about Meg's "friendships" with his ENEMIES ... they are always valid. I do not understand why the writers think that ANY woman in a relationship with a man she loves would DISRESPECT that man by being friends with his enemies. That THAT is real life model of behavior. Only very stupid and very self-centered women betray their men like that in RL. It is unacceptable behavior and speaks to the disloyalty of those woman. Is that the writers point? That female characters and RL women are not very far apart in stupidity and selfishness? Or are they just riding the misogyny of the Message Boards where posters revel in calling female characters that they don't like every kind of filthy name that the language filters allow?

Misogyny. Writers. Posters. Viewer response. Circle jerk.

I think that the writers actually do give viewers what they want. A justification for their own misogyny. Yep. Look at EVERY female character on the Show's particular paradigm. Not one has been spared.

Which is why Dusty is always being presented as the Hero. Because any thinking person knows he is NOT ... but it affords the opportunity to make women in his orbit look like MORONS. Every single one of them. And there has been quite a few. Sigh.

And in this present return ... it's not enough for him to caveman his way around ... no, he has to indelibly TRASH moments that should have belonged to Paul.

I will NEVER NEVER NEVER forgive the writers for Dusty delivering Paul's daughter.

NEVER. There's more ... but that is my "got kicked in the gut for crappin' nepotism" #1 on a list that is long.

Go to Hell, Goutman. I know you and sonnyboy just loves you some Grayson, but you crossed a line there. Really.

There's Soap and then there's Egregious Bullshit. Learn the difference and maybe the ratings will go up.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

You've got THAT right, Tat!! So, you saw that *Roger is playing Paul Todd-like* BS at MediaDomain, I see. Utter garbage! And the GM stuff....SO TRUE! What the...? did he do to earn his status???? Nada. Zip. Zilch. He's such a big ZERO. And (surprisingly so...NOT) I completely agree with your analysis of Meg's behavior toward Paul's enemies. It is nearly impossible in real-life for a married woman to maintain 'friendships' with other guys....and it's most definitely impossible when those 'friends' are your husband's sworn enemies. (NT) -- TK, 15:02:09 04/08/09 Wed
Exactly, TK! I just shake my head over the idea that a man is irrational and jealous because he would have misgivings over his partner having a close relationship with another man. It's not about trust ... it's about COMMON SENSE. I'd be interested to know how women ... fictional and real ... would HONESTLY feel about their man being in a very "close" friendship with another woman. Especially if she is very attractive. Heh. Because sexual attraction is ALWAYS the elephant in the room. It's human nature. AND ... even if a woman trusts her man ... can she also trust the other woman? Hmmm? (NT) -- tat statler, 04:14:41 04/09/09 Thu
There has always been one consistent Cautionary Tale in Literature, Theater, Movies ... TV, whatever. A CENTURIES old caution. When a person is involved in a "close" friendship with another person while they are in a relationship ... well, it always ends in tears. People who think otherwise ... people who think they have some kind of "right" to engage in outside relationships because they are "platonic" are fools. Stupid. Self centered. It IS a betrayal on many levels. And ... if ANY marriage counselor would condone this kind of dynamic ... especially the kinds that Meg has rubbed in Paul's face over and over again ... when he told her it hurt him? That marriage couselor is UNFIT to deal with the underpinnings of human emotion. (NT) -- tat statler, 04:17:08 04/09/09 Thu

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.