PDA

View Full Version : NBC's Smash.



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DarrellH
03-13-2012, 09:20 PM
Anjelica's around to deliver the "fasten your seatbelts..." lines.

cruisin
03-13-2012, 09:27 PM
But you're not a 20-something actress trying to break into show biz (at least I don't think you are :lol: )

:lol: No, that's true, I'm not - in fact, so far from 20 something, it's scary!

Marilou
03-14-2012, 06:57 PM
Not sure how much longer I'll keep watching. I really HATE the audultery story line.

soxxy
03-14-2012, 07:03 PM
I hate the adultery story line, too. Is it because Debra Messing has played likable characters? And in what universe does Will remotely resemble Joe DiMaggio?

genevieve
03-14-2012, 07:16 PM
I don't hate it because it's adultery (a common and effective staple of nighttime soaps); I hate it because it's poorly written, the adulterers have no chemistry, and most of all it's BORING.

sk9tingfan
03-14-2012, 07:32 PM
I don't hate it because it's adultery (a common and effective staple of nighttime soaps); I hate it because it's poorly written, the adulterers have no chemistry, and most of all it's BORING.

Interestingly enough, in real life, Messing is dating her "co-adulterer with whom she has no chemistry" :P

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Chase

genevieve
03-14-2012, 07:40 PM
Interestingly enough, in real life, Messing is dating her "co-adulterer with whom she has no chemistry" :P


yep (it's been discussed in this thread)

I still say they have no chemistry - or maybe it's just that HE has no appeal :scream:

Marilou
03-14-2012, 09:24 PM
I don't hate it because it's adultery (a common and effective staple of nighttime soaps); I hate it because it's poorly written, the adulterers have no chemistry, and most of all it's BORING.

This! If you're going to have an adultery story line - at least write it in a way that at least one of the characters is somewhat sypathethic - the way this has story line has been written it just feels SOOOO slimey and wrong!

Artemis@BC
03-14-2012, 10:24 PM
Interestingly enough, in real life, Messing is dating her "co-adulterer with whom she has no chemistry" :P

Well, it wouldn't be the first time that an off-screen couple had no on-screen chemistry ...

dramagrrl
03-14-2012, 10:58 PM
It seems completely unrealistic to me that Michael would be such a slime that he can go home to his wife and young child and then have absolutely NO qualms in cheating on his family with Julia. The writers seem to be portraying him as a general "good guy" otherwise, but as soon as the adultery storyline comes around, he has no guilt or morals whatsoever. If he had been set up to be a Derek-like "slimeball" character, then maybe it would make some sense, but for him to be so overcome by lust that he literally seems to forget that he has a family? C'mon.

I think one of the problems with this show is that the writing is so inconsistent/mostly one-note that I don't actually like a single one of the main characters. Derek is interesting but emotionally abusive and prone to cheating and lying to get what he wants; Tom is generally good-natured and funny, but has a tendency to be super-whiny; Julia is a flustered adulteress who doesn't seem to have a clue what she wants; Karen is just wishy-washy and Ivy is given bitchy things to say/do every time the audience gets a little bit on her side. Angelica Houston's character doesn't seem to have much of a point right now, as glorious as she is. Ellis is an annoying caricature who is NOT STRAIGHT in any world, and while Dev comes closest to being a character I'd root for, he's just waaay too nice and puts up with too much of Karen's nonsense most of the time. The rest of the ensemble members are like a joint pack of cartoon characters that only speak with one voice, and the (dance captain? I think?) dude Sam who is gay but loves sports could be interesting... if he wasn't reduced to being the gay dude who loves sports and nothing else. The only relationship that seems remotely real so far is the Tom-Julia friendship, which gives the show moments of what I think it could be if the performers and writers all settled down and decided to give the whole thing some focus.

Matryeshka
03-15-2012, 12:28 AM
It seems completely unrealistic to me that Michael would be such a slime that he can go home to his wife and young child and then have absolutely NO qualms in cheating on his family with Julia. The writers seem to be portraying him as a general "good guy" otherwise, but as soon as the adultery storyline comes around, he has no guilt or morals whatsoever. If he had been set up to be a Derek-like "slimeball" character, then maybe it would make some sense, but for him to be so overcome by lust that he literally seems to forget that he has a family? C'mon.

I completely disagree. I like that they are making him a good guy in all aspects but the cheating, because honestly, that's how the majority of adulterors are (male and female). IME, with both men and women, you can be a great person in all aspects except an inability to keep it in your pants.

I like that with both Julia and Derek thay didn't take the easy way out and make the spouses unlikeable; I think it's a more realistic portrayal of real people. Not saying that I'm condoning cheating, but it just makes you a bad spouse, and not automatically a bad person.

dramagrrl
03-15-2012, 12:51 AM
I completely disagree. I like that they are making him a good guy in all aspects but the cheating, because honestly, that's how the majority of adulterors are (male and female). IME, with both men and women, you can be a great person in all aspects except an inability to keep it in your pants.
But Michael seems to completely forget he has a family at all. Julia has actually had to remind him that he is married more than once. I suppose if one really stretched, one could say that the writers are trying to make Michael still "caught" in the previous affair he had with Julia, when he was single and had nothing to lose/feel guilty about, but the fact that she consistently has to say clunky lines like, "You're a married man! You have a child!" seems very false to me.

genevieve
03-15-2012, 01:19 AM
I completely disagree. I like that they are making him a good guy in all aspects but the cheating...
I disagree with both of y'all - I think they've done a terrible job of showing Michael with much personality at all, good or bad. We're told he's super talented but in all the numbers he's 2nd fiddle to Ivy so who can say? He doesn't exude star power, or charisma, or anything but an age-inappropriate whininess that makes me wonder if he's Leo's real father. The adultery is the most interesting thing about him, and even that's all about Julia. I don't blame him forgetting he has a wife and baby - I sure wouldn't remember it if Julia or Tom wasn't constantly reminding us zzzzzzzzzzz

What I do like is when Julia is talking to Tom about the affair - it comes across as believable, she's sympathetic, and Tom is a great friend who withholds judgment but tells his BFF she needs to get her shit together before everything falls apart.

I think I'm like the only person watching this show who likes Karen :shuffle: and sometimes finds Ivy sympathetic and interesting :shuffle:

chantilly
03-15-2012, 01:21 AM
It seems completely unrealistic to me that Michael would be such a slime that he can go home to his wife and young child and then have absolutely NO qualms in cheating on his family with Julia. The writers seem to be portraying him as a general "good guy" otherwise, but as soon as the adultery storyline comes around, he has no guilt or morals whatsoever. If he had been set up to be a Derek-like "slimeball" character, then maybe it would make some sense, but for him to be so overcome by lust that he literally seems to forget that he has a family? C'mon.

I think one of the problems with this show is that the writing is so inconsistent/mostly one-note that I don't actually like a single one of the main characters. Derek is interesting but emotionally abusive and prone to cheating and lying to get what he wants; Tom is generally good-natured and funny, but has a tendency to be super-whiny; Julia is a flustered adulteress who doesn't seem to have a clue what she wants; Karen is just wishy-washy and Ivy is given bitchy things to say/do every time the audience gets a little bit on her side. Angelica Houston's character doesn't seem to have much of a point right now, as glorious as she is. Ellis is an annoying caricature who is NOT STRAIGHT in any world, and while Dev comes closest to being a character I'd root for, he's just waaay too nice and puts up with too much of Karen's nonsense most of the time. The rest of the ensemble members are like a joint pack of cartoon characters that only speak with one voice, and the (dance captain? I think?) dude Sam who is gay but loves sports could be interesting... if he wasn't reduced to being the gay dude who loves sports and nothing else. The only relationship that seems remotely real so far is the Tom-Julia friendship, which gives the show moments of what I think it could be if the performers and writers all settled down and decided to give the whole thing some focus.

I mostly agree with this.

However I do feel that Messing and Chase have great chemistry.

But yeah it is hard to like either of these characters or understand this affair since they both seem to have great partners at home. But I think what it comes down to with these two is Obsession. An incredibly toxic thing. I actually think this is quite common in the film/television/theatre world. These actors, directors get mesmerized by the talent of someone and can't keep it in their pants like someone else said. I always thought that people only had affairs if they were unhappy at home and needed an escape but maybe not.

But having said that this show is just "too". Karen is too clueless, Derek is too much of a jerk, Ellis is too conniving and completely unbelievable as a straight guy. In fact the black actor playing the "straigtish' gay guy should have had his role. He is way hotter and a much better actor to boot. however that would be a waste of his incredible talents to sing and dance. And the numbers are too cheesy.

But I'll stick with it for a bit. Bernadette Peters is on next week. But I am not sure how much longer I'll give it.

dramagrrl
03-15-2012, 02:24 AM
I disagree with both of y'all - I think they've done a terrible job of showing Michael with much personality at all, good or bad.
Oh, I do agree with this - this is why I said the writers seem to be portraying him as a good guy. I meant that they seem to want the viewers to see him that way, but I don't really see him as anything except strangely clueless about real-life consequences and obsessive over Julia.