Thursday, March 31, 2011

massaging the theory

This is from a conversation with JAQ and Maria at About.com General Hospital
Fans

JAQ and Maria agree but had some questions which I try to address... This is all speculation on my part but I am having fun :)




Annette

I think when Franco said “I should have been paying closer attention” it’s a big clue.

The Joss cancer/kidney s/l is part of the rip off from BJ/Maxie… but I think irrelevant as far as Franco kidnapping Jake and putting a mangled toddler in his place simply to torture Jason.

In life their are coincidences/parallels, etc. So perhaps the writers were ‘playing cute’ by having Joss have cancer and need a kidney. It’s another distraction but Franco (IMO) had nothing to do with it… it just ‘happened’.

However… as far as ‘the writers’ being cruel enough?
Let’s review just a few storylines:
Luke raped/married Laura
Helena killed Lucky (just kidding… he’s fine!)
Stavros is dead.. oh no, he was just FROZEN!
Alan.. where to begin??
Robin, Stone??
Georgie.. Seriously.
Alcazar’s niece (what was her name?)
Helena slitting Alexis’ mother in front of her as a child
Jason in a horrible accident, comes out a new man.

More recently…
Michael shot in the head/in a coma for a year .. comes out a new man
Michael violently raped by a man in prison
Brenda blown up on her wedding day…
just kidding.. she was drugged and kidnapped and drugged again!
Sam was swapped out for Brenda because you know.. women are so disposable, blown up, lost her hearing and.. wait for it.. appears to come out a new woman

Do I think the writers have the capacity to write a s/l that encapsulates kidnapping a 3.5 year old little boy (Lucky is already calling him 4yr so I predict a SORAS when found.. too bad I loved his little nose!) anyway.. the kidnapping, swapping of Jake with a mangled child, pinning it on the head of one of the LAST of the main families in PC and one of the most dynamic actors on daytime? Sure.. I have no trouble imagining it and I have watched since I was 4 yrs old (so lets say 40+ yrs thanks Granny!).

Do I think they are doing it for the right reasons?
Well we’re talking about it.
Huff Post is, NY Times, et al. so…
Do I think we’re being ‘played’. Yes… but I’ll keep playing.


March 30, 2011 at 6:29 pm

Maria and I agreed on some things, but not everything... so I press my point.

Annette

Hi Maria,
Franco tossed a man off of a building to make Jason think he had killed himself.
So.. the ‘character’ Franco is cruel and callous and the writers seem to know no limits and like to push boundaries with him.
It could be more palatable..
For example, perhaps it was an accident of circumstance… Franco could have had the word out that whenever a little boy looking like Jason’s son was critically injured to pick him up and go kidnap Jake. After all there is the question of how Jake opened the door.
However, I will never buy Franco as a killer with a conscience.

As far as Joss/Kidney?
I think that was just thrown in there to heighten the drama.
Joss has been healthy, no illness/symptoms whatsoever. All of the sudden on the same night as Jake’s ‘death’ she comes down with Wilms Tumors on both kidneys and must have immediate kidney transplants? Improbable.
The Joss s/l was rushed. She was sick, in the hospital, and in the next days sitting up and playing.
Sure.

Why do I think it was thrown in? Well the Maxie/BJ storyline was a beloved s/l long remembered for how emotional it was. Of course that story was carefully crafted over time.

This was done barbarically, swiftly and without much planning.

Anyway.. this is all just IMO.
March 30, 2011 at 6:54 pm
cont.
Oh, and I don’t think ‘anyone’ ran over a child.
I do think that the DNA of the mystery child who was operated on/died was placed on Luke’s car.

I also think that at some point a blood test on Joss will come up in front of Elizabeth.. she’ll see the blood type or something and say “how is it possible that Jake/Joss are a match”.

And then the hunt for Jake will be on.

Or.. I could be completely wrong. :)


March 30, 2011 at 6:58 pm


Annette

Hi JAQ,
What I meant is that Joss’s need for a kidney was not caused by Franco.
I think that adding her need for a kidney seemed slapped into the story because it wasn’t developed.
If she had been sicker, longer, and then Jake was hit (or whomever) it would have made more sense (of course it would have also more directly paralleled the Maxie/BJ s/l).

When Franco said “I should have been paying more attention” I think it was as if he was saying he should have been aware Joss was sick. How that plays into anything that has transpired I don’t know. Would he have waited to take Jake? How would that have affected things… more tragically as it turns out.

I just think that if you look at the story from the outside it is completely coincidental that Joss needed a kidney transplant on the night Jake (whomever) died and the child left in Jake’s place is a perfect match.
If you look at it from the inside (as we are trying to do) it seems very convenient, and contrived.

As convenient plot devices go I think it will be the clue to finding Jake. (yay!)

I hope I made it make sense this time :)


March 30, 2011 at 7:29 pm

Maria pays me an amazing compliment:






Maria



Annette, your storyline theory about DNA on Luke’s car and the blood test that Elizabeth sees not being a match for Joss is too good a story for these writers to come up with, so forget it. Franco throwing a man off a building is not the same as an injured child. It’s not that I think he has a conscience, but wouldn’t you think the writers would have consciences? They’ve already put us through Jake’s death, they’re going to compound it with an awful story of some poor kid? As far as the Josslyn story being thrown in, it wasn’t thrown in because it had been planned for a long time. It just looked like it was thrown in. Was it stupid? Yes. Did it seem like an afterthought? Yes.

Originally, way back, they were going to do a COMPLETE ripoff of the Sam-Alexis stem cell storyline with some kid or another, now I can’t remember. Then they came up with this. Sloppy.

And no one has mentioned that, after Luke being a drunk for what, 20 years or so, they’re suddenly addressing his drinking.

All this is an excuse to show off the one thing GH has – good actors.
March 30, 2011 at 7:33 pm

Annette

Well, thank God for that… Otherwise we’d have nothing to watch :)


March 30, 2011 at 7:44 pm

Annette

And Maria,
I should say thanks :)
When I was a kid.. maybe 12 I dreamed of writing for GH.
My imagination is brutal and it’s probably not helped by watching the violence that I subject it to each day just on regular TV. (I quit horror movies in college)
I don’t read the trades/spoilers so I had no idea about what was/is planned/not planned as far as s/l. I prefer to spin it out in my head. I’ve done that for years.

Okay.. so the writers have planned out Joss’s Kidney cancer. That does give her a long arc story of being a survivor, and how it can affect her body down the road (can she have kids for example, other illnesses, etc).

I still believe the Joss s/l could lead us to Jake and I will continue to hold out hope for that :)

And no.. I don’t believe the writer’s have consciences. I think the writers have jobs.
Their jobs are to tell stories (note I did not say good stories, just stories) that get viewers.

For every viewer that says they are ‘leaving GH’ there are viewers that are posting… talking about it, and then there are the people talking about the viewers posting. GH has gotten a ton of press.

I Googled and stopped counting at 36 mentions for “Jake’s Death” in articles from the US/Canada. News/TV/Forums/Blogs/Video. Diatribes, rants, polls, opinions. Everyone is talking about what happened and why.

Talk about a lot of advertising for ‘a lousy story’.

Considering I read on this board not long ago that ABC is finished with AMC and OLTL has until 2012 I would imagine that TPTB would ask that GH stay well in the public’s mind. Right now everyone is pissed off. In 3 months ‘we’ll’ remember.. the rest of the world will just remember “GH”. Maybe even less time.. as more happens in life the shorter attention spans people have (people barely talk about C. Sheen anymore and he allegedly starved his dogs – one died).

SO.. what I’m saying is that in the old days we had amazing writers and producers telling incredible stories that grabbed our attention, pulled at our heartstrings and tickled our imagination.

Today I suspect the writers are playing the ‘no news is bad news’ game much like every star releasing an album/movie.
Something ‘bad’ happens, the press talks, everyone gets excited, then goes about their business but the attention has been refocused on their brand for the moment and no one had to pay $$$.

Oh.. but perhaps those advertising revenues coming in are working better. More sales, better sales?


March 30, 2011 at 8:12 pm




JAQ


You made soo much sense I want to marry the post.
I LOVED it!!

My problem is the writers are too stupid and lazy for all that to ring true.

Good catch with the comment from Franco.
The child is kidnapped for years, and when he comes back it will be years. Or he will have grown.
March 30, 2011 at 8:44 pm

JAQ

All the boards today are lit up with this article.
A friend stated it was on twitter last night.

Maria…What I meant to say in an earlier post is that Annette’s ‘theory’ of what could have happened, I don’t feel the writers are that smart or ambitious to come up with the scenerio as she did.

Hopefully I am wrong. The boy lives on.
March 30, 2011 at 10:18 pm

Maria

I agree, JAQ, Annette’s ideas are too good!

Also, Annette, I think you give the writers too much credit with the no news is bad news. I don’t believe they think past their noses. Sadly, I think by killing off Jake, they thought they were writing a heartfelt story that would pull at the heartstrings and bring in ratings. There’s been a lot of publicity but how many people, after reading Ed Martin’s article, are going to decide to tune in who never have before? Try NONE.

March 30, 2011 at 11:32 pm


Barb

The car was rented to or otherwise associated with the Balkin. But we don’t know who was drivingit. Franco, Johnny, somebody else.


March 31, 2011 at 12:44 am


Barb


The no news is bad news idea has become so basic, everyone knows it. Even Guza.
March 31, 2011 at 12:59 am JAQ
I know this is getting off topic, not sure where to post this.
Annette-I took your theory to a friend. We mixed it up a little.
Tell me, including you Maria if this is too far fetched as well as impossible for the writers to think up on their own:
(We know they aren’t bright)

Jake is alive. He was kidnapped. One child in place for aother. The parents didn’t go to see him on life support, wasn’t he so unrecognizable they didn’t want to remember him like that??
Franco’s hint. Jason should have paid ‘better attention’
Brenda & Jax had a child. Franco kidnapped that child. (Jakes age) The child was that of Brenda’s and Jax. (Kidney compatible) He then took the another in place of the one he kidnapped.
The DNA on Lukes car was planted there by Franco. SORSDS Jake and he comes back older. This was the plan all along with the writers.
Is this feasable or am I spending too much time on the computer??

March 31, 2011 at 4:30 am


Maria


You’re spending too much time at the computer. Only kidding.

It would all make some sort of convoluted, insane sense if Brenda’s child wasn’t coming onto the show April 4, little Lucian, whom I know you know about. Are you trying to say they had ANOTHER child that somehow Brenda is forgetting? She never said she had two miscarriages, and we know if she had another child, she would have kept the baby as she was going to keep the one she thought she lost.

March 31, 2011 at 12:10 pm

Annette

Hi JAQ

Haha we ALL are spending a lot of time on the computer these days but I think that is what makes it fun :)

You bring up a great point.
To tell you the truth I keep wondering ‘where’ this other child could be sourced from. Is he relevant or random? What would have more impact?

Would Franco just have a call out to his henchmen for any toddler who fits the bill? After all the writers make the kidney match work, not Franco. That is either a ‘happy accident’ (if we go with my theory) or Franco picked up a child no one knew about. In that case that’s so low and even more disposable/despicable. What male had a child with someone off screen that would make the boy a match with Joss? Jax or Jerry.

Sigh.

I can see it work but wow we are really going dark!

March 31, 2011 at 3:36 pm

JAQ

What I am thinking Maria is, the boy they are bringing on the show really is not Brenda’s boy. Brenda’s boy was kidnapped & put in Jakes place. So the body was that of Brenda

This is from a conversation with JAQ and Maria at About.com General Hospital
Fans

JAQ and Maria agree but had some questions which I try to address... This is all speculation on my part but I am having fun :)




Annette

I think when Franco said “I should have been paying closer attention” it’s a big clue.

The Joss cancer/kidney s/l is part of the rip off from BJ/Maxie… but I think irrelevant as far as Franco kidnapping Jake and putting a mangled toddler in his place simply to torture Jason.

In life their are coincidences/parallels, etc. So perhaps the writers were ‘playing cute’ by having Joss have cancer and need a kidney. It’s another distraction but Franco (IMO) had nothing to do with it… it just ‘happened’.

However… as far as ‘the writers’ being cruel enough?
Let’s review just a few storylines:
Luke raped/married Laura
Helena killed Lucky (just kidding… he’s fine!)
Stavros is dead.. oh no, he was just FROZEN!
Alan.. where to begin??
Robin, Stone??
Georgie.. Seriously.
Alcazar’s niece (what was her name?)
Helena slitting Alexis’ mother in front of her as a child
Jason in a horrible accident, comes out a new man.

More recently…
Michael shot in the head/in a coma for a year .. comes out a new man
Michael violently raped by a man in prison
Brenda blown up on her wedding day…
just kidding.. she was drugged and kidnapped and drugged again!
Sam was swapped out for Brenda because you know.. women are so disposable, blown up, lost her hearing and.. wait for it.. appears to come out a new woman

Do I think the writers have the capacity to write a s/l that encapsulates kidnapping a 3.5 year old little boy (Lucky is already calling him 4yr so I predict a SORAS when found.. too bad I loved his little nose!) anyway.. the kidnapping, swapping of Jake with a mangled child, pinning it on the head of one of the LAST of the main families in PC and one of the most dynamic actors on daytime? Sure.. I have no trouble imagining it and I have watched since I was 4 yrs old (so lets say 40+ yrs thanks Granny!).

Do I think they are doing it for the right reasons?
Well we’re talking about it.
Huff Post is, NY Times, et al. so…
Do I think we’re being ‘played’. Yes… but I’ll keep playing.


March 30, 2011 at 6:29 pm

Maria and I agreed on some things, but not everything... so I press my point.

Annette

Hi Maria,
Franco tossed a man off of a building to make Jason think he had killed himself.
So.. the ‘character’ Franco is cruel and callous and the writers seem to know no limits and like to push boundaries with him.
It could be more palatable..
For example, perhaps it was an accident of circumstance… Franco could have had the word out that whenever a little boy looking like Jason’s son was critically injured to pick him up and go kidnap Jake. After all there is the question of how Jake opened the door.
However, I will never buy Franco as a killer with a conscience.

As far as Joss/Kidney?
I think that was just thrown in there to heighten the drama.
Joss has been healthy, no illness/symptoms whatsoever. All of the sudden on the same night as Jake’s ‘death’ she comes down with Wilms Tumors on both kidneys and must have immediate kidney transplants? Improbable.
The Joss s/l was rushed. She was sick, in the hospital, and in the next days sitting up and playing.
Sure.

Why do I think it was thrown in? Well the Maxie/BJ storyline was a beloved s/l long remembered for how emotional it was. Of course that story was carefully crafted over time.

This was done barbarically, swiftly and without much planning.

Anyway.. this is all just IMO.
March 30, 2011 at 6:54 pm
cont.
Oh, and I don’t think ‘anyone’ ran over a child.
I do think that the DNA of the mystery child who was operated on/died was placed on Luke’s car.

I also think that at some point a blood test on Joss will come up in front of Elizabeth.. she’ll see the blood type or something and say “how is it possible that Jake/Joss are a match”.

And then the hunt for Jake will be on.

Or.. I could be completely wrong. :)


March 30, 2011 at 6:58 pm


Annette

Hi JAQ,
What I meant is that Joss’s need for a kidney was not caused by Franco.
I think that adding her need for a kidney seemed slapped into the story because it wasn’t developed.
If she had been sicker, longer, and then Jake was hit (or whomever) it would have made more sense (of course it would have also more directly paralleled the Maxie/BJ s/l).

When Franco said “I should have been paying more attention” I think it was as if he was saying he should have been aware Joss was sick. How that plays into anything that has transpired I don’t know. Would he have waited to take Jake? How would that have affected things… more tragically as it turns out.

I just think that if you look at the story from the outside it is completely coincidental that Joss needed a kidney transplant on the night Jake (whomever) died and the child left in Jake’s place is a perfect match.
If you look at it from the inside (as we are trying to do) it seems very convenient, and contrived.

As convenient plot devices go I think it will be the clue to finding Jake. (yay!)

I hope I made it make sense this time :)


March 30, 2011 at 7:29 pm

Maria pays me an amazing compliment:






Maria



Annette, your storyline theory about DNA on Luke’s car and the blood test that Elizabeth sees not being a match for Joss is too good a story for these writers to come up with, so forget it. Franco throwing a man off a building is not the same as an injured child. It’s not that I think he has a conscience, but wouldn’t you think the writers would have consciences? They’ve already put us through Jake’s death, they’re going to compound it with an awful story of some poor kid? As far as the Josslyn story being thrown in, it wasn’t thrown in because it had been planned for a long time. It just looked like it was thrown in. Was it stupid? Yes. Did it seem like an afterthought? Yes.

Originally, way back, they were going to do a COMPLETE ripoff of the Sam-Alexis stem cell storyline with some kid or another, now I can’t remember. Then they came up with this. Sloppy.

And no one has mentioned that, after Luke being a drunk for what, 20 years or so, they’re suddenly addressing his drinking.

All this is an excuse to show off the one thing GH has – good actors.
March 30, 2011 at 7:33 pm

Annette

Well, thank God for that… Otherwise we’d have nothing to watch :)


March 30, 2011 at 7:44 pm

Annette

And Maria,
I should say thanks :)
When I was a kid.. maybe 12 I dreamed of writing for GH.
My imagination is brutal and it’s probably not helped by watching the violence that I subject it to each day just on regular TV. (I quit horror movies in college)
I don’t read the trades/spoilers so I had no idea about what was/is planned/not planned as far as s/l. I prefer to spin it out in my head. I’ve done that for years.

Okay.. so the writers have planned out Joss’s Kidney cancer. That does give her a long arc story of being a survivor, and how it can affect her body down the road (can she have kids for example, other illnesses, etc).

I still believe the Joss s/l could lead us to Jake and I will continue to hold out hope for that :)

And no.. I don’t believe the writer’s have consciences. I think the writers have jobs.
Their jobs are to tell stories (note I did not say good stories, just stories) that get viewers.

For every viewer that says they are ‘leaving GH’ there are viewers that are posting… talking about it, and then there are the people talking about the viewers posting. GH has gotten a ton of press.

I Googled and stopped counting at 36 mentions for “Jake’s Death” in articles from the US/Canada. News/TV/Forums/Blogs/Video. Diatribes, rants, polls, opinions. Everyone is talking about what happened and why.

Talk about a lot of advertising for ‘a lousy story’.

Considering I read on this board not long ago that ABC is finished with AMC and OLTL has until 2012 I would imagine that TPTB would ask that GH stay well in the public’s mind. Right now everyone is pissed off. In 3 months ‘we’ll’ remember.. the rest of the world will just remember “GH”. Maybe even less time.. as more happens in life the shorter attention spans people have (people barely talk about C. Sheen anymore and he allegedly starved his dogs – one died).

SO.. what I’m saying is that in the old days we had amazing writers and producers telling incredible stories that grabbed our attention, pulled at our heartstrings and tickled our imagination.

Today I suspect the writers are playing the ‘no news is bad news’ game much like every star releasing an album/movie.
Something ‘bad’ happens, the press talks, everyone gets excited, then goes about their business but the attention has been refocused on their brand for the moment and no one had to pay $$$.

Oh.. but perhaps those advertising revenues coming in are working better. More sales, better sales?


March 30, 2011 at 8:12 pm




JAQ


You made soo much sense I want to marry the post.
I LOVED it!!

My problem is the writers are too stupid and lazy for all that to ring true.

Good catch with the comment from Franco.
The child is kidnapped for years, and when he comes back it will be years. Or he will have grown.
March 30, 2011 at 8:44 pm

JAQ

All the boards today are lit up with this article.
A friend stated it was on twitter last night.

Maria…What I meant to say in an earlier post is that Annette’s ‘theory’ of what could have happened, I don’t feel the writers are that smart or ambitious to come up with the scenerio as she did.

Hopefully I am wrong. The boy lives on.
March 30, 2011 at 10:18 pm

Maria

I agree, JAQ, Annette’s ideas are too good!

Also, Annette, I think you give the writers too much credit with the no news is bad news. I don’t believe they think past their noses. Sadly, I think by killing off Jake, they thought they were writing a heartfelt story that would pull at the heartstrings and bring in ratings. There’s been a lot of publicity but how many people, after reading Ed Martin’s article, are going to decide to tune in who never have before? Try NONE.

March 30, 2011 at 11:32 pm


Barb

The car was rented to or otherwise associated with the Balkin. But we don’t know who was drivingit. Franco, Johnny, somebody else.


March 31, 2011 at 12:44 am


Barb


The no news is bad news idea has become so basic, everyone knows it. Even Guza.
March 31, 2011 at 12:59 am JAQ
I know this is getting off topic, not sure where to post this.
Annette-I took your theory to a friend. We mixed it up a little.
Tell me, including you Maria if this is too far fetched as well as impossible for the writers to think up on their own:
(We know they aren’t bright)

Jake is alive. He was kidnapped. One child in place for aother. The parents didn’t go to see him on life support, wasn’t he so unrecognizable they didn’t want to remember him like that??
Franco’s hint. Jason should have paid ‘better attention’
Brenda & Jax had a child. Franco kidnapped that child. (Jakes age) The child was that of Brenda’s and Jax. (Kidney compatible) He then took the another in place of the one he kidnapped.
The DNA on Lukes car was planted there by Franco. SORSDS Jake and he comes back older. This was the plan all along with the writers.
Is this feasable or am I spending too much time on the computer??

March 31, 2011 at 4:30 am


Maria


You’re spending too much time at the computer. Only kidding.

It would all make some sort of convoluted, insane sense if Brenda’s child wasn’t coming onto the show April 4, little Lucian, whom I know you know about. Are you trying to say they had ANOTHER child that somehow Brenda is forgetting? She never said she had two miscarriages, and we know if she had another child, she would have kept the baby as she was going to keep the one she thought she lost.

March 31, 2011 at 12:10 pm

Annette

Hi JAQ

Haha we ALL are spending a lot of time on the computer these days but I think that is what makes it fun :)

You bring up a great point.
To tell you the truth I keep wondering ‘where’ this other child could be sourced from. Is he relevant or random? What would have more impact?

Would Franco just have a call out to his henchmen for any toddler who fits the bill? After all the writers make the kidney match work, not Franco. That is either a ‘happy accident’ (if we go with my theory) or Franco picked up a child no one knew about. In that case that’s so low and even more disposable/despicable. What male had a child with someone off screen that would make the boy a match with Joss? Jax or Jerry.

Sigh.

I can see it work but wow we are really going dark!

March 31, 2011 at 3:36 pm

JAQ

What I am thinking Maria is, the boy they are bringing on the show really is not Brenda’s boy. Brenda’s boy was kidnapped & put in Jakes place. So the body was that of Brenda & Jax’s kid, NOT Jake, thus Jos being compatable.

Lucia or whatever his name is, was bought on the black market as a substitute for the original boy of Brenda’s.

Jake was switched at the street. Being held hostage now.
I know I am grasping for straws.
But I don’t want Jake to die.
99% of viewers agree with keeping him alive!

Why would Franco leave a message ‘Jason wasn’t paying attention’.

This story either way has way too many holes in it.

As far as the article goes, do you think there was a chance it landed on TPTB desk yesterday? Would it matter?

March 31, 2011 at 6:14 pm

JAQ

Annette, as hard as it is for us to believe, do you know how many children go missing in this country a year?
They are sold. Sold to other countries. Black market babies.
Other countries have child snatching going on as well.
To steal a child is unfortunatly what this world has come to. So replacing Brenda’s REAL child with another, could happen. She never met the kid before, she doesn’t know what he looks like.
And Jake, was switched. Franco grabbed him and put Brenda & Jax’s baby in front of the car.

I do know 2 other things !! Guza is OBSESSED with GVM & Franco. Would he dirty his hands by writing that for Franco?
Who was driving that black sedan? Who was in it?
I know one thing. Luke did not run that child over.

March 31, 2011 at 6:21 pm

Annette

Hi JAQ
I’m thoroughly intrigued with your s/l of the substitute child being Jax/Brenda’s and that Lucien is yet another ‘mystery’ child.. not poor Brenda’s.

Black market babies/children (and body parts) pop up often enough in the media and I can see Franco manipulating this.

I’m convinced The Balkin and Suzanne are working for Franco.

“The Balkin” is no mob kingpin (a cave/lair, a henchman? seriously?) It is very Franco to pick a nut job with a personal grudge to ‘manage things’ in PC and it is another thing Franco could “not have been paying attention to”. This makes more sense the more I think about it.
WHY did The Balkin wait 3 years and then suddenly come after Brenda?? Maybe on Franco’s orders?

I’ve never bought the whole story of The Balkin setting Brenda up for three years. I do buy Suzanne being more in control than the Balkin.
I also have this thought that Suzanne could have known Franco from any number of events/galas (lovers?) or perhaps she and his mom are buddies.
If Franco has long been obsessed with Jason (and I have gotten the impression his obsession began before he came on canvas) then I can see him using a convenient situation to his advantage.

I have NOT seen today’s episode so I have no idea if Suzanne offed the Balkin or visa-versa but I’m hoping she got him!

Any one of Franco’s men could have made the switch, or the Balkin’s (who are downstream Franco employees).

I agree that Guza acts out his weird fantasies on his actors, and they aren’t very nice. He tortures them. He may be obsessed with VMG but he treats her character horribly. Her happiness is always short lived and overshadowed by tragedy. Carly (for all of her antics) seems to have moments of genuine happiness in there.

If I had to pick a GH woman to be on the show I’d probably pick Alice… she seems to have suffered the least.
haha.

March 31, 2011 at 7:40 pm

JAQ

My theory is making more sense. Today there was a memorial only it wasn’t shown!
I swear if they don’t get VGM off my screen I am going to kill someone. She is a child, locked into a women’s body. She has no mind. She is a nothing. A model? For who? Midgets?
I am counting her days to leave this show.

And Sonny didn’t go to the memorial. WTF????

March 31, 2011 at 9:27 pm

Annette


I do believe we have cracked this nut! (or we are on the right track so YAY US!!)

On the topic of VMG we will always disagree dear JAQ
I think she is a very pretty woman. I hate 90% of what is written for her character but don’t fault her any more than I fault LW when Carly becomes overly annoying and unreasonable and spiteful (I could go on), or Sarah Brown when they totally mangled the Claudia character (which had real potential). I also wouldn’t complain if I woke up tomorrow with VMG’s looks (especially that hair!) Prince did not call her “the most beautiful woman in the world” on a whim.

In real life VMG supports a wonderful non-profit here in Santa Monica called Sojourn for battered women and their children. I did a benefit for them in February and know the director. I also know she’s a mom, and her sister has been battling cancer. She’s an actress and a person and I don’t necessarily think a bad storyline dictates personal vilification.

However: you are VERY entitled to like and dislike anyone you choose :) That’s just IMO.

As far as today…

I cannot believe Sonny did not attend the memorial. How insane is that? What was he doing that was more important than attending the memorial of his best friend’s biological son? (Or.. does the entire town not yet know?) He could attend to support the Spencer’s… or just as a member of the community. Yikes.

March 31, 2011 at 10:11 pm
Jax’s kid, NOT Jake, thus Jos being compatable.

Lucia or whatever his name is, was bought on the black market as a substitute for the original boy of Brenda’s.

Jake was switched at the street. Being held hostage now.
I know I am grasping for straws.
But I don’t want Jake to die.
99% of viewers agree with keeping him alive!

Why would Franco leave a message ‘Jason wasn’t paying attention’.

This story either way has way too many holes in it.

As far as the article goes, do you think there was a chance it landed on TPTB desk yesterday? Would it matter?

March 31, 2011 at 6:14 pm

JAQ

Annette, as hard as it is for us to believe, do you know how many children go missing in this country a year?
They are sold. Sold to other countries. Black market babies.
Other countries have child snatching going on as well.
To steal a child is unfortunatly what this world has come to. So replacing Brenda’s REAL child with another, could happen. She never met the kid before, she doesn’t know what he looks like.
And Jake, was switched. Franco grabbed him and put Brenda & Jax’s baby in front of the car.

I do know 2 other things !! Guza is OBSESSED with GVM & Franco. Would he dirty his hands by writing that for Franco?
Who was driving that black sedan? Who was in it?
I know one thing. Luke did not run that child over.

March 31, 2011 at 6:21 pm

Annette

Hi JAQ
I’m thoroughly intrigued with your s/l of the substitute child being Jax/Brenda’s and that Lucien is yet another ‘mystery’ child.. not poor Brenda’s.

Black market babies/children (and body parts) pop up often enough in the media and I can see Franco manipulating this.

I’m convinced The Balkin and Suzanne are working for Franco.

“The Balkin” is no mob kingpin (a cave/lair, a henchman? seriously?) It is very Franco to pick a nut job with a personal grudge to ‘manage things’ in PC and it is another thing Franco could “not have been paying attention to”. This makes more sense the more I think about it.
WHY did The Balkin wait 3 years and then suddenly come after Brenda?? Maybe on Franco’s orders?

I’ve never bought the whole story of The Balkin setting Brenda up for three years. I do buy Suzanne being more in control than the Balkin.
I also have this thought that Suzanne could have known Franco from any number of events/galas (lovers?) or perhaps she and his mom are buddies.
If Franco has long been obsessed with Jason (and I have gotten the impression his obsession began before he came on canvas) then I can see him using a convenient situation to his advantage.

I have NOT seen today’s episode so I have no idea if Suzanne offed the Balkin or visa-versa but I’m hoping she got him!

Any one of Franco’s men could have made the switch, or the Balkin’s (who are downstream Franco employees).

I agree that Guza acts out his weird fantasies on his actors, and they aren’t very nice. He tortures them. He may be obsessed with VMG but he treats her character horribly. Her happiness is always short lived and overshadowed by tragedy. Carly (for all of her antics) seems to have moments of genuine happiness in there.

If I had to pick a GH woman to be on the show I’d probably pick Alice… she seems to have suffered the least.
haha.

March 31, 2011 at 7:40 pm

JAQ

My theory is making more sense. Today there was a memorial only it wasn’t shown!
I swear if they don’t get VGM off my screen I am going to kill someone. She is a child, locked into a women’s body. She has no mind. She is a nothing. A model? For who? Midgets?
I am counting her days to leave this show.

And Sonny didn’t go to the memorial. WTF????

March 31, 2011 at 9:27 pm

Annette


I do believe we have cracked this nut! (or we are on the right track so YAY US!!)

On the topic of VMG we will always disagree dear JAQ
I think she is a very pretty woman. I hate 90% of what is written for her character but don’t fault her any more than I fault LW when Carly becomes overly annoying and unreasonable and spiteful (I could go on), or Sarah Brown when they totally mangled the Claudia character (which had real potential). I also wouldn’t complain if I woke up tomorrow with VMG’s looks (especially that hair!) Prince did not call her “the most beautiful woman in the world” on a whim.

In real life VMG supports a wonderful non-profit here in Santa Monica called Sojourn for battered women and their children. I did a benefit for them in February and know the director. I also know she’s a mom, and her sister has been battling cancer. She’s an actress and a person and I don’t necessarily think a bad storyline dictates personal vilification.

However: you are VERY entitled to like and dislike anyone you choose :) That’s just IMO.

As far as today…

I cannot believe Sonny did not attend the memorial. How insane is that? What was he doing that was more important than attending the memorial of his best friend’s biological son? (Or.. does the entire town not yet know?) He could attend to support the Spencer’s… or just as a member of the community. Yikes.

March 31, 2011 at 10:11 pm

No comments:

Post a Comment