From: vickie@carina.unm.edu (Victoria Hamilton)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv.soaps
Subject: Re: DOOL -- The Jack Discussion
Date: 21 Jan 1993 23:29:27 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: carina.unm.edu


 
TimTom the Timinator responds fervently:
 
In article <1jmlmlINN2n1@lynx.unm.edu> vickie@carina.unm.edu (Victoria Hamilton) writes:
 
Ooooh.  A wild response.  I like it.
 
> >First, I think Matt Ashford is one of the finest actors on this show.  His
> >only real competition comes from Peggy McKay.  Secondly, I do not think
> 
> Then don't you mean to say that he is THE finest actor on the show?   If
> not, I'll go along with "one of the finest" and we'll have nothing to 
> argue about.
 
Oh Tim.  Unlike Spud, I use the term "actor" in a completely non-sexist way.
Peggy McKay is an actor in my mind as is Matt Ashford.  I am not a computer
scientress.  I am a computer scientist.  See?
 
> I think that Melissa Reeves hit her stride with Jack, but I also think 
> that she could be good w/out him at this point.    Three years ago I
> wouldn't have said this.
 
I disagree, but you aren't surprised are you?
 
> >Jack is a great character and different from the standard bad guys on
> >this show in that he is not bad on a grandious level.  He doesn't murder
> >people, but he is slimy.  Matt is probably one of the few actors on this
> >show who can show such fine degrees of character.  I remember back when
> >Cal first came to the show.  Jack was a scumwad.  I HATED him like I never
> 
> Well, I for one understand everything you are saying here.  You seem to
> think that "we people" that are not as enchanted with Jack as you are
> must be in the dark.   We get it, believe me.   Now let's move on.
 
There is nothing in this particular paragraph that implies that I think this.
Of course, that doesn't mean I don't think that. ;)
 
> Okay, that's fine because you said "in my book".   For me, two of those
> four actors you mentioned HAVE proved themselves.   Staci and Crystal
> were both excellent throughout the cancer storyline, and I think Crystal
> has had several excellent scenes since then too.   I'm not saying that
 
I disagree whole-heartedly here.  Staci was OK in a few of the cancer
scenes but she got worse towards the end.  I have yet to see Crystal do
anything I thought was any better than mediocre.  She is better than Billie
or Icky, but not much.
 
> either one is a great actress and I still blame them largely for the
> weaknesses of their characters.     Okay, so maybe they are "uneven".  
> Hasn't that always been your favourite way to describe Drake???    [I
> know that *now* you would say that he is consistently good, and I'd
> have to agree.]
 
He is good much more often than either one of the other two are and lately
he's been terrific (perhaps because he doesn't have to play off a pathetic
actor anymore).
 
> >wife.  And their dear friend Jennifer, in true tabloid television (didn't
> >she scream at Jack for turning the Spectator into a tabloid) style, raked
> 
> Jenn doesn't approve of the tabloid stuff...   she felt she was forced
> into it.   
 
Oh, now I understand.  Jack's reason - saving the Spectator - wasn't good
enough, but Jenn's was.  This argument holds no water, TimTom.  There
is no difference.  She did it, but she didn't want him too and nagged
him about endlessly.
 
> >them over the coals and didn't even bother to apologize.  She felt
> 
> She did so!!!  Right after the show off to the side of the set.   Just
> cos the words "I'm sorry" didn't come out doesn't mean that it wasn't
> an apology.
 
Wreck their lives and then one I'm sorry is OK.  She was ecstatic about
the response to the show.  Just how sorry does that actually make her?
 
> >it and then that was that.  So guys, where are your complaints about
> >Jennifer's lack of integrity or the way she treats her friends?  My
> >feed must be slow or something because I haven't seen one damn post
> >on the topic.
> 
> Give me a break.   Not everything that happens on the show gets 
> commented on here.   And I apparently don't consider it the big deal
> that you do.   So, if you're going to throw your sarcasm all over the
> place, throw it at the Jack-lovers that *do* think of this as some-
> thing significant.
 
If you recall, this all started when someone went on and on about Jack
not being honest or having integrity or whatever.  Treating D&D like this
is major and it does prove that our little Jennifer is no better than
Jack.
 
> >When I got a call from the GrapeNut this weekend, we discussed this latest
> 
> Ahhhh, now this is all starting to come into focus.  :-)
 
NOT Tim and you know it.  Remember how wrong you were last time you
assumed I wasn't thinking for myself.
 
>net.discussion.  I pointed out to her that there were some interesting
> >opinions on the opposite side in general.  For instance:
>  ^^^^^^^^
> 
> Oh Vickie, come on.   Don't euphemize.   We all know that you want
> to say "questionable opinions" or "unfounded opinions".   
 
No, I meant what I said.  I meant interesting.  Just because I totally
disagree does not mean that I think something is "questionable" or
"unfounded".  I'll let you know when I need you to translate for me.
 
For instance, Susan Hagan comes across as intelligent.  I find it interesting
that she likes that movie.  I don't understand why, but it is interesting.
 
> First of all, as Vickie knows, I totally agree with her about 9 1/2 Weeks.
> But I do think that she is going too far in concluding that one must have
> no taste to like such a film.   No one is saying that it is high art.   And
> don't we all have a "guilty pleasure"-- a trashy movie or a goofy, sugary
> song?   I think that if you look hard enough you'll find that even those
> that agree with you about Jack will also like some things that you detest.
 
See above.  I believe that I am saying that I don't have a clue how
she can stand this movie.  Therefore it is not surprising that I don't
agree with her about Jack.  I did not say that she had no taste.
 
> Hence I have no idea what I am talking about.   Yet when I pound on Bo,
 
No, hence it is no surprise that we disagree on other things.
 
> I am right.   When I used to flame Isabella, I was right.   When I
 
You are not right or wrong.  Opinions are not facts and people who
disagree vehemently on some things might be expected to disagree vehemently
on others.
 
> I wish there was a shred of logic in your post so I'd have something
> to sink my teeth into, but alas, there is not.
 
Well, perhaps there is a shred of logic and you have read things into
my post that aren't there.
 
> You can like Jack's character for doing despicable things but nobody
> can like Carly's for the same reason?   I know that she hasn't been
> portrayed as being despicable, but for me it is that flaw and her
> chemistry with Lawrence that has made me like her.
 
I bet if you ask Ann she will say that she doesn't like Carly because
she's despicable.  I bet she admires Carly.  Your argument is flawed.
 
> "These people", eh?   Well, I've got news for you.   There are people
> out there that like Jack AND ALSO hold the opinions you've attacked
> here.  Believe it.
 
I know and I hope I stirred up a whole hornets' nest. ;) What I really
am trying to say is that I am not surprised we disagree over Jack considering
the above list of things we already disagree over.  It doesn't surprise
me if we agree.  There isn't necessarily a relationship between agreeing
on one issue and disagreeing on another.
 
> >We'll chalk Rose's delusions up to being sick lately.  I too am a diehard
> >Nick fan.
> 
> Get her, Rose!  
 
Heh, heh.  No way.  She's down and out.  No competition from her.
 
Vickie