- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This is another reason as to why the recasting of Holly & Tate shouldn’t have happened, much less the writers writing the story to have Puzemis & Mann to tape & that’s this: It doesn’t matter that Holly & Tate didn’t light up the joint, what matters is that Holly’s father died in an alcohol-induced car accident that Eric had caused & that it’s known that Brady had gotten Daniel’s heart, Brady is a reformed alcoholic, so you tell me was it needed for Puzemis’ Holly to pull out that joint much less Mann’s Tate was willing to toke it with her?
I think they’re just trying to establish that both of these characters are going through a rebellious stage. It may have been worse if she had pulled out a bottle of booze.
It doesn’t matter that they are focusing on their rebellious stage or not, & yes, it would be worse if she had pulled out a bottle of booze, but what I’m getting at is that these characters are not needed at all, PERIOD. The reason is because of the stories that aren’t being focused on because of them? What about the stories that the viewers want to see, do you really think that with what Colin & Talia had done to Chanel, do we really need to see what Holly plans to do Chanel to get into Johnny’s pants? Much less, Tate for that matter, meaning, that he thinks that it’s abhorrent to pay for what he did in California. Then this: it’s like watching wallpaper paste, yes, I know that we, the viewers have the option to not to watch, but what I’m getting at is that they are putting into play to have the viewers to make that decision, why would they do that?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.