|
|
Post by fourbeccaone on Feb 23, 2003 12:02:45 GMT -5
I have been overwhelmed in the last month concerning all the varying attitudes and opinions about Lulu the character and Wendy Moniz the actor who portrays Lulu.
On SimonBakeronline at Yahoo, a very torid discussion took place that ended up with some mean and uncalled for name calling which I viewed as quite childish. I, therefore chose not to get involved. I do believe each individual has the right to defend their position whether for or against the Lulu character and how WM portrays it, or how she is directed to portray it. But, I do believe other members with varying opinions need to show respect. Therefore a good, healthy debate can ensue. I'm sure there were some great opinions lost those few days because of the mean spiritedness of one member.
Yesterday, under iconic's icon "guestbook," there was a new discussion concerning Lulu with several comments made concerning Nick and Lulu being completely wrong for each other. It also memtioned that Nick and Kim were a better match. There was no chemistry between Nick and Lulu, as there was with Kim.
I'd like to start a new discussion on "this" board to view opinions concerning these two couples. Any courageous thoughts--for or against are welcomed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gloria on Feb 23, 2003 20:43:48 GMT -5
Hi! Let me start by saying that I like the Nick and LuLu dynamic. I think the actors, Baker and Moniz intereact well in every scene they have, small or large scene. I have no probem with constructive criticism done in moderation. I also respect other people's opinion. What bothers me though is the repetitive bashing of the actress, a real person done sometimes in a mean spirited way. There is just so much that you can take if the content of the posts is about bashing the character of LuLu and WM being done over and over again. It was intimidating and so I just lurk most of the time. It is sort of a turn off for me. People sometime complain about so many things and the only solution that I can think of is perhaps take a break from the show or don't watch rather than be miserable. I personally think that Wendy Moniz is a capable actress and the character of LuLu though there was some inconsistencies in the writing at first, is a likable character, IMO. I like her more and more each episode. Of course, anyone can disagree with me and that is okay. As for Kim, I see no chemistry between her and Nick. I was bored with their interactions, be it in bed or not. I am pleased that they are not really a couple as Nick obviously cares about LuLu . JMHO.  |
|
|
|
Post by lambertoise on Feb 23, 2003 21:10:21 GMT -5
I am very happy tonight with finally a reaction to all this LuLu bashing going on on Simonbakeronline. I can't understand these sometimes hateful comments. I started watching the show, by accident last year, the night In loco parentis aired for the first time. I was hooked with these beautiful scenes between LuLu and Nick. I think her character is a good match for Nick : if he keeps his emotions very tightly inside himself, she is, on the opposite, an ambulatory emotion! She was perfect, if we believe her mother, in everything she tried : studies, sports, etc. Like many overachievers, she can read books but can't read people, including herself. So, after marrying Brian, she could not admit the mistake even if she felt she had made a huge one. And Nick opened up a little bit with her, telling her he cared a lot and it shows also in his relationship with his father. Nick probably guessed earlier this year what she just discovered when she looked at his family pictures : she would come to him, sooner or later, so he could wait, with Kim or without a Kim. LuLu and Nick are so perfect together, the actors and the characters. That is why I'm so worried with these two episodes and I hope the LuLu bashing did not convince the writers to write her off. And even when the show is not perfect, it is always one of the best on tv, a story where the colors are subtle and the meanings not always obvious at first look.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hales on Feb 24, 2003 0:01:04 GMT -5
Cool a thread where we can not argue about Lulu... :excited: You know my opinion about characters in any show is that I adore all the main characters... they are different and they have their good moments and their bad, but I just can't hate/or dislike them. Lulu isn't a problem for me, except when she's with the Goose, I mean Brian (oops I typed 'Brain' :nyah:) as she drives Nick crazy... and i'm not sure if thats good or bad. Anyway that's my two cents for now... unless I think of something else |
|
Jeannie
Junior Associate
"It's not the having it's the getting" Garfield swinging a mouse by the tail
Posts: 19
|
Post by Jeannie on Feb 24, 2003 10:31:25 GMT -5
Hi everyone. I am a novice at this so I apologize now for any mistakes in posting.
I posted as GloriaII on Simonsphere but it gets confusing, hence the new name. I liked what you had to say Gloria and I would concur. I think both matchs had chemistry, they were just very different. It is very obvious that Nick is totally besotted with LuLu
. I don't serously dislike LuLu
and certainly don't attribute any of my ambivalence to the character to Wendy Moniz's acting ability. I love the show and tend to follow where it leads, it is their show after all. I don't enjoy what happens at Simonon line either and have actually stopped reading a lot of the posts. Everyone is entitled to their opinion without being belittled. One of the reasons for reading these boards is to get another outlook.
My first response to Kim was "yuk" but her character grew on me over time. I think she would challenge Nick and keep him on his toes. I really felt for her when Nick stood her up but I thought at the time, and I still do, that it was a deliberate set-up to end the relationship. I thought the scene in the elevator between the two of them showed Nick's disgust with Kim over her gossiping about LuLu
and that was his solution. I expected him to end it from that point on but I wasn't prepared for the brutal way he did it. I could see possibilites there if they had taken this in a different direction. The two couples in juxtoposition and conflict, Nick settling for Kim because he couldn't have LuLu
but trying to make the best of it etc.
I didn't pick up this show until reruns in the summer and missed a lot of those so I feel I don't have the full background on the characters, which is why I couldn't grasp LuLu
for a while. I haven't seen "In Loco Parentis" for example. I put myself in her shoes to try and understand her. Logically speaking, who would throw away a long-term relationship on the whim of an attraction to someone on probation for a drug offense and who clearly has many issues to sort out? She has had time to get to know Nick and see the integrity of the person not just the mess-ups in his life. She has also been completely disillusioned by Brian. I see her now as acting on impulse in response to the breakup of her marriage, what has she got to lose? Just my opinion of course, and a rushed one as I have to get to work. I also wonder about the age of the audience and if that affects how people react to these characters.
BTW, my daughter is a total LuLu
fan and wanted me to let everyone know that.
Either way I think the show is fantastic and I hope it continues.
|
|
skater
Senior Associate
Posts: 44
|
Post by skater on Feb 24, 2003 18:42:07 GMT -5
Unfortunately there are only a handful of LuLu
bashers over at Yahoo who ruin the board for those who want to participate in healthy debate. What makes the situation laughable is that I'm sure they are all adults who really should know better. Every once and awhile a voice of reason rears its head and calmer waters prevail... until a new episode. Go figure. I say, enjoy TG while it lasts. Who know how long that will be!
|
|
|
|
Post by bakergirl on Feb 24, 2003 19:14:35 GMT -5
Okay, so here's my take on this, if it pleases anyone.  First to say is that "The Guardian" is a great show and I love it! Simon Baker is a very gifted actor, and he and Dabney Coleman are my most favorite ones on the show. I think that all the actors on the show, playing these different characters, are all great and excellent! And that's exactly that! -- Actors! We really don't know them personally, and therefore can only judge them by the characters they portray. Having said that, I never liked Kim, (the character, that is, and from now on I only talk about the characters they play -- not the actors themselves!) but I do like LuLu, most of the time, and many of the scenes between her and Nick are clearly magic. I did not read the postings at "SimonBakerOnline" @yahoo, but did so at "Simonsphere" about Kim/Nick and LuLu/Nick. My biggest beef has always been about the fact that the show should not become a soap opera. I don't like Kim (as said before) and I don't think she and Nick had ever anything between them but sex! I do like LuLu, however, except for the times when she is so pathetic and should for once make-up her mind, because she is clearly torturing the man! The fact that Kim & Nick had (so called) more fun together and that Kim had more spunk, is not to say LuLu does not. LuLu is a good match for Nick (and he really loves her...but does she love him?) and of course she could be spunky too, I think,when given the chance! And what about the fun -- we don't know that, do we, because he has not been in her bed,.....not yet!  I love the guardian to be "the Guardian"; the way Nick Fallin moves along and interacts with his Father, the F&F firm, LSOP and the children -- don't forget the children. Simon Baker is such a wonderful actor that the show could easily be crafted all around the life of Nick Fallin: the man and lawyer!  |
|
Jeannie
Junior Associate
"It's not the having it's the getting" Garfield swinging a mouse by the tail
Posts: 19
|
Post by Jeannie on Feb 25, 2003 14:54:20 GMT -5
You are so right Bakergirl. It seems LuLu was letting go in the last episode with the promise of a whole new dimension in the Nick/LuLu relationship. We haven't really seen that side of her yet as we have with Kim. Nick's treatment of Kim really underscores how much he loves Lulu, he is so tolerant and protective of her.
I also appreciate all the characters on the show and especially the father-son interactions, they are my favourite. I like how Nick is looking out for Dad and not just the other way around.
I think Jake always adds so much so the show when he is on, he can be slimey but very funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by iconicsoup on Feb 26, 2003 6:38:17 GMT -5
On SimonBakeronline at Yahoo, a very torid discussion took place that ended up with some mean and uncalled for name calling which I viewed as quite childish. I, therefore chose not to get involved. We all say things we regret.  I have turned over a new leaf - no, two leaves. Firstly, I just used a smiley and it was a painful experience, believe me. But it's progress, right? Secondly, for about 3 weeks now I have not been responding to posts by my partner in crime so that particular kind of discussion won't escalate. (Yes, my partner! - we did it on purpose to drive you all away as part of our cunning secret plan to turn simonbakeronline into Jake'n'LaurieForever.) To comment on a post further down, while it's true that actors are real people, don't forget that David Hollander is, too. When we criticise a storyline, a character, a relationship, a plot twist, or anything else, we're criticising *his* skill and judgment (particularly when the words "soap opera" are uttered!). Writers have feelings, too. Or so I've heard. I haven't seen too many people suggesting that we should stop doing that for the sake of DH's feelings. Artists put themselves out there for criticism - and they are fully aware of that. Art isn't meant to just sit there. It exists to be interpreted. I'm hanging out for a Jake'n'Laurie couch scene in MY AIM IS TRUE, a sweet fumbling kiss the ep after that, and cohabitation by the season finale. JLF roolz. |
|
Jeannie
Junior Associate
"It's not the having it's the getting" Garfield swinging a mouse by the tail
Posts: 19
|
Post by Jeannie on Feb 26, 2003 11:12:38 GMT -5
Well said Iconic. I have noticed your restraint and fully appreciated that you have chosen not to engage, and I am sure many others have as well. I do so enjoy your posts wherever they may be. They are well-written, intelligent with a caustic wit and irreverance that brightens my day. Your kind of like my favourite columnist in a newspaper or magazine, the one you read first before going to the rest. I may not always agree with your point of view, although frequently I do, but I sure enjoy the way you present it.
It is interesting that critcism of Lulu generates such controversy when all the characters on the show are flawed and often flayed for their actions by the fans. You make a good point about criticism of the show. My guess is DH and company are probably much happier with the high level of interest and commitment reflected in these kinds of exchanges than they would be if no one was interested enough to even start discussion forums, sites etc. in response to their show.
|
|
|
|
Post by iconicsoup on Feb 26, 2003 17:25:48 GMT -5
My guess is DH and company are probably much happier with the high level of interest and commitment reflected in these kinds of exchanges than they would be if no one was interested enough to even start discussion forums, sites etc. in response to their show. Thanks Jeannie, and you're absolutely right - it's an artist's worst fear that no one talks about them at all. With LuLu's increased screentime lately, and now her life hanging in the balance, it's only natural that a lot of discussion centres around her, her role in the show, the pros and cons of her recovery/non-recovery, and Nick's feelings for her. Earlier this season, and last year, there was a lot of talk about Nick and Burton, and Nick and LSP, because those things seemed to be having the most influence in Nick's life. I think over the last few episodes the focus in Nick's life has shifted and so has the discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by bakergirl on Feb 26, 2003 19:10:09 GMT -5
To comment on a post further down, while it's true that actors are real people, don't forget that David Hollander is, too. When we criticise a storyline, a character, a relationship, a plot twist, or anything else, we're criticising *his* skill and judgment (particularly when the words "soap opera" are uttered!). Writers have feelings, too. Or so I've heard. I haven't seen too many people suggesting that we should stop doing that for the sake of DH's feelings. Dear iconic, I think you're clever and witty - and have a sharp eye and ear - as is shown many times in your own reviews of "The Guardian" at your web-site. :beer: Your *soap opera* take makes me raise an eye though, :eye: as I believe that writers are different than actors, even though they're all considerated *artists*. Actors portray and play-out characters being scripted on paper by their creators (writers), and they can do that (acting) either good or bad, but the story written down remains the same. They can not change the course of a plot without the writers' permission. Writers can create stories and characters according to their own belief and vision. They can write and re-write, and have the freedom to make a story gripping and realistic or cheesy and *soapie*! David Hollander has many good visions and qualities, and has proven so in previous episodes of "The Guardian". I do believe he's a great artist and creator of storytelling. "The Guardian" is an exceptional show with all wonderful actors, good storylines and heartbreaking episodes. Therefore; David Hollander doesn't need to go the "daytime soap" road to keep his audience fixed and fascinated, -- he's got them already! |
|
|
|
Post by iconicsoup on Feb 26, 2003 19:38:01 GMT -5
Your *soap opera* take makes me raise an eye though,  as I believe that writers are different than actors, even though they're all considerated *artists*. Hi bakergirl - I think you may have misunderstood what I said, because I don't understand your reply. But to clarify my comment: "...criticising *his* skill and judgment (particularly when the words "soap opera" are uttered!)" - I just meant that when viewers call this show, which is supposed to be a primetime drama, a "soap opera", I think Hollander would take that as an insult to his skill and judgment (if he's the kind of man who was easily offended). Just as calling a primetime TV actor's performance "soap-like" may well offend him. I take your point, though, that writers (esp. DH since he's exec producer) have a different kind of control over the show overall than do actors. |
|
|
|
Post by bakergirl on Feb 26, 2003 20:23:54 GMT -5
Writers can create stories and characters according to their own belief and vision. They can write and re-write, and have the freedom to make a story *soapie*! Hi iconic: What I meant; he has walked that road before, in my honest opinion! Whether it's called soap or drama, the meaning is the same if the drama is of *soapie* caliber, and I wouldn't want him to go there! That's what I meant !!... and if he does, that's when he puts himself out for critisism, also - writer or not!  |
|
|
|
Post by Guess who on Feb 27, 2003 9:46:49 GMT -5
NO! NO! NO!
Alvin'n'Burton. ALVIN'N'BURTON!
Much more interesting and eminently more watchable.
Now that would really be a Burton/Alvin 'dilemma' for Nick.
Nick'n'Laurie could even go on a nice little bender together and re-introduce some 'edge' to the show.
|
|
I have turned over a new leaf - no, two leaves. Firstly, I just used a smiley and it was a painful experience, believe me. But it's progress, right? Secondly, for about 3 weeks now I have not been responding to posts by my partner in crime so that particular kind of discussion won't escalate. (Yes, my partner! - we did it on purpose to drive you all away as part of our cunning secret plan to turn simonbakeronline into Jake'n'LaurieForever.)