Mrs. Beau felton...wow..
Twinkie 66
Alrighty, I just finished watching tonite's episode of H:LotS, and after seeing
these first two eps of season three, its quite obvious that Beth Felton is just
a few fries short of a Happy Meal.
Are we given any reasons for this...mental shortcoming...during the series at
all? Or are we just given this character "as-is"?
OR am I just reading WAY too much into this woman's actions at 2:20 am???
Cuz it just seems that... The wheel is spinning, but the hamster,s dead, ya
know?
jennifer :)
Dave Locke
Twinkie 66 cast forth electrons:
> Alrighty, I just finished watching tonite's episode of H:LotS, and after seeing
> these first two eps of season three, its quite obvious that Beth Felton is just
> a few fries short of a Happy Meal.
> Are we given any reasons for this...mental shortcoming...during the series at
> all? Or are we just given this character "as-is"?
As is. What you see is what you get.
And when she left with the kids, that was the end of Beau Felton being
one of the really interesting characters on this series. It was a
plotting and writing disaster what they did with his character at that
point. I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if that goes far
toward explaining the mystery of why Baldwin left the series. We know
only that Ned Beatty left at the same time because he was unhappy with
the direction the series was headed. I can't help but think the
terrible ending decline of the Beau's Wife&Kids arc must have been on
his short list of examples to point at.
--
Dave | dave...@bigfoot.com | http://www.angelfire.com/oh/slowdjin/
Dutch, Injun, Irish, Limey, Scotch | "Proud to be a mammal"
Lynn
In article <359a5a37....@news.pipeline.com>,
dave...@bigfoot.com (Dave Locke) wrote:
>[snip]
>And when she left with the kids, that was the end of Beau Felton being
>one of the really interesting characters on this series. It was a
>plotting and writing disaster what they did with his character at that
>point. I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if that goes far
>toward explaining the mystery of why Baldwin left the series. [snip]
You don't think, maybe, John Seda would make the same decision, only sooner,
wouldja? Huh? Maybe? Perhaps?!?!
Lynn
In a fantasy haze at 1:14am.
CWagg72971
>
>Alrighty, I just finished watching tonite's episode of H:LotS, and after
>seeing
>these first two eps of season three, its quite obvious that Beth Felton is
>just
>a few fries short of a Happy Meal.
Well she was married to Beau Felton. Next question.
WAGGER
delta...@hotmail.com
> Twinkie 66 cast forth electrons:
> its quite obvious that Beth Felton is just
> > a few fries short of a Happy Meal.
Then Dave said:
> And when she left with the kids, that was the end of Beau Felton being
> one of the really interesting characters on this series. It was a
> plotting and writing disaster what they did with his character at that
> point. I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if that goes far
> toward explaining the mystery of why Baldwin left the series.
>
RC Freya says:
The whole story line was absolutely terrible. First of all, they clumsily
bring in Isabella Hoffmann (Russert) as Felton's short-lived love interest.
What the hell would a woman like Russert be doing with a loser like Felton?
We're never given any explanation for how/why their affair started, only
that Russert ends it quickly-perhaps out of guilt, perhaps for the
writer's convenience. I think it really short changed Russert's character
development, and started her off in a rather stereotypical role.
Believe it or not, I actually liked Felton in seasons 1 and 2 - I really
liked the way he interacts with Howard. He's sort of a protective big
brother, but not in an overbearing way. Kay and Beau were always equals,
even though she was a better detective than he was. Too bad they turned
Felton into such a loser. He didn't have to turn out that way. His decline
is remarkably similar to Kellerman's in season 5, but that's a whole
different essay topic for another day.
RC Freya
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
schlock
Dave Locke wrote:
> Twinkie 66 cast forth electrons:
> > a few fries short of a Happy Meal.
> > all? Or are we just given this character "as-is"?
>
> As is. What you see is what you get.
>
> one of the really interesting characters on this series. It was a
> plotting and writing disaster what they did with his character at that
> point.
FWIW, I find it hard to fault season three given that's where I really
started watching the show. But with the benefit of experience with
seasons one and two, looking back it was kind of terrifying where that
arc was trying to go. Instead of Beau being the neglectful husband and
father (a real character, no prettifying about it), suddenly PsychoBitch
comes in out of left field to make Beau the victim instead of the
perpetrator. Sigh...
However, that arc does not come close to the Falsone emote-fest that's
going on in Our Show as it is today. Sigh.
schlock
--
"I've got a ferret sticking up my nose." --John Cleese
http://www.stanford.edu/~schlock
Bruce Mills
>What the hell would a woman like Russert be doing with a loser like Felton?
Beautiful, intelligent women need a reason to be with a loser? What rock
have you been living under?
Bruce
"You poor schmucks"
-Naomi on H:LotS
delta...@hotmail.com
In article <6mq1m9$7...@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>,
mil...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (Bruce Mills) wrote:
>
> In article <6motf2$a2s$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <delta...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>
> >What the hell would a woman like Russert be doing with a loser like Felton?
>
> Beautiful, intelligent women need a reason to be with a loser? What rock
> have you been living under?
>
and Russert was never really explained-it was just there. You were just
supposed to accept it, whether it was realistic or not. The scenes
between them always looked forced to me. I didn't think it was credible
to have them involved in an affair.
Lynn
In article <6mr03d$bhg$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
delta...@hotmail.com wrote:
>In article <6mq1m9$7...@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>,
> mil...@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (Bruce Mills) wrote:
>>
>>[snip]>>
>>Beautiful, intelligent women need a reason to be with a loser? What rock
>>have you been living under?
>>
>That wasn't my point. My point was that the relationship between Felton
>and Russert was never really explained-it was just there. You were just
>supposed to accept it, whether it was realistic or not. The scenes
>between them always looked forced to me. I didn't think it was credible
>to have them involved in an affair.
>
They say real-life couples don't make good movie pairings. There's no
sexual tention because they know each other too well. Personally, I don't
ever remember having a problem with the Felton/Russert pairing. It was
the, "Ohhhhhhhhh, where're my kiiiids!" wailing that I couldn't deal with.
Lynn
Bruce Mills
>That wasn't my point. My point was that the relationship between Felton
>and Russert was never really explained-it was just there. You were just
>supposed to accept it, whether it was realistic or not. The scenes
>between them always looked forced to me. I didn't think it was credible
>to have them involved in an affair.
Sorry, my knee-jerk-bitter-nice-guy reaction got the better of me...
Todd
On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 15:52:13 GMT, Lynn <en...@ix.netcom.com> thus
spake:
>They say real-life couples don't make good movie pairings. There's no
>sexual tention because they know each other too well. Personally, I don't
>ever remember having a problem with the Felton/Russert pairing. It was
>the, "Ohhhhhhhhh, where're my kiiiids!" wailing that I couldn't deal with.
>
>Lynn
I don't know about that. I thought Beatty and Bening did a credible
job in Bugsy.
Todd
(who knew the man who killed the real Bugsy Siegel)
Matt Stevens
>They say real-life couples don't make good movie pairings. There's no
>sexual tention because they know each other too well.
They don't? And what about Bogart and Bacall ... ?
Matt
Lynn
I said,
>>They say real-life couples don't make good movie pairings. There's no
>>sexual tention because they know each other too well.
>
"Matt Stevens" <mf...@columbia.edu> wrote:
>They don't? And what about Bogart and Bacall ... ?
>
Ok. Tracy and Hepburn, too. I've read that and heard that a lot, but maybe
they (reviewers) just say it when a couple doesn't work out.
Lynn
Virginia Brown
I always thought Beth Felton was a crazy bitch.
I can see why Daniel Baldwin would leave, him being unhappy and all with
the writing of his character going no where thus damaging his successful
career.
--
--
Virginia Brown
"Sometimes being a bitch is all a women has left to hold on to."
-Dolores Clairborne
"Thangs just be's that way sometimes."
-Det. Meldrick Lewis
TVFan87656
>That wasn't my point. My point was that the relationship between Felton
>and Russert was never really explained-it was just there. You were just
>supposed to accept it, whether it was realistic or not. The scenes
>between them always looked forced to me. I didn't think it was credible
>to have them involved in an affair.
I was waiting for an explanation, maybe that they had been lovers for a time
before Megan got the job as lieutenant. I thought it was implied they may have
been involved for a while, but it was never explained. Instead he kisses her
and suddenly they are doomed lovers. It undermined the character of Megan, I
preferred her as the lieutentant instead of the other woman.
Why did Homicide get rid of Megan? From most of the new characters that have
joined the show since the beginning, I can't think of any that have lasted more
then two or three seasons. I can understand why with Kellerman (ruined by Cox,
and the arson investigation), and Brodie (entertaining when I started watching
the reruns, irritating by the time he left in season 5). I started watching
when Megan was out the door, or practically out the door, and I liked her then
too. There weren't any signs of character decay, her partnership with Munch was
interesting. Nothing had changed when she came back at the end of season 5, I
wish they'd kept her.
Dave Locke
TVFan87656 cast forth electrons:
> Why did Homicide get rid of Megan? From most of the new characters that have
> joined the show since the beginning, I can't think of any that have lasted more
> then two or three seasons. I can understand why with Kellerman (ruined by Cox,
> and the arson investigation), and Brodie (entertaining when I started watching
> the reruns, irritating by the time he left in season 5). I started watching
> when Megan was out the door, or practically out the door, and I liked her then
> too. There weren't any signs of character decay, her partnership with Munch was
> interesting. Nothing had changed when she came back at the end of season 5, I
> wish they'd kept her.
They wanted to, and she was interested, but the best that could be
arranged was to bring her back for the two-part 5th season finale.
Hoffman and Baldwin had serious complications with their new baby, and
that's why she disappeared off the show until then. Problems with
trying to set up a part-time schedule for her just didn't allow it to
work out.
Lionors17
Dave Locke explains:
>Hoffman and Baldwin had serious complications with their new baby, and
>that's why she disappeared off the show until then.
I had heard that there was a problem. Any updates on the child? I hope
everything is under control.
Lionors
TVFan87656
>They wanted to, and she was interested, but the best that could be
>arranged was to bring her back for the two-part 5th season finale.
>trying to set up a part-time schedule for her just didn't allow it to
>work out.
Thanks for explaining. I didn't know about the problems with her baby, now I
can see why she left.