Forums
New posts
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Awards
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
A little forum update...We're planning an upgrade.
Find out more about what's planned and how you can help support the forum
Click here for the details
Forums
Dynasty
The Colbys
Should Zach Powers have been a 'trickster'?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ked" data-source="post: 400105" data-attributes="member: 54"><p>It's been complained about that Zach Powers was set up to be this sinister, dangerous person with a long held grudge against Jason Colby, and yet... he didn't do anything. Aside from half-seducing Sable, Jason's wife, and maybe a few other minor things, but ultimately, he didn't do anything of consequence. And on some level, I can understand why the writers were hesitant to allow Zach to do anything that could really destroy Jason, as having a family patriarch, a "Blake Carrington", was part of the status quo. </p><p></p><p>But *something* should have been done with Zach, so why not just have him be a trickster instead? He's filthy rich with enough time and resources to do whatever the hell he wants, so why not just simply have him be somebody causes general mischief for shits and giggles? That would keep him from doing anything that would upset the status quo, while simultaneously at least giving him something to do. But I don't know, what do you all think?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ked, post: 400105, member: 54"] It's been complained about that Zach Powers was set up to be this sinister, dangerous person with a long held grudge against Jason Colby, and yet... he didn't do anything. Aside from half-seducing Sable, Jason's wife, and maybe a few other minor things, but ultimately, he didn't do anything of consequence. And on some level, I can understand why the writers were hesitant to allow Zach to do anything that could really destroy Jason, as having a family patriarch, a "Blake Carrington", was part of the status quo. But *something* should have been done with Zach, so why not just have him be a trickster instead? He's filthy rich with enough time and resources to do whatever the hell he wants, so why not just simply have him be somebody causes general mischief for shits and giggles? That would keep him from doing anything that would upset the status quo, while simultaneously at least giving him something to do. But I don't know, what do you all think? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
6 + 4 =
Post reply
Forums
Dynasty
The Colbys
Should Zach Powers have been a 'trickster'?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top