Episode 8 (HTD's) - 7/18 - Bachelorette 9 - Discussion - Spoilers

I think all these men are nice men on the whole. None are my type but I am not the Bach'ette so who gives a whoop what my type is.  Hopefully one of them will be right for Des and it will work. If not, I am sure most of us will be here for the next go around.

Sprite wrote:I don't see Brooks as being a great Bachelor...he is too indicisive for that, but he is also kind of bland...like Des. A big  on that. I don't mind him or have anything against him, but I am not drawn to him either. He is inoffensive to me and a little too soft for me. It's hard to explain what I mean by soft...not exactly metrosexual like Drew with the hair and I don't think he is gay or anything, just his voice, his mannerisms etc., don't seem to have that certain strength that I like in a male lead. I would have a problem with Drew or Chris for the same reason.

Brooks bland? Somehow I don't think he'd be bland. He'd have girls drooling and tearing each other's eyes out for him, though. I have no doubt they'd get vicious because Desiree is vicious over him. I'd be vicious over him.  And I think it'd be a pretty dramatic season. I don't know if Brooks would like it, though, or if he'd find all those women and tears exhausting. Despite kind of looking like a player, I don't think he is one and I think you kind of have to be on this show. He tends to be more of a listener, a person who likes to step back and let others in front, who does a lot of deep thinking. But, he's a good sport, spontaneous, fun, adventurous and everyone thinks he's funny and witty.  Don't you remember his funniness? (Before they decided to make him serious all the time, except when he's with Des?) I think he might be a hoot. He wore that red headband with flair and killed the Mr. America competition.  

And he just has those looks that drive a lot of women wild. Masculine side/feminine side good looks. Chiseled, scruffy, pretty, rugged, and an oddly elegant dresser. The perfect romantic figure without the beefy, bulky muscles. But at least he has broad shoulder, nice, long legs and long, slender man hands, unlike some others *looks at James*.

It's those soft qualities in him I find so irresistible. His voice is sexy. His brother has the same type of voice as Brooks, so it's not like it's an anomaly just in him in his family. I love the way he says Desiree's name—and I think she must, too. She turns into a puddle. He just has a real sexiness about him. Not brawniness. I love the way he holds himself, too. Shoulders back, neck, head straight, upper lip stiff. It's so regal. You can even see it in those pics of him with his girlfriend in Costa Rica.

He's all man where it counts. The rest is just an overlay that makes you go :Drool: . He's like an Aston Martin, my favorite car. Aston Martins are described as the perfect blend of masculine and feminine features. That's what makes Aston Martins such beautiful cars.

ImeldaMarcos wrote:

nutty1 wrote:I have seen a better close up picture of the bottom one and it does resemble some Neil Lane rings. Someone (maybe Kasha??) posted them earlier today.

It resembles his less expensive line for Kay Jewelers. I does NOT resemble his normal creations for this show. TPTB may be cutting back $$$ because that stone is MUCH smaller than the usual.

I doubt TPTB picks up the tab for the rings. It's Neil's way to advertise twice a year. Cheaper than regular commercials in expensive time slots.

BarbB222 wrote:

ImeldaMarcos wrote:

nutty1 wrote:I have seen a better close up picture of the bottom one and it does resemble some Neil Lane rings. Someone (maybe Kasha??) posted them earlier today.

It resembles his less expensive line for Kay Jewelers. I does NOT resemble his normal creations for this show. TPTB may be cutting back $$$ because that stone is MUCH smaller than the usual.

I doubt TPTB picks up the tab for the rings. It's Neil's way to advertise twice a year. Cheaper than regular commercials in expensive time slots.

Even cheaper yet .. Seeing as they get most of them back :bigsmile: 

BarbB222 wrote:

ImeldaMarcos wrote:

nutty1 wrote:I have seen a better close up picture of the bottom one and it does resemble some Neil Lane rings. Someone (maybe Kasha??) posted them earlier today.

It resembles his less expensive line for Kay Jewelers. I does NOT resemble his normal creations for this show. TPTB may be cutting back $$$ because that stone is MUCH smaller than the usual.

I doubt TPTB picks up the tab for the rings. It's Neil's way to advertise twice a year. Cheaper than regular commercials in expensive time slots.

So the thinking is there is no compensation whatsoever except for promotional? I think I heard one ring was 75k. That is mighty expensive ad time. You could very well be correct though...I am sure TPTB are cheap and anything they can get free would be a bonus.

TBTB are not paying for the rings--Neil Lane provides them.

Kashathediva wrote:TBTB are not paying for the rings--Neil Lane provides them.

So Kasha, when the couple breaks up and the ring goes back...does Neil just polish it back up and sell it? Weird. Maybe eBay.

TBTB are not paying for the rings--Neil Lane provides them.

ImeldaMarcos wrote:

Kashathediva wrote:TBTB are not paying for the rings--Neil Lane provides them.

So Kasha, when the couple breaks up and the ring goes back...does Neil just polish it back up and sell it? Weird. Maybe eBay.

That's why some friends and I used to dub them....Boomerings. They always find their way back to Neil. Regarding the cost...it's retail value is 75k or up. We know jewelry is marked up about 200% or so. So his cost is not as expensive and again he can advertise and write off costs.

BarbB222 wrote:

ImeldaMarcos wrote:

Kashathediva wrote:TBTB are not paying for the rings--Neil Lane provides them.

So Kasha, when the couple breaks up and the ring goes back...does Neil just polish it back up and sell it? Weird. Maybe eBay.

That's why some friends and I used to dub them....Boomerings. They always find their way back to Neil. Regarding the cost...it's retail value is 75k or up. We know jewelry is marked up about 200% or so. So his cost is not as expensive and again he can advertise and write off costs.

Exactly--plus he probably pops the solitaire out of the setting, places it in the vault and leaves the setting in the showcase. It really is no biggie.

Going back a few, I caught the question, is Des good enough for Brooks?  Truth is, we don't really know either one of them, so who knows if either is good enough for the other.

But, you know, I have an issue (general life, not specific to the poster who used the word) with the concept of good enough.  Absolutely no way would I consider family background to be part of any "good enough" equation.  Des is very self-made, she hasn't had any financial support, and that most likely will have shaped in many positive ways and given her a maturity few men her age can match.  She isn't her brother, nor is she her parents - who seem to be super loving, good and solid people, just not super successful.  What the heck is "good enough" anyway?  There is no good enough, just how well people treat each other, and how compatible they are.  We all deserve to be considered based on who we are, not who our relations are, and not what our pasts look like.  Character goes so far deeper than any of those things can tell us.  Who will participate in an illegal insider trading scheme?  Who will be an alcoholic?  Those both happen to seeming model citizens.  "Good" can be an illusion.

Brooks - the one thing that concerns me is his doubts about his feelings for Des. He has every right to that, and it is healthy given the situation, but the history with this show is that when the lead pursues someone who is rather reluctant, it never works out. I'd really like to see a relationship work out.

dw_a_mom wrote:Going back a few, I caught the question, is Des good enough for Brooks?  Truth is, we don't really know either one of them, so who knows if either is good enough for the other.

But, you know, I have an issue (general life, not specific to the poster who used the word) with the concept of good enough.  Absolutely no way would I consider family background to be part of any "good enough" equation.  Des is very self-made, she hasn't had any financial support, and that most likely will have shaped in many positive ways and given her a maturity few men her age can match.  She isn't her brother, nor is she her parents - who seem to be super loving, good and solid people, just not super successful.  What the heck is "good enough" anyway?  There is no good enough, just how well people treat each other, and how compatible they are.  We all deserve to be considered based on who we are, not who our relations are, and not what our pasts look like.  Character goes so far deeper than any of those things can tell us.  Who will participate in an illegal insider trading scheme?  Who will be an alcoholic?  Those both happen to seeming model citizens.  "Good" can be an illusion.

Brooks - the one thing that concerns me is his doubts about his feelings for Des.  He has every right to that, and it is healthy given the situation, but the history with this show is that when the lead pursues someone who is rather reluctant, it never works out.  I'd really like to see a relationship work out.

I don't think it's about Brooks feelings for Des. It's grown and on HTD he said, I feel closer to the union of marriage than ever before. So, love is in the equation for Brooks. It's the catch and release syndrome of this show. He gets on a high with Des but is left hanging . But not just hanging, it's hanging with his handlers . He loves Des of that I' m sure and we even here it in a VO. Call it spliced if you want but I doubt it . He will come to that realization and we will see it.