Members marceline Posted March 7, 2013 Members Share Posted March 7, 2013 I don't think "Rapemance" is overused. That term refers to one specific story like "Ice Princess" or "Eterna." It's not really a term so much as a title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members frequentsoapfan Posted March 7, 2013 Members Share Posted March 7, 2013 People use it for Ejami too but Ej did rape Sami so it applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jfung79 Posted March 8, 2013 Members Share Posted March 8, 2013 Yes, of course the term can be used in a legitimate way, but too often it is not in my opinion. Writers can establish a reason for a character to act a certain way, but some viewers can refuse to accept the reason while other viewers do accept the reason. When an explained action evokes that gray area of mixed reactions on the part of the viewers, it means that the definitive cry of "out of character" is simply not clear cut enough to be justifiably hurled in a state of outraged conviction as I often see. This whole thread is full of terms that are usually used legitimately, but also often are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Eric83 Posted March 8, 2013 Members Share Posted March 8, 2013 LOL! Praise the lord we don't have psycho EJamis on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted March 8, 2013 Members Share Posted March 8, 2013 Reading this thread, what strikes me is that the fault is always in the writing. If the writing is well-researched, well-paced, top-notch, and smooth, none of these terms would even exist. Who's to say what's "out of character", for example? Living, breathing human beings often do unexpected things. In the hands of a good writer, I think anything can be fleshed out and justified. It's just when the writers make sudden, clunky, broad strokes with little explanation that the viewers take issue. They haven't been provided with all of the necessary beats to get them there. I think a truly skilled writer could take any character and make them front burner and beloved without us ever noticing the effort, or seeing them as being "propped". Thing is, it takes patience and artful construction. We don't respond well to rush jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members QueenOfHearts Posted March 8, 2013 Members Share Posted March 8, 2013 Read over this thread and he's my list I definitely agree with the term legacy character being overused. Not every child born to a character that was on a soap prior to 1999 is a legacy or of some great importance. And the children of 80s/90s glorified dayplayers are not legacy characters. And Marland's rules. Do people even read those rules anymore or do they just post them automatically now? Because if they read those they would realizes how outdated and wrong some of those rules are for this day and age in soap and that a writer shouldn't be trying to copy another's writing style. I actually haven't heard hair model in awhile. Newbie is over used though. Imo if someone's been on the show for over a year there's no reason to be still calling them a newbie. And I agree with putting the word Nu in front of a character's name because the role has been recast. After the first month there's really no need. Using the word original to describe someone that didn't even originate the role on canvas. Balance. Whenever I hear people talkig about how a show has good balance, it usually doesn't and the focus just happens to be switched to a different set of people to eat up storyline. Pet. Just because someone is getting airtime does not mean they are a pet. Supercouple. Let's be honest the only supercouples still left on soaps are Luke and Laura and Nikki and Victor Ruining the show- this term seems to be used everytime a character does something fangurls don't want them to do. A recent example would be "Lauren's affair with Carmine is ruining the show" And I can't even beleive I'm saying this but boobs has become an overused term. I swear everytime a pretty daytime newcomer actress is hired on a soap now it's because she was hired for her boobs. And I hear countless talk about her boobs on the message boards long before she even appears onscreen and the first month of her being onscreen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sindacco Posted March 8, 2013 Members Share Posted March 8, 2013 Cartoon villain, comic book villain, one note villain. These days a villain can't do anything bad without being called one of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members frequentsoapfan Posted March 8, 2013 Members Share Posted March 8, 2013 I don't think cartoon villian is tired. It applies perfectly to the mahority of villians on soaps. Like those running the same schemes that they did decades ago that amount to nothing(Helena, Stefano, etc) or they are the new character that comes on loud, obnoxious, and rude in their first scenes as the obvious villian deserve that title of cartoon villian. Or that crap from last summer on GH with Jerry Jax and the water crisis. I think the last time a villian did something bad that shocked and disturbed me was Adam Newman in the cross dressing, sleeping with Rafe, throwing fetuses into the fire days .Kidnapping and holding someone and holding them at gunpoint is pretty tame for a soap. Big Boobs is the new hair model. At least on the likes of DD, DC, and SOC. You'd think there was some unwritten rule that females under 40 on soaps can't be larger than a cup with all the bitching I've heard over the past few years. So and so can't possible have any acting talent she has a large chest obviously they hired her for her boobs! Even though said female isn't even showing cleavage on the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members y&r_fan Posted March 13, 2013 Members Share Posted March 13, 2013 "Kyle Abbott" (it's JENKINS, people). "Rape" when used inappropriately (i.e. Deacon/Amber, Malcolm/Dru). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members frequentsoapfan Posted March 13, 2013 Members Share Posted March 13, 2013 Malcom/Dru was rape. She thought he was Neil because she was out of it and he just obliged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted March 13, 2013 Members Share Posted March 13, 2013 I've seen that "big boobs" too. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. I guess they think Beth Maitland is back on Y&R for the Russ Meyer fans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Darn Posted March 13, 2013 Members Share Posted March 13, 2013 "Asexual" Everyone's asexual! If you're not dryhumping your screen partner you're asexual! If you're a good actor with a good story but you just don't happen to generate heat with whoever your love interest is supposed to be you're asexual! It's tired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members y&r_fan Posted March 13, 2013 Members Share Posted March 13, 2013 It was deceptive but I still wouldn't necessarily call it rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members QueenOfHearts Posted March 14, 2013 Members Share Posted March 14, 2013 In some cases it's true though. When they test you with multiple men and you fail to have chemistry with any of them but they have chemistry with most others ala Marcy Rylan than I'd say asexual is the right word. She's over 40 it's doesn't apply to her. Lol. Only older women on soaps are allowed to have big boobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Eric83 Posted March 14, 2013 Members Share Posted March 14, 2013 Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.