Jump to content

OLTL Discussion: Week of April 9th


Recommended Posts

  • Members

I didn't realize they had tired it before. I still think something needs to be done. These stories go on way too long. Spencer's murder should have been wrapped up in February, now it's dragging into the end of May and depending on who you believe (Valentini or Higs) it could last throughout the summer.

Whatever story they have planned for Jessica and Nash should have happened last year. Jessica should have left Antonio before the wedding and they should have moved on from there.

Jess I don't know if I should be offended that you agree with me. LOL. I'm thinking it has something to do with the fact that you agree with something Port Charles tried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

You are completely correct that Higley's stories go on far too long. I'd suggest part of the problem is there is no real story. There is the shock and awe event and then there is filler until the next event. If you are doing something like the DID story it may well be a year long story but that story should have a finite ending that isn't 3 years away and it should have definite arcs. The appearance of Tess should have been a mini arc which should have then led into the discovery of Tess, actual treatment and some arc about the creation of Tess. The creation arc IMO should have been as much about Viki and the family as it was about Tess which would have given some Tess relief and others some chance to be seen.

Spencer's murder should have been the end with a quick reveal of who rescued Blair.

IMO what we are talking about here is more Higley's failure as a writer than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

LOL. Actually I wasn't a big fan of PC. It wasn't because of the shorter stories, it's I don't like vampire stories. LOL. Anyway, I think they need shorter story arcs and I also think daytime dynamics are really changing. Daytime is in a lot of trouble. I read so many people saying look at this ratings are going down, two years ago ratings were this or that. The industry is dying because the model hasn't kept pace with the times. You and I are good examples. We all argue the viewer they need to get back is me. But if they focus on only what I want then they are going to lose you. If they focus on what you want, the are going to lose me. So I just think daytime needs to be a little bit different. That fact that something did or didn't work 15 years ago doesn't mean much now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Stories not only drag on but they miss the core of the story. Nora's house being burnt down wasn't even about her in danger. Higs seemed far more interested in Talia/Bo. It's now used as an excuse to make Nora a wrecking ball. The time for the hunt for Todd's son was last summer, as it was for Todd's revenge. Spencer's murder SHOULD have been about Blair, the woman who was drugged and kidnapped in the middle of the hospital. The core story is the same as Who killed Colin? -- Spencer wasn't out to get Todd just because he didn't like his haircut. Spencer hated Todd because TOdd had Blair's love presumedly. Todd walking away from Blair, being Evangeline's lapdog gives Spencer far too much victory.

As for who did kill Spencer, Blair seems remarkably uninterested in the results, as does TOdd. As does everyone on the canvas. As does most of the audience. So why will it be brought up again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Why does it have to be either or? Soaps thrived in the past because they found a way to appeal to the many rather than the few. Now they focus on the few rather than the many and they are in trouble.

The answer to me is to go back to the model that worked - an ensemble with rotation. I found a way to ff through a decade of Todd and still enjoy most of the show until Frons showed up. Now I've all but walked way unless you count watching less than 1 episode in 5 months faithful viewing. I just don't care about their pets and the OOC and poorly written sightings, not to forget rare, of the characters I do enjoy aren't enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I've noticed that all the soaps have abandoned the concept of rotation. They juts shove characters down your throat until you're ready to throw up. Or change the channel. Michael Easton's character is not that interesting that he needs to be the constant focal point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ok SOW sucks period, they are taking everything that is being said on the internet and putting it in the paper to sell. I swear the message boards and mags are more entertaining than the dam show. .

The best part of the show is RJ back and well Viki putting Clint into his place cause everything else SUCKED!!!! I did so much flipping it wasnt funny.

As for the show I watched Vicki "FREE VICKI FREE!!!" "DIE CLINT DIE"

"DIE JESSICA DIE" UGH so tired of this triangle. End it already. I dont care what you say RJ wouldnt be happy that twit was taking Kerrie place if he or she knew what the skank was truely doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Full statement from city of Glendale https://www.glendaleca.gov/Home/Components/News/News/9293/16
    • Has anyone ever totted up how many women on GL slept with both father and son(s)? Reva gets a lot of crap for it but she's far from the only one: Claire Beth Blake Olivia Dina Did I miss anyone?  Also, did Reva ever sleep with Phillip? They always had some "closeness" thing, but I don't know if they ever actually did the deed. If they did, then Reva's the clear winner, with TWO families covered, lol!  
    • I think Long was probably planning to have Claire suffer from Post Partum, but she left the writing staff shortly after Claire had Michelle so that element didn't get explored. And I always assumed that when Claire returned in the late 90s/early 00s.. that she was realizing that she messed up by not staying a part of Michelle's life and became resentful/bitter over her previous choices.  That was my theory.  
    • Jenn was a huge part of the success of Days back in the day, and that contribution shouldn't be dismissed.  With that said, I do think her and Jack's time on the show should remain as occasional visits/drop ins. When Missy returns to play Jenn, Jenn is back to being Jenn.   Jenn in her glory days was head strong, fiesty, and was a live wire.... and her scenes with Jack on Friday was classic Jenn with Jack being the voice of reason.   It was the foundation of their relationship back in the day.    
    • Claire was always tightly wound, I think what Long was going to do is to throw the three into this impossible situation with no bad guys, Mo, knowing how to take care of kids from growing up but unable to conceive and Claire, who didnt know how to take care of kids and was totally focused on her career, gets knocked up.  Ryder took Claire off the deep end as a convenient way to make story for characters he wasnt interested in (though Pratt blames McTavish) with little effort. It was later explained to be a brain tumor (though why was she a bitch again when she returned?) \ Claire did sleep with Rick, she was his first!
    • I'm sorry, truly I am, but this literally made me LOL. Tempting fate, much?

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Oh, I have very little doubt that Missy feels some way personally and privately.  Donna was just saying she actively spoke out against Days in public in reference to the gay storylines, which she did not. I don't have super strong feeling about Jen one way or another.  She was always a side character to me.  I still think Missy is Jen regardless of her stupid beliefs.
    • I hated the swap-over; Clayton Norcross, to me, was far superior in the role of Thorne than Jeff Trachta ever was. And the recast left me disliking Thorne when he was the superior son to me. As for Teri Ann Linn, I feel like she got the raw deal. Kristen was very clear as a forefronting character, especially in her rivalry with Stephanie, and it feels like she was dropped off for Felicia, and they never returned it. Not to mention the subpar recast with Tracy Melchior in 2001. Someone like Brenda Epperson (ex-Ashley, Y&R) would've been more suited for that role.
    • I just remember when Leo was marrying Craig (?), Greg Rikaart stated a line and made direct eye-contact with Melissa Reeves, and when the camera cut to her, she looked away. 

      Please register in order to view this content

       Rikaart had a mission that day, and he succeeded.
    • I need to go and find less.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy