Jump to content

Changes Planned to Save 'Turns' and 'Light'


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I like this idea. ATWT has no sets now and GL hasn't for a while. It's time to give these people real homes like the ladies on Wisteria Lane. The location can really add to the feel of a scene. The long-term story plotting needs to be fix but perhaps having real locations can inspire the writers. Couldn't be any worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I like what I'm reading too, and I like who british soaps ae being produced so that's good. Filming on location has been sort of a luxury around daytime. So that part of the article is definitely all good! And the ideas of making it more realistic almost sounds too good to be true. :)

Thanks for the 2nd link miss wolf, interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This sounds like a good idea, as long as they don't make it look 'too' real and by that I mean seriously amateurish and cheap. Remember when some ATWT promo was put on YouTube that was advertising the teen slasher story and instead of sets the characters were seen talking in real homes rather than sets, and it looked really cheap? If it looks like that we're done for. However, if they really do make it look like 'The Hills' and have that glossy effect and good camera work, then I'm all for it. The only thing is, if they're going between exterior footage and sets for the interiors of houses (which I hope they do) they find some sort of way to make it slightly less jarring.

In UK soap Hollyoaks, everything is filmed on location; they have a purpose built set complete with interiors in actual houses rather than sets. There is one house that is a set (the McQueen house) which BLATANTLY stands out from the rest as not being real.

I hope this looks good for GL. BTW, does anyone know if/when the regular opening returns? I'm not really a fan of this cheap thing with the poem anymore, and the opening they had before that was one of the best soap openings, I hope they bring it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I always loved Eastenders and the Britsoaps shooting 'on location' or at least on a very realistic artifice that resembled location, but my concern is that that was a stylistic choice, and not something mandated by cost. While I admire some of GL's recent location work, some of the stuff, like Reva and her friend hustling a drugged Lizzie to a doctor's office, came off downright low-rent and cheap, with just the actress, the camera, and a random location, like a frickin' snuff film. There's a fine line between promoting realism and concrete reality on soaps and coming off cheap, and daytime has yet to master that. This move is about cost, not aesthetic, and that's where I think the danger is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

So, to "feel real", we get "outdoorsy-ness". D'uh...eliminate evil twins, slashers and show people at work, so they don't talk to the same four people every day.

I'm still not convinced this won't look as cheap as it sounds. If it looks like the "new" stuff on ATWT, it's a failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
If they're gonna do what they're saying in the articles then it won't be anything like what's going on over at ATWT now. It's not the same at all. Previous posts will explain that as well. :)

I'm all for these changes. They simply has to try something new. At least someone wants to save these shows so we should all be happy for that, because things can't go on like they are now. imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No, I think they explained that the look will be the same, because they're going to smaller cameras, etc. I don't like the "look" we're getting now. Everything seems nearly claustrophobic, and that will only continue moving to a four-walled set.

If it saves money, fine...but I think it's ignoring the real problem, which is the writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Okay I can't comment on ATWT but as a whole, I think this is fantastic news for daytime. If they pull it off, it will demonstrate that these shows can survive on a smaller budget with decent production values. I think it's tremendously exciting -- particularly for GL which is going to go from one hotel room and a fake Main Street to resembling real life. It should go a long way to removing the cheap, dated stigma attached to these shows.

I don't have a problem with the writing on GL so that aside, I think this is the most exciting daytime news I've heard in a long while.

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

    • What else? #May4th

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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