Bellcurve - remember last year on B&B during summer when the show introcuded the 80s sitcom music, corny pop songs and quick-a-whip editing styles they also tried a very different take with dialogue.

An extremely awful one, but the mission seemed to be: freshen it up, folks! This is probably an example of a mandate put on the writers; regardless whether it came from CBS or Brad Bell personally. The show suddenly sounded a lot different with Shannon B. Bradley doing the worst jobs but probably obeying the mandate the most.

In general, even through script editing, you can hear the specific author if you ask me. At least when he gets the show and its characters. Amanda Beall seems to be a prime example; first she was given the young generation heavy episodes to write for on Y&R but now she's given broader episodes and for at least more than half the time she's doing good or better. She seems to be a worker bee fullfilling the mandate and so she went from corny and bland ABC-ness to a more stilted and complex Y&R dialogue.

What it means, though, for a writer who defines his/her success by putting his/her voice or his/her stories out there...they don't want to work for the "community production approach" of a daytime soap.

The "auteur", in daytime, is -- at most -- the HW. And it seems unlikely that most HWs are auteurs these days.

How does this relate to this thread? If "sitcom-y" language SOLELY appeared in Beall's AMC scripts, then that is the fault of the writer. On that show, she somehow didn't get into the groove. If "sitcom-y" language appeared, for certain characters, every time they were on the show, then that is actually a triumph of the ovearching creative agenda that drives the show (or more precisely, the ability to implement a cohesive vision)-- whether we as viewers like it or not.

here is the thing tho, perhaps it was a mandate from above, somewhere above, or perhaps it was her own idea, perhaps it all just happened that way, perhaps that is the way she saw the characters voices, perhaps she hated amc and wanted to destroy it, perhaps her mission was to drive R Sinclair crazy, perhaps she was lazy, perhaps she thought she was bring brilliant, perhaps she was mad she wasnt writing sex and the city, perhaps none of it was her fault.

we dont know. we assume we know. we then assume our assumption is correct because of the little information we get. we dont know, and until one of us speaks to her directly i doubt we will ever will.

that said, all you have to rally judge a scriptwriter on is, well the scripts they write. same thing with HW's - even if a mandate comes from above they still tell the story. so if they cant make it work, it really is their fault. they are not innocent, but then again just because your not innocent doesn't mean you have committed a crime with intent.

but as showen here, just because a person wrote a certin way one place doesnt mean they will again. so perhaps we shouldnt so quick to judge and label them hacks and unholy and curse their kids (obviously, im being over dramatic).

we judge, we become critics, we stick by that view and hold the little we know about why we feel that way and most of the time there is SO MUCH MORE to the situation than that. and thats not to say that we should never judge and never be a critic again, but perhaps sometimes we are too harsh, but then aagin some things are so bad they deserve

and i know im 100% flip flopping, thats because i feel BOTH ways on this, of anyone understands that. lol.

This thread has spun out of control.

Frankly, bellcurve, I think you'd want to give the scriptwriters more autonomy than they actually have. As I told a friend of mine not too long ago, the scriptwriter's just another cog in this enormous wheel. They take the work seriously, of course; at the end of the day, though, they just put words in other people's mouths, and that's all they do.

I guess I want to give the scriptwriters too much credit for their work. And I know that by the time they see those changes, they are seeing them right along with us. What I meant was, would the writer be able to go to the Head Writer or Editor and say, "in future episodes, can we change this/that."

Bellcurve - remember last year on B&B during summer when the show introcuded the 80s sitcom music, corny pop songs and quick-a-whip editing styles they also tried a very different take with dialogue.

An extremely awful one, but the mission seemed to be: freshen it up, folks! This is probably an example of a mandate put on the writers; regardless whether it came from CBS or Brad Bell personally. The show suddenly sounded a lot different with Shannon B. Bradley doing the worst jobs but probably obeying the mandate the most.

I'm aware of the whole "lets be hip and trendy" stuff B&B stuff. I didn't know that also had to do with refreshing the dialogue as well. But it makes no sense to have Kay Alden(who is quoted as saying daytime shouldn't be a breeding ground for anything new or fresh) in charge of editing a show script to make it more "hip." It would be like asking John Conboy to produce "Ryan's Hope."

In general, even through script editing, you can hear the specific author if you ask me. At least when he gets the show and its characters. Amanda Beall seems to be a prime example; first she was given the young generation heavy episodes to write for on Y&R but now she's given broader episodes and for at least more than half the time she's doing good or better. She seems to be a worker bee fulfilling the mandate and so she went from corny and bland ABC-ness to a more stilted and complex Y&R dialogue.

And that was my point and I am glad you restated this: even with butchering and slashing someone's work, you can hear the specific writer's style and voice. Yeah, we may give the scriptwriter too much credit for bad scripts that may have gotten watered down by the writing team(as brimike said), but I don't believe for a second a really bad script equates to bad rewrites. If that were the case, then wouldn't the entire scriptwriting team's work sound awful instead of Monday's dialogue being decent(despite the fact the stories featured are awful) and Tuesday dialogue being really really bad?

Anyway...

Edited April 16, 200916 yr by bellcurve

This thread has spun out of control.

:lol:

All we need to refresh it is... A bit of Y&R writers talk!

All we need to refresh it is... A bit of Y&R writers talk!

Along with the nymph and pan flute acadia, as well as Ross Geller's "night rainbow with gremlins dancing on top of it," this thread will be back to normal.

Does anyone know what is Hogan Sheffer's job at The Young and the Restless exactly? If not exactly, then I'd like to hear some theories.

Perhaps just a super-paid breakdown writer with zero to 0.00001% input in stories?

Edited April 17, 200916 yr by Sylph

Does anyone know what is Hogan Sheffer's job at The Young and the Restless exactly? If not exactly, then I'd like to hear some theories.

Perhaps just a super-paid breakdown writer with zero to 0.00001% input in stories?

You know, we should as French Fan to look up someone on the Y&R writing staff and ask that.

I have no clue, but I do know he HAS to be responsible for the Chipmunk haunting LOL

It would be interesting to know where Hogan fits in.... and Scott Hamner for that matter as well.

You know, we should as French Fan to look up someone on the Y&R writing staff and ask that.

Do you want me to ask Tom Casiello?

Ask him. Thank you!

Do you want me to ask Tom Casiello?

Sure!

Sure!

I will ask him once he logs in on Facebook.

Y&R:

- Tom Casiello first listed as Breakdown Writer on April 20