Jump to content

Star Trek recipe for soaps?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Well as someone who grew up watching reruns of ST:TOS with my father the same way many soap fans grew up watching with their moms I loved the movie. It certainly had flaws but that's for another thread on another board.

I don't agree that Abrams believes that the franchise was crap before he "held his nose and waded into the stinky Federation waters." But I DO believe that he decided that he was going to have to do this reboot his way and the old guard was either going to have to like it or not.

Abrams offended a lot of people by openly admitting he wasn't a big Trek fan. The clarion call went out for his head. "He's not a FAN! Only a FAN can do it justice!!" Isn't that the same thing we see said on this board? "If you want to save soaps you need to bring on someone who's a real fan of the genre." But perhaps a so-called "real fan" is part of the problem. Or more accurately, being a fan of good dramatic storytelling doesn't mean being a fan of soaps. Look at Carlivati. When he took over the reins at OLTL, half of soapdom erupted in a mass orgasm at the thought that OLTL was finally being written by a FAN of the show and its HISTORY and VETS and yet he proved incapable of even stabilizing the show, let alone reviving it.

The Trek franchise had become so unwieldy that they had to do a serious reset to make it viable again and a "real fan" couldn't make the type of hard decisions necessary to do that. Abrams respects Star Trek but he doesn't worship it. IMO, a soap reboot would require the same combination of affection and discernment. That would be guaranteed to piss off fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Since Davies is so bad, wouldn't him praising Moffat be bad for Moffat?

I notice that was written before the episodes about the library, which were lazy, patronizing, about as scary as a Care Bear, and dominated by a Mary Sue who rattled off expository dialogue viewers about a life viewers were never going to see, before she was given the worst idea of a happy ending I can remember. Before those episodes, I had a higher opinion of Moffat's work. They were just awful.

I'm not offended because he's not a Trek fan. I don't think you have to be a Trek fan. It's the idea that he is somehow singlehandedly bringing prestige to a wretched waste of space, and we should be humbled he even wanted to go near something the project, that any changes he makes must be great because they're updating something unworthy of him, that's what bothers me. So much of the hype for this film comes from his name and from his not caring about Star Trek, it makes me wonder why he even wanted to get involved or use the characters, if they were so awful.

I don't think you have to be a fan of a genre to revive it, but not having open contempt for the genre would be a good start. The people who have most destroyed soaps over the past 15 years have been people who all but openly hate soaps, or who want to turn soaps into some pale copy of primetime. I remember when JFP took over Another World and she said she wanted the show to be Cheers meets NYPD Blue meets ER. I thought, "What about wanting the show to be Another World?" She hated AW, and daytime, so much that she financially and creatively bankrupted the show within a year.

Admitting to being a fan will usually get more scorn than not being a fan, because you're seen as obsessed, as not hip enough. Soaps would rather go with people who hate daytime (JFP, Frons, Guza) or are incredibly indifferent or incompetent, than talented people who truly care about the genre.

Carlivati did stabilize the show for about a year. I don't think that means being a fan makes you a good writer, because he's not a good writer, but I don't think it proves you must not be a fan if you want to help a show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not just talking about bringing in someone who isn't from soaps, I mean someone who will like or respect soaps, even if they don't have experience with them. Wendy Riche, for instance, had no daytime experience, but her GH was incredibly produced for 3 or 4 years, until she began to spread herself too thin and Guza came along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That is just your impression and I am really sorry you feel that way. It's just not true. (But if it were, Hello! Welcome to Hollywood! But it's not.) Anyway...

Carl, you know... I've been thinking... I have this idea about a show which is something like Survivor meets Gilligan's Island meets Cast Away meets Lord of the Flies... Can you do something about it? Make a show from it? No.

But here's the thing: Abrams did. Completely revamped the idea and made it a successful show. Sure, the ratings dropped. But do the ratings reflect the quality? No. (In this case, they kind of did.) But the show learned from its mistakes and corrected what was wrong. I am in no way forcing you to like Lost or anything like that, but it will most definitely be the show that made its stamp and revolutionised television in more than one way. Lost is not a show about "only the good-looking passengers of a jumbo jet [who] survive a spectacular crash onto a cinematic beach and show off their Pilates bodies while spearing fish". Lost is not about "polar bears, invisible monsters, secret hatch, magic numbers, mysterious French woman". Which is precisely why it is successful. It uses that kind of background to tell the simplest of stories about people, their fears, dreams, lives...

It has its flaws, and so does Abrams, but ultimately he does deliver: he satisfies the network or a studio (ratings, box office revenue) and his audience. It's really very simple.

It's perhaps best if we ended here the Moffat vs. Davies and Abrams vs. Roddenberry debate. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This recipe comes off like a recipe for a gumbo- "add a little salt, some chicken, a little shrimp...but not too much."

I'm pretty positive the Star Trek recipe would work for soaps- but these descriptions have to be tailored to fit the particular shows, otherwise it will just create panic. Just reading some of the posts it sounds like if Frons were to do a press release with this as his manifesto he would be crucified- as he should be.

These ideals require process, and not everyone understands that this recipe is not a checklist for success. Even if someone did have all these elements the show could still fail! Which is great for the creator because they learn more that way, but sucks for the fans because yet another show will bite the dust. But this is why I do think shows should be allowed to bite the dust, because it allows all those involved to stop, look, and begin again.

And what the hell does it matter if someone's a fan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah. I think that's the difference. You can't "reboot" a show until it goes off the air. I wonder what would happen if in 3-5 years a reboot version of Guiding Light came back the way Star Trek: The Next Generation did with a brand new cast, a fresh look and new stories. Have it take place in Springfield, maybe have one or two people work at Spaulding Enterprises (but no member of the Spaulding family just use the company as an employer) and start fresh. I know that the real world makes that impossible but I'm just theorizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But you don't have to recreate the show, especially by admitting that you are not a diehard fan. You could basically create the story around a third party that has no ties to the canvas, and stumbles onto this world. It's essentially what you have with all the soaps that are still on today- where the core once stood to be third parties.

But yes, the shows have to be able to end their course. Creators have to be able to begin again, and start from scratch, and allow for others to elaborate.

But then you see shows like the new 90210 and you think that's awful, and it has nothing to do with this recipe for greatness. It has to do with the fact that someone thought they could take a recipe and create a show. Which you can't do for a show that was a creator's process. I can't write a show and think, "what would spelling do? that's right, those bitches should be clawing each other's eyes out like in that one episode I really liked." it's a piss poor perspective and something I imagine a piss poor executive to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I remember, a few days ago, a friend of mine went to see the movie. My best friend instantly laughed and called her a geek. There is a very instinctive, hateful reaction towards the brand of STAR TREK, even between those who have never even seen a single episode, and I feel that this is very much the same bias that soaps in general have been dealing with for years. A lot of people--a lot--have this preconceived notion of something cheap and unworthy...

Naturally, all this has little to do with the topic at hand, but nevertheless I feel that it was important to mention because it's not just the material or the way of presenting that material that needs to be changed (i.e. rebooting the shows, tweaking the formula)--it's the preconceptions about the material that need to be altered first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think one of the reasons daytime finished itself off is because they became so desperate to change preconceptions. They had huge ratings at a time they tried to stay within their own boundaries. There were some changes, but still within those boundaries. Even Luke and Laura, done by a producer who hated the old soap format, had a soap love story format.

Then the soaps decide to become all about trying to ape primetime and movies, trying to be what they were never going to be. Ignoring what made them special. Not only did they not get any of those who sneered at soaps, they also chased away many people who loved them.

It's like Passions. In their first few years they got glowing commentary and press from some of the hippest shows on TV, cultural zeitgeists like BtVS. Yet, they never managed to harness those viewers to move beyond being a niche show.

The most probable way that a soap will be adored by those who hate soaps is if it's a niche show which can be used by those who dislike soaps to talk about how much better it is than other soaps, like what often happened with the BSG remake and other TV shows, or other sci-fi shows. That wouldn't do very much to actually change the state of the genre itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

People have always derided sci-fi. They make fun of it then they turn around and watch it. Star Trek, Buffy, BSG, Heroes, Lost have all done just fine in spite of the preconceptions because the quality is there. People will keep making fun of sci-fi even as its creators become multimillionaires. Star Trek made $72 million this weekend. Not bad for a bunch of "geeks."

People will always make fun of soaps. The question is will they also watch them. Right now the answer is no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Soaps are inherently serialized and forward-moving. While I love what Abrams did for Trek (and think it is one of the few times his work has had any follow-through), a reboot is anathema to soaps.

Meanwhile, you lost all remaining sanity when you claimed RTD's Doctor Who sucked - it brought a beloved British institution for children and adults alike back with honor, pride and a "soft reboot" - unlike you, it did not seek to scorch the Earth where it was not needed (and neither did Abrams' Star Trek). Not all of it is perfect, but it's been damned good and Moffat will be a worthy successor, I'm sure.

As usual, you act like a caricatured version of the renowned scribes and producers you wish you were, when in fact Abrams, Moffat, etc. are nowhere near as dismissive and pretentious as you. They both treated and shepherded Trek and Who well; Moffat is close with RTD, and is a longtime, hardcore fan of the original series. Abrams became a fan, but also worked with longtime, hardcore Trek fans on the script and overall production (frankly, I think Abrams works best on established properties; his own invariably fall apart). He recognized what has always worked about Trek despite the dilution of the brand name through mediocre shows like Enterprise and Voyager, and the bland neutering of Berman and Braga starting in the 90 - optimism, exploration, and adventure. These are not new values for the Trek franchise, but beloved and long-held ones.

Why don't you just admit these threads are always about you and what you think should be done for soaps? In your rush to crown your latest object of adulation king, you always piss on what's already there, even when your idols never do that. That is your primary failing. You are not JJ Abrams, Sylph. You're not Steve Moffat, and it's exactly your kind of attitude towards a long-standing property and any collaborators (you think everyone else is a peon) that would keep them from hiring you - especially Moffat. Nor is anyone going to hand you the key to soaps with your attitude.

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

    • Some country club revelation thoughts from a casual watcher no one asked for. The Great: Daphnee Duplaix gave the best performance we've seen yet. Nicole's dialogue was also well thought out and felt character specific. TJ Maxx Ted was also pretty good. Trisha Mann-Grant steals every scene she's in. Often without even trying. Carrying multiple episodes worth of exposition heavy soap dialogue with starts and stops and recapping and drama and humor is no small feat and she nailed. Vernon telling Lesliana to STFU.  The Bad: So much of the dialogue for the rest of the cast was overly written. Martin said "You are a vile human being with a hole in your heart!". Marty, what are we doing? It's SO dramatic and sounds so silly coming from this grown man. Do Bill and Hayley do anything but talk about the Duprees? And the nerve of her to get so excited to find out Ted is a cheater when she and her husband are too. There should be a hint of shame mixed in with your glee, ma'am. The Questionable: Coffee and a rendition of Amazing Grace after finding out Nicole was betrayed by her husband. The Duprees are an odd bunch. The stinger of one segment had Anita prepared to lambast Lesliana, when we came back someone else was talking. When Anita eventually said something to Wig, it was a lukewarm at best. And then of course she thought singing a song about something that should absolutely not be extended to her son-in-law. The entire family allowing this deranged woman to speech at them in their own was...nuts. I know she said something about what would the neighbors say but my GOD. Is she just going to be allowed to trespass whenever she feels like it now? The focus on Leslie and her wig usage as an oddity is...odd. I think Chelsea said something like "and she wears wigs!" (while wearing a buss down middle part). Okay? It's just not that odd for a black woman to change up her hair. It's the different names that's the problem. I know it's meant to be humorous, in a throwback soap kind of way, but it fell flat for me.  I'm sorry I find the whole family to be WEIRD. It's like they want us to see them as ruthless yet benevolent, open yet furtive, snobbish yet tooth achingly sweet all at the same time. I cannot get a lock on the family dynamics. Everyone is just there.  I'm gonna cry if this show doesn't start giving us ages (or close to it!) for these characters. Because if Eva is 21-22 then Martin was being given crayons, a soda pop and blinders when he was 15-17 years old. Martin had to have been under 8 for me to buy this story, which would make Eva and Kat late 20s (Martin is at least 35 since he wants to run for president), which I don't think they're meant to be. It's honestly minor but it bothers me. I've mentioned this to @Vee but I think the optics on opening the show with both sisters discovering their husbands of over 30 years are cheaters should've been considered. I doubt there was any intention behind it, no one's rubbing their hands together as they scheme to say the married black men can't stay loyal but how does it look? Maybe it's just me. Honestly it's probably just me!
    • Thank you very much!!!! I really appreciate it!!! I also have read the GH coffee table book from the 90s!!!
    • For a homeless woman, June sure has nice teeth. I agree Ted didn't bring the power in the fallout scenes but to can him and leave Tomas, Martin and Derek onscreen? i'm not looking forward to Martin's secret being revealed and have him flail in the spotlight scenes. Yes, he's got a little better, but... When someone like Timon delivers with every line reading, you wonder how some other casting decisions were made. And I need sunglasses every time characters are at Uptown-is that green paint left over from GL's Cedars Hospital makeover? And for the cliffhanger, instead of the Door dash nonsense, simply have Leslie encounter Vanessa on her way out and push past her to enter. As there is no front door have Leslie barge into the living room, with Vanessa following.  Then Nicole can tell Vanessa- it's OK she can leave them alone.
    • My question was basically is Dani the only character to have a bedroom? And then the response was Jacob and Naomi ONLY have a bedroom as their set .
    • Our next installment of Love of Life 1976 Before leaving San Francisco, Cal phones her Aunt Van to set up a family gathering. Van arranges it, and upon their return, Cal and Rick announce that they are engaged. In the shocked silence that follows the announcement, Meg steps in to offer her congratulations, and also to pay for the wedding. But the family members still don’t respond happily. They fear that Rick isn’t good enough for Cal, and are surprised by Meg’s offer. Rick and Jamie visit Meg and ask whether, in light of her acceptance of his marrying her daughter, she |will drop the lawsuit. She replies that she will if he returns as her partner in Beaver Ridge. Rick reminds her that this has been settled; he can’t do that. So Meg, pretending largesse, says she’ll drop the suit, but in fact she asks her attorney to put the suit in abeyance, so it can be reopened at any time. Rick gives Cal a lovely diamond-and-sapphire engagement ring, and Betsy, who has promised to be Cal’s honor attendant, gives ‘her the dress she wore when she married Ben, saying that a bride who really is a bride should have it. Cal speaks privately to each member of the family, hoping to convince them that she and Rick are right for each other and will be happy. Jamie, after accepting Rick’s request that he be best man, checks to see if Meg has dropped the action, as promised. Finding out that it’s only in abeyance, Jamie asks if she is planning to sue her son-in-law in the future. Meg insists that she has acted on her attorney’s advice. Meg convinces Cal to give her two weeks to plans a lovely wedding, but after several days Cal discovers that Meg has done nothing in preparation. She therefore informs her mother that she and Rick will be married this weekend at the chapel. Betsy goes into labor and has her daughter by the natural-childbirth method. Cal tries to reach Ben, to tell him he’s a father, but has to be content with leaving a message. An ecstatic Ben sends flowers and a card to his wife and daughter Suzanne. Meg, in desperation at being unable to stop the wedding, has been drinking heavily. When she tells Carrie she can’t sleep and that’s why she can’t get herself together, Carrie sympathetically gives her some tranquilizers which Tom had given her. At the wedding rehearsal Meg tries once again to “reason” with Rick, but he makes it clear that he and Cal are getting married as planned. Meg then faints, upsetting Cal, who declares that her mother’s health is more important than the wedding. This gives Meg an idea. On the afternoon of the wedding, as the bride’s party waits at the chapel for Meg, she takes some of the pills, then calls Rick and tells him what she has done. When he doesn’t believe her, Meg becomes even more upset and takes more pills. When Rick informs | the wedding party of Meg’s call, they don’t believe she’d do anything that foolish, but Cal and Rick realize they can’t take the chance and go to her home. Finding her unconscious, they rush her to the hospital.Meg is treated for overdose complicated by alcohol and eventually regains consciousness.Van and Bruce offer to take Meg to their, home to recuperate, but Cal, worried because Joe raises the concern that Meg could try it again, allows her mother ‘to convince her to take her home with her. Meg is pleased with herself for having managed to come between Cal and Rick, and begs Cal not to let Rick come to the apartment, as she can’t bear to have him see her like this. Meg then works on Cal’s conscience by pitifully admitting that she loves Rick and can’t live without him. Van tries,- without success, to make Meg see that Cal and Rick are in love and can make each other happy, but Meg won’t give up and suddenly begins to have “headaches.” Even Betsy overcomes her bitterness at Meg and brings baby Suzanne to see her,trying to get Meg interested in living again. But Meg insists she can’t do anything because of her delicate | condition and has no interest in Beaver Ridge at all. .Rick has to go to New York on business and asks Cal to go with him. She replies that she can’t; she’s afraid to leave Meg. Cal, with Hank, sees Rick off at the airport, and just before he boards, he gives her a letter to read later. She reads it at home that evening; -it’s a plea from Rick to join him in New York and get married immediately. He tells her that their love and their being together are the only things that matter.Cal puts the letter in her handbag and goes to shower.Meg has seen the letter and reads it. Upset that Cal might do what Rick asks, she goes to Joe at the clinic, claiming she’s sleeping badly, and asks for sleeping pills. Joe, of course, refuses to give them to her, and, as she has hoped, he calls Cal to warn her. Cal now redoubles her efforts to keep an eye on her - mother. Meg, complaining of another headache, asks for water to take aspirin and takes four tablets from abottle, which she holds so Cal can see the label has been removed. When Cal snatches it and demandsto know what she’s taking and where she got them,Meg “confesses” that she went to a new doctor for sleeping pills because Joe wouldn’t give her any. Seeing she’s got Cal where she wants her, Meg presses Cal to promise she’ll be there as long as she needs her. Rick’s New York trip comes to nothing when he discovers the prospective backers want almost complete control of the project. Jamie suggests that Rick talk to Meg again about dropping the suit, as every cent Rick has is being tied up by this litigation. Rick insists that Meg won’t do any favors for him, and he isconvinced that her suicide attempt and subsequent emotional instability are just a scheme to tie Cal to her. But he realizes Cal won’t be able to see it this way. Rick sees only one more possibility to his financial problem: Ray Slater promised to help him if hearranged a meeting between Ray and Jamie, which Rick did. As a result of that meeting, Ray informed Ian Russell that he might be able to get Beaver Ridge for him but will require a piece of the action if it works out. Rick arrives home to find a distraught Cal, who informs him that she was warned by Joe to watch out for Meg and, sure enough, she discovered her trying to pass sleeping pills off as aspirin. But Rick insists on knowing the name of the doctor Meg got the pills from, and when he attempts to call him, Meg backs down and admits there was no doctor and no sleeping pills—the bottle contained her allergy medication. Cal is horrified that she allowed herself to be taken in again by Meg in spite of knowing firsthand what her mother is like and warnings from the entire family. Rick insists that she get away from Meg now and go visit Betsy until he gets things settled. As soon as Cal has gone, Rick insists that Meg come out of the bedroom where she has barricaded herself, and tells her he knows her too well to believe she would ever take her own life. He tells her he admires her and would like them to come out of this as friends. Meg makes it clear that friendship isn’t what she wants from him. But when Rick picks up Cal, who now wants to get married right away, and | returns to her apartment, they find a note from her “loving mother” saying she and Rick are now friends and they should call her after they are married.  
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • As always, really interesting to get your impressions! I was only watching sporadically during this period (whereas I was transfixed during the Marian storyline), but if I remember correctly 1996 was a pretty rough transitional year. It came at a period where P&G was playing musical chairs with its executive producers--ATWT was hit especially hard by this. The current executive producer, Michael Laibson, is out in November 1996, replaced by Paul Rauch, who stays for nearly 6 years. While Rauch has a few really bad ideas that cause long-term damage to the show, those don't really kick in until 1999, and his first couple of years are very strong. So once you get to 1997, you should see the show rebound significantly. 
    • Haha love a little drunk posting

      Please register in order to view this content

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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