Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members

You’re right. That seemed to be the biggest flaw in ATWT’s final years. Storylines lasted only like a month and there was practically no buildup, no aftermath, no segue into another story, etc. Soaps aren’t supposed to be like that, for the most part.  

 

Look at when Bob and Kim got sick. Bob had a mass on his brain and needed surgery and Kim got so upset about it, she had a heart attack. They made the one joke about “his and her hospital rooms” and then the next time you saw them, they were both perfectly fine as though nothing had happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2970

  • DramatistDreamer

    1958

  • Soapsuds

    1716

  • P.J.

    823

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

 

Exactly.  I could mention at least one site that has those characteristics that you speak of, but I won't, lol.

Please register in order to view this content

The echo chambers and lack of critical analysis, out of fear that any critique would somehow land the show in cancellation was far more of a problem, imo.  The exec-producers were never challenged to improve or adapt and the show stagnated itself into cancellation anyway.

 

It's likely because the storylines weren't planned beyond a few weeks. 

One salient point that I have gleaned from these Locher Room livestreams with the actors is that Marland, in particular had storyline projections for at least a year or more. He had it physically mapped out, but wasn't rigid about being able to make adjustments as he saw things unfold.

One thing that I learned early on is that the more specific you are in your outlines, the more freedom you have in your capability to adjust for the unforeseen because you've taken the time to build a stronger story foundation in which to lay everything out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Speaking as someone who writes and has tried to do without outlines, I can tell you that it is likely that ATWT dispensed with any degree of detail in story plans. If they did, it was likely a thumbnail sketch, compared to what Marland did.  The stories in the wake of MADD and beyond had all the hallmarks of stories written without much of a plan, certainly not a well-thought out one.  It showed so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I remember back in 1998 when Lorraine Broderick was hired that she had a 6 month story projection that got her the job..but that once she was hired..all her ideas were rejected and she tried to make their edicts work as best as she could.  Her stint was one of the last times Lisa had any sort of story, etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I remember FMB or LB saying in 1999 that they would come up with long arcs for characters like Bob, Kim, and Lisa but could never get them approved after  Kim’s heart story (even though that got them their highest ratings in years).

 

How much of a lack of a long term plan resulted from HW ideas being rejected or cut short? HS had a long term story in place for Lily/Holden/Molly/Dusty and it was supposed to go for a year or so after Rose’s death, but then CBS pumped the brakes. Mid-2004 when HS really went off the rails in terms of planning.

 

HS’s early stories also had clear trajectories with the ways he mapped out the disintegration of Hal and Barbara’s marriage and everything that spun off from it. 

 

I want to think that JP had a yearlong bible when she first began as solo HW in 2005. That yesr and into summer 2006 were quite good. By 2007, it was obvious that CG and/or the network had assumed near total control and budget issues could not be hidden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yes. And this was his commenting on the situation upon her arrival so that would be 1996, the Black and Stern year. 

 

 

I never have understood why they even hired her if they didn't want to use her talents. I guess FMB and MADD loyalty. 

 

P&G and CBS were so incompetent and incoherent. The whole thing makes me mad all over again because ATWT should still be on the air today. 

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Does anyone know why they decided to kill off Rose in the first place? If they needed to axe one of Martha Byrne's characters, then I think Lily would have been the more logical choice. They clearly struggled to write for Lily, and she came off as a mopey bore for most of her final decade on the show. Rose was a much more exciting, dynamic character, and it always looked like Martha had fun playing her.

 

Also, can you just imagine the storyline possibilities if someone tried killing Rose but ended up killing Lily by mistake? You could get years of story just out of Lucinda not forgiving Rose for Lily's death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I thought killing Rose was bold because she was so fun and vibrant. It rocked the show. Did I think all of the story at the time was very good - no. Some was, some sucked. The Paul/Rose wedding stuff was a ripoff of Todd and Blair's equally dumb "hell no" wedding at OLTL with Roger Howarth, who should never have replaced Scott Holroyd. But did the bold choice outweigh the losses with her gone - I don't know.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

IMO, that's the way it should be done. Marland was a genius. If I was a professional soap writer, I would do the same thing. Jean didn't do that, or Goutman (or P&G) didn't allow that and it ruined the show.

Same could be said for AW and GL. I still find what P&G did unbelievable. Clearly they didn't want to be in the soap business anymore, but why they chose to wreck their shows to get them cancelled rather than just sell them, I will never understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Reminds me of the premise behind the musical The Producers. People think the idea of purposely setting out to destroy something is farce but P&G prove the concept it is very real.

 

Lily's a "lifer".  They were never going to kill off a character that has been on the show since 1984. I know most people tend to think of Martha as Lily but the character predates Byrne and obviously had as much longevity as Lucinda.  The fact that three actresses have played the character speaks to the enduring quality of the character, at least in the minds of the production staff and execs, regardless of what any of us may think.

Personally, I just didn't see Rose ever having that type of longevity, since imo, the character was written as overly-broad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Yes, I am familiar with Fred Silverman. Agree, the 90 minute AW a very poor decision by Silverman. I think Silverman was behind the decision to go with Texas.
    • Thanks -- you're doing God's work The Gio reveal was everything I hoped for and more. GH got it right. Head to toe, GM is a stunning physical specimen.
    • I really wonder how they'll handle Netflix's usual long breaks between seasons. That girl is going to grow up fast... makes me wonder if this wouldn't have been a better fit for HBO Max considering they're leaning into a more broadcast style of production model with The Pitt.
    • I agree -- I didn't suspect Ted, either. I think a lot of people are giving themselves way too much credit in predicting Ted's problems

      Please register in order to view this content

      And can I have a different take on Ted here? Yes, he's made a huge mistake with this Leslie debacle, and yes, he has to suffer and pay for it. But does that make Ted a terrible human being? I don't think it does. He made a horrific mistake over 2 decades ago, and as far as we know, he's been a good husband and father since. As far as we know, he hasn't strayed or violated his marriage since. He didn't know that he fathered another child, and thought he "removed" Leslie from his life. I won't blame Nicole if she doesn't forgive him, but I also won't blame her if she decides what they have and what they've had more than makes up for what he did. Ted is getting dragged far more than Bill is on these boards, and I think Bill is MUCH worse as a husband and father. How many times did he cheat on Dani during their marriage? How many times did he do vile things in his role as fixer? How much did he hurt his daughters by screwing their friend and marrying her? With Keith Robinson coming in as Ted, maybe we'll see a character change in direction and we'll discover that Ted has many flaws and always had a dark side. For now, though, I'm inclined to both be angry with Ted for hurting his family while also sympathizing with him. I know what you mean, but I do think that was intentional. So much was going on in that episode, and I think they decided not to let Nicole's reaction be lost in all that. Nicole will get those scenes that you're asking for.  
    • That was the original point of me sending you her 6 airdates, so now with those, and the link to the daily episode guide I've provided, that should help you more easily find the additional Ruth Buzzi scenes. I will always repeat myself when it comes to defending my data that I've taken decades to research and compile. But, as you pointed out in a recent post, I am kind, so at least I will do it with you in a kind way as opposed to the usual social media way most people do with just getting rude/nasty. That's not my style, as you correctly pointed out earlier this week, and never will be.  So, all is well! 

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Ambyr Michelle continues to be *that girl.* She’s just a star, period. Elevates every scene she’s in on the sheer strength of her emotional realism and charisma. Can sell any dialogue. I wish the show veered away from the B&B-style scripting. TMG/Leslie’s tirade stood out, I suppose, but she’s getting a bit mustache-twirly. And I wish DD had more to do in that episode than stand and sob.
    • Well, that was down to CBS being weak and not being willing to just pulling the plug entirely. They didn't want to commit to cancelling the show in case they needed it for their schedule basically; plus they kept showing that they were willing to make cuts if needed to be. 
    • I'm sorry but clearly what I've said is not satisfactory to you. I have now read what you have to say, twice. As it happens, my interest at this point is looking at other mislabeled files to find this other Ruth Buzzi content. I do not see any point to each of us repeating ourselves, so I will leave it here. 
    • It seemed to be your intent. coming into a thread I started and making multiple posts saying my data was wrong. In the next paragraph you say "Of course, I was suspicious from the very first instance where what I saw & heard did not agree with what it should have.  I'm very glad to know why." That certainly didn't stop you from immediately saying the data was wrong, until I provided additional receipts. Why did you not check the daily episode guide (for instance, this one for the 1980's) I posted for the world to see for exactly this reason...to help confirm airdates: http://daytimeroyaltyonline.com/days-daily-summaries-1980-1989-t15361.html? That is what you should be checking BEFORE you make any posts in the future like this, trying to suggest something from my data is incorrect. You could have also messaged me and asked me why your dates weren't adding up with what the correct data is. I would have fast forwarded through that video you posted, spotted Roman and Hope and immediately have told you that was the 11/1/83 episode.
    • Jason, just let me say that it was not my intent to any way impugn any of your data  or research. I'm very sorry if it came out that way. Obviously the person I got these 4 November episodes from has mislabeled files, multiples, which I was certainly unaware of.  When I am editing it is all about what I see & hear. Later, I find time for greater reflection.  Of course, I was suspicious from the very first instance where what I saw & heard did not agree with what it should have.  I'm very glad to know why.  If you find you are no longer interested in the edit, that is fine. I have no ego in this. I did it only to share it.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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