Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members

......."almost" universally praised. "Almost." Meaning not entirely.

I never understood why so many people need characters to talk about things that happened 20+ years ago. If it makes sense with what's currently playing out, then it's great, but anything else borders on gratuitous. What exactly was there to revisit in regards to Kim and John in 2010 considering they hadn't been in a relationship with each other since the 70s and she'd been married to Bob for over 20 years? If they hadn't resolved Kim and John's story after 30 some-odd years, that's indicative of bigger problems. The Kim/Susan feud was addressed during the 50th anniversary and then in that one-shot ep with Kim and Bob's "marital troubles" a few years later. Bringing that up again would just make both women look supremely immature.

ATWT screwed up a LOT in its last few years, but not having characters randomly discussing events from 1976 with little to no context isn't an example of that IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2974

  • DramatistDreamer

    1958

  • Soapsuds

    1718

  • P.J.

    823

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

Fair enough opinion, AMS, and I should clarify that I wasn't hoping to see a revival of a feud or a rehashing of anything that happened 20 years ago but trying to make a statement that there were a lot of characters with a lot of history still on the show but many were given very little to do in the last 9 months following the cancellation announcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Because I think long-time viewers LOVE to get these nods to history, the same way movie or comic book fans love the easter eggs. Soaps sometimes have an infuriating amnesia syndrome that drives fans crazy. How many times has one mother of a missing/kidnapped/sick child heard "I can't imagine how you feel" from someone who we know underwent the exact same situation?

 

Maybe it didn't need to be a long "conversation" about something, but just some kind of an acknowledgement of history. Kim and John might have discussed Andy and Hope, or Barbara might have said she'd talked to Hal's sister for the first time in forever.

 

Specifically re: Kim/Susan, I'll have to rewatch the Divas on a Bus eppy, but I don't remember them bringing up Dan. I don't remember them bring him up during the Bob/Susan fling. And long time viewers always felt it simmering just under the surface whenever they got bitchy with each other. You don't know how much I would have paid for Kim just once to have shaken her head at Emily's latest debacle and chime in with something along the lines of "this would break Dan's heart to see Emily....(fill in blank)" and then have Susan explode on her.

 

I agree there wouldn't be a reason to bring up Tom's parade of ex-wives, or the Stewart quads, for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


And on that point, I completely agree with you, but the show had failed on that front time and time again over its last 5-10 years, so I guess by the time it ended, I just knew not to expect it. I wasn't entirely disappointed with the end because I didn't have too many expectations going in.
 


I agree with most of what you're saying here. Like I said, if it fits the story/scene/moment, then I'm 100% all for it. I'm a complete nerd for soap history just like most of us are, so I would never shake my head at a logical conversation about a character's history or characters' shared history. I agree with you about Kim and John mentioning Andy - one of my biggest pet peeves with ATWT was that once characters left, they were seemingly forgotten, even though they were parts of these huge families. It costs absolutely nothing to write in a mention of a character. By the late 2000s, though, soaps were no longer written in a way that conversations that are completely normal and commonplace in real life would also find their way into character dialogue. The more time you focus on stupid, complicated, repetitive plot lines, the less time you have to acknowledge impactful characters who are no longer on the canvas.

I wasn't referring to Dan in regards to the Bus episode. I assumed tune_in_tomorrow meant their 1990 feud over Bob, which was flashbacked and discussed in the Bus episode and used kinda cheaply for comic relief in the "OMG Bob and Kim are divorcing!" episode. I think it would have been petty for either Kim or Susan to bring Dan up after he'd been dead for so long, but I would've been okay with Kim bringing him up in regards to Emily.

All those are things that were NOT really happening much at all on this show anymore and hadn't been happening for a long, long time, though, so while I absolutely agree that it was ignorant of the show's great history, if I'm strictly assessing the finale and the weeks leading up to it, I can't really point at that as a big let down. We all knew that we weren't going to get much. Maybe GL's literal "come to Jesus" the previous year had gotten some people's hopes up, but I wasn't one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

From what I'm guessing, it may have been a reunion for the cast and crew of Tremors.  

 

It would've been so nice if she had gotten invited back before the show ended (perhaps around the time that Julianne Moore returned) but with a different Craig, as well as that Gabriel character (that looked more like Sierra's ex-husband Tonio Reyes) it most likely would've been awkward.

 

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I'm sure you're right. ATWT was so disjointed. It was like several different shows in one. As much as I enjoyed seeing Julianne, it brought into sharp relief how glaring the contrast was between her scenes with the Hughes, which were at least mostly, recognizeable and so many other characters that I could care less about by that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I was just thinking how head writers can either make or break certain characters. Barbara Ryan was on the back burner when both Douglas Marland and Hogan Sheffer started their respective tenures. Both plucked Barbara from dullsville and injected new life into the character. Who do you think did a better job?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The storylines in the mid-late 80s to early 90s wasn't just about Barbara but the characters she was involved in and there were such good stories to watch. 86 was one of the best years for Barbara dramatically, she was building Simply Barbara, juggling Fashions, being mentored by Lucinda Walsh, which caused a rift between her and Lisa, while sleeping with Lucinda's son-in-law, after she nearly wrecked Tom & Margo's marriage, tried to take revenge on Brian and Shannon, ended up being blackmailed by Tad Channing. We didn't just see Barbara scheming, we saw her working, designing, poring over every detail of her business.

Oh, and then we saw the lies come crashing down, as well as haunting her when she was falsely accused of murder, we saw Barbara fall in love and allow herself to be vulnerable (something Barbara had been loathe to do after past failure in relationships).

Barbara just seemed like a much more complete character back then. 

 

Under Sheffer, I'm sure it was a relief for Colleen to be active again and to have someone to actually write for Barbara but her character seemed to be written much more broadly, whereas under Marland, there was a lot more specificity.  Under Sheffer the humor was very broad, to the point of being slapstick, at times. I swear, once Colleen was doing an impression of Groucho Marx during that scene before she jumped out the window. It seemed a bit too cartoonish for my liking. 

Edited by DramatistDreamer
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

    • I think they’re desperately trying to cover his awful tattoos. But anyway them being unable to style short kings properly has been a major pet peeve of mine for a while now.  I honestly don’t understand what some people expect from actors to even begin considering them for recognition. Let’s be real—awards mostly mean that an actor is respected by their peers and has some level of cultural relevance. Actual judgment on the acting itself? That’s often secondary—highly subjective and shaped by the times. I completely agree on both points. If you’re an actor or a dancer you shouldn’t get any tattoos (sorry not sorry). Tomas’ tattoos are ugly too. And regarding the couples- you’re completely right. These writers are unable to write romance.   Further comments: - Kat cannot be this dumb to keep tampering with evidence over and over again. And I’m officially not a fan of the actress—every time she’s in a scene with Leslie, she doesn’t seem intimidated at all. She plays it like comic relief, which is just too much, especially when paired with Leslie’s histrionics and over-the-top antics. Leslie is older, dangerous, and has literally been portrayed as homicidal—Kat should be at least a little scared. • I also didn’t like Kat playing damsel in distress with the hotel manager. It gave off the same weird energy as Dani with the cop. I would’ve much preferred the version Paul Raven suggested, with her sneaking in through housekeeping. • And yes, Dani again accused Hayley of faking the pregnancy—this time even specifying she might be using a pillow under her shirt. (No fake miscarriage being mentioned) I stand by my take: this is ridiculous writing. No one in the real world—except us, the chronically online soap watchers—would even think of such a conspiracy theory. Haley is no Beyoncé. • What in the world was Chelsea wearing in her hair the other day? And this whole thing with Madison is beyond cringe. Chelsea’s coming off as needy and toxic—basically like every other Dupree. • I’m glad the casino storyline is moving forward, but it’s still boring as hell. Honestly, I’d be so here for a plot twist where Vanessa and Doug take Joey out. • The direction and editing lately have been rough. Abrupt cuts, weird pacing… something just feels off overall. There’s a strange uneasiness to how it’s all coming together. • And finally: Tomas is too much of a saint. Where are the messy sluts when you need them? (Vanessa doesn’t count.)
    • Andrew sure has hard nips.
    • I was watching some August 1987 episodes and they brought back so many memories. I had some thoughts: Lisa and Jamie were so dull. Lisa was such a nothing character. It boggles my mind that so much story was centered around her in such a short amount of time. Joanna Going is a talented actress, but the material was just not there.  It was so good to see Wallingford and Mitch again. I know there was talk about Felicia a while back, but these episodes reminded me how integral Felicia was for the show.  Sally Spencer was done so dirty. She is turning in superb performances in an icky storyline. I wish she had stuck around longer. She has chemistry with everyone. The McKinnons should have lasted longer. Spencer had some strong stuff with Stephen Schnetzer and Mary Alexander. AW waster such a talented actress by getting rid of her. Justice for Cheryl too. I also missed Ed Fry when he left. Sandra Ferguson was a star from the moment she came on. She was charismatic and just popped. She had immediate chemistry with RKK and blended in well with Wyndham and Watson. I'd forgotten about the teenage Matthew.  I have no memory of Peggy Lazarus. She must not have lasted long. Was the original plan for John that he was going to turn out to be the twins' real father?      
    • If the new and improved copies that @rsclassicfanforever has uploaded can be manually moved into the "by month, by year" folders, that would be awesome. I personally don't think it's necessary to keep the older versions (which either have Dutch subtitles hard coded on them, or are lesser in picture quality). That's a lot of valuable drive space that could be cleared. Just my view but can appreciate others may feel differently. The structure had been by month by year previously, so I think it would be easier to conform to that, where so much prior work to get it to that format has already been done. Hopefully you can "drag and drop" so the new copies are in the right month/year? Re Clips, I never look at them now we pretty much have the episodes in full. Appreciate others may use, however. Thanks for all your hard work here @BoldRestless!
    • Oh yes defintely, Josh Griffith repeats and repeats the same storylines.
    • Isnt’t this storyline similar to the Cameron Kirsten situation though? Sharon thought she killed him. He ended up being alive and Sharon was being tormented with thinking she was seeing his face everywhere and that’s how we got that iconic scene with her and Nikki in the sewers.   I understand in Mariah’s case this is different circumstances but it does seem like a play on that whole thing. Maybe I’m wrong. I just wish if they were going to make any character follow in Sharon’s foot steps it would be Faith. Mariah wasn’t even raised by her, and her personality is different. I would expect her to take a different path. I understand I could be completely jumping ahead because the storyline hasn’t even played out yet but we’ll see. 
    • Thanks again @Paul Raven Monica was completely without redeeming qualities at this point. I always found the whole Monica = Carly narrative regressive, as I don't think shows comparing characters so heavily is ever a great idea, but she's actually worse than Carly was. Was it the Pollocks who had Leslie have a miscarriage?  Giving her a child, especially by rape, was not a good idea, but a part of me wishes they'd committed to it just to see what story it might have had in later years.
    • @janea4old Your detailed explanation and delving into the psychology and motivations is no doubt the opposite of what we will see onscreeen. As @ranger1rg stated we will get a few scenes and some sketchy explanations. Like the adoption of Aria, most of it will take place off screen.
    • I'm suddenly fearful that DAYS is going to pull a Flowers-for-Algernon stunt and Bo's progress will be reversed.  While @te. is stuck on Abe's tiny bedroom, I can't stop thinking of the size of Bo's huge hospital room.
    • Okay, why are Paulina and Abe sleeping like that?!  I'd take a screen grab if I wasn't lazy, but come on.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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