Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

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.

 

When announcing MADD taking over the P&G soaps, I think it was Michael Logan who pointed out, aghast, that ATWT no longer had a long-term story plan. I have wondered if they ever did again. It sure didn't feel like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 11.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2377

  • DramatistDreamer

    1255

  • Soapsuds

    1005

  • P.J.

    647

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

1 minute ago, DRW50 said:

 

When announcing MADD taking over the P&G soaps, I think it was Michael Logan who pointed out, aghast, that ATWT no longer had a long-term story plan. I have wondered if they ever did again. It sure didn't feel like it.

 

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 post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

When announcing MADD taking over the P&G soaps, I think it was Michael Logan who pointed out, aghast, that ATWT no longer had a long-term story plan. I have wondered if they ever did again. It sure didn't feel like it.

 

As early as MADD? That's nuts. Wasn't that the '90s? 

I know Frank Valentini was livid at OLTL when Dena Higley never had a long term bible, just a pitch line or two (Jessica has DID, etc).

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

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.

 

 

Yes, Eileen Fulton herself mentioned that P&G rejected most of Broderick’s ideas. Not sure how she was in the loop of all that though.

Edited by BetterForgotten
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vee said:

 

As early as MADD? That's nuts. Wasn't that the '90s? 

I know Frank Valentini was livid at OLTL when Dena Higley never had a long term bible, just a pitch line or two (Jessica has DID, etc).

 

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

 

1 hour ago, Soaplovers said:

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.

 

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 post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AbcNbc247 said:

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. 


Yes! That crossed my mind. I shudder to even call it a "story" because it just wasn't. Everything was just a mini-story, and the result was that sometimes you got some really, really good single episodes (Bob and Kim's anniversary drama, for example), but never a really, really good full story.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, EllenP said:

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.

 

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 post
Share on other sites

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 post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

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.

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.

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

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. 

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 post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AbcNbc247 said:

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

 

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.

3 hours ago, prefab1 said:

 

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.

 

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 post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2020 at 2:11 PM, prefab1 said:

 

Speaking of CarJack... I know this will probably be an unpopular opinion, but while I liked both Maura West and Michael Park as actors, and I thought Carly and Jack were both well-defined characters who had a lot of chemistry together at one point, the Passanante era just made me so sick of CarJack as a couple. Most of their storylines seemed to keep falling into the same pattern: Carly does something that offends Jack's sense of morality, so he yells at her, then she yells back, then they break up for a while, then they get back together a few months later. 

 

It reminded me a lot of GL's Reva and Josh, another relationship I ultimately found toxic, with the man ultimately judging the woman and making her feel she wasn't good enough for him. That's why I'm probably the only one on these boards who preferred Reva with Jeffrey, who accepted her for exactly who she was. I actually felt the same way about Carly and Craig, and I thought Maura West had great chemistry with both Hunt Block and Jon Lindstrom, chemistry I wish the show had explored a bit more. 

 

THIS!

 

I loved early Carly and Jack. But Pissy's ATWT was so repetitive for them it made me wonder how they even cared about each other anymore or why anyone would root for them to get back together. 

 

Exactly the same with Josh and Reva. They yelled. Broke up. Dated others. Circled back around. Zzzzzz.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see both sides of the above discussion... As someone who originally only watched from 2000 onwards and who only saw the earlier stuff after, it's sometimes difficult to hear people pointing out the shows's flaws in the last ten years so much. Then again, I will be happy to admit that the episodes I've seen from 1979-1980, as well as the Marland era, are much better than the final ten years. And even in what I consider "my era" with the show, I can honestly say it went off the rails. I just don't necessarily agree on the when and how of it.

 

My take is that the show was terrible in the post-Marland mid-90's, with all of its soft porn sequences. It got an upswing in the late 90s with the return of Carly and Holden and the introduction of Jack, Molly, Camille, David, etc. I think the show soared with early Sheffer, which I might be a bit prejudiced on, because that's when I started watching. Having seen Scott Bryce, I concede that Hunt Block was no Craig, but at the time I though he was awesome. Let me also point out here that every single person who has commented on this board who hadn't seen SB, loved HB. What I mean to say is that while I get that long-time viewers had an issue with him, and perhaps it was a sign of carelessness about the show's history (which I DO take as a very serious offense in this genre), it did NOT make the show unwatchable. I get that Block's acting style isn't for everyone, but there were tons of worse actors on the show. Anyway, I digress. In 2002-2003 the show waned a bit (which I think is normal after a high), although I agree with Passenante's opinion that Rose's death was some good stuff. In 2004 the show did become quite terrible, with the Doc Reese storyline sticking out as one of the worst (at the same time, Jack's amnesia storyline was awesome). As a result, in early 2005, the show wasn't in a good place, but by the summer, the show was in a major upswing, which is why I think JP's early work wasn't that bad. Yes, it was another baby switch, only a few years after the last one, but it was a huge umbrella storyline that involved nearly all of Oakdale. I thought the majority of 2006 was really good, save the Nick Kasnoff stuff. I know the Slasher wasn't for everyone (I enjoyed it), but again, I don't think it made the show unwatchable. I think 2005-2006 also had a really strong cast, which helped to keep it watchable.

 

2007 is, in my opinion, when it all went downhill. I think that year still had some strong storylines, but mixed in with a lot of lesser ones, and the writing just didn't feel inspired. It is also, I realize in hindsight, when so many of the longterm sets started disappearing or shrinking and the weird shakycam started being used. Budget cuts starting to be felt. 2008 and 2009 were the absolute worst (more on that later). In 2010, perhaps as a result of the cancellation, the show ticked up bit. Yes, I think with this much time to prepare the show could have done a lot better in its final months, but 2010 was watchable, which 2008 and 2009 definitely weren't (and I say that as someone who has continued to watch through all of that).

 

Sorry, this is getting a bit longer than I meant, and obviously this is just my opinion. But the reason I brought all this up is because I wanted to respond to the recent claim that 2005 was terrible and late 2009 was awesome (I'm paraphrasing). I am not sure who said it, and it doesn't really matter, because it is not my intention to attack anyone, only to discuss our personal opinions. I have recently, for hobby research purposes started reading episode transcripts backwards (I know, don't ask), starting with the finale and I have just made my way to Thanksgiving 2009. A few points:

- I know Janet has a really bad rep in the ATWT community, and I agree that more airtime in the final years should have been given to more pivotal characters (or even bringing back absentee ones). Having said that, I really liked Janet, even more so in reading these transcripts now than I did at the time. As a character, she made more sense to me than Jon Lindstrom's version of Craig, who also took up much airtime, flip-flopping between Carly and Rosanna. I agree with what was said above that Jack & Carly (and Holden & Lily, for that matter), would have benefitted from a real out-of-each-other's-orbit breakup a la Bob & Kim, with both characters involved in other pairings, and I think Janet had the potential to be that pairing for Jack. What I appreciate most about Janet is the way the character was kept and repurposed as a love interest for Dusty, as opposed to the many one-storyline characters who came and left in those years. Again, I agree the show became bit Ciccone-heavy in those final years, but I think Janet is overly criticized.

- I just made my way through the Mick Dante storyline that started in 2009 and was seemingly quickly discarded following the show's cancellation. I didn't like the storyline much at the time (it didn't help that I'm no RH-fan), but even less so now (I'm pretty sure this would have to be in the top 5 worst storylines on the show). I agree this show wasn't suited for the more science-fiction type storylines, but I actually enjoyed the spa storyline in '01/'02. The reason I enjoyed that storyline was not so much for the Dr. Weston stuff, but for seeing MW, KMH and MB together, as well as the people in Oakdale trying to figure out what happened (again, I really enjoy storylines that affect most people on the canvas). Although the Dr. Weston stuff was admittedly whacky, I think they explained it enough for it to make sense if you were willing to suspend you disbelief. The Mick Dante storyline, perhaps because it was scrapped so quickly, never made sense. Was he supposed to be a de-aged James Stenbeck, who had successfully used that serum? Or was he brainwashed into thinking he was James? I always thought it was the latter, but Barbara had some of his DNA tested as match for James. There were so many plot holes I can't even properly explain the storyline. Another thing that bugged me is that when Barbara found out he was James, the man she had feared for decades, she was immediately willing to help him make up for his mistakes with their son. The whole thing made NO sense. 

 

- OK, finally to the reason why I decided to finally write this post. Thanksgiving 2009. There was a huge Thanksgiving celebration at the Snyder farm, which I'm sure some people who didn't like the Snyders weren't happy with, but I didn't mind that. There was also a Hughes celebration, at Tom & Margo's, because that had been the go-to set for Hughes celebrations ever since Bob & Kim's kitchen became WOAK. So at the start of the episode Margo is at Katie's, convincing her to come and talking about all the preparations she has to make for dinner (which, isn't she supposed to be a terrible cook? but okay...). Elsewhere Craig and Rosanna prepare to tell Margo about their engagement. Post commercial break, Katie and Margo are at T&M's when Craig and Rosanna come in. Katie and Margo are not as enthusiastic as Craig had hoped, and Margo warns them that if they plan the "rest of the family" over Thanksgiving dinner, maybe they shouldn't, because they might not respond well. At that point, (on reading) I started wondering... Wait, what rest of the family? When I think of Thanksgiving dinner over at T&M's, I envision Bob, Kim, Nancy, Lisa. None of them are related to Craig. But I guess she meant Tom & Casey. Anyway... Katie goes outside and talks to Nancy about talking to their ex-husbands, while Craig & Rosanna leave. Katie later decides to go to the Snyder Farm, so Jacob can spend some time with Brad's family. At this point, we've only seen Margo, Katie, Craig, Rosanna, Johnny and Nancy at T&M's. Now all of this would still have been at least somewhat acceptable without the final scene. As Holden gives a toast at the Snyder Farm, a montage of different scenes is shown. As part of this montage, we see Nancy sitting on the couch at the Hughes', with clearly nobody next to her, as Margo walks up from the kitchen behind her and sits with her. Nancy grabs a picture of herself, Chris, Bob and Kim, as Margo says somehing along the lines of "that's a nice one". I can't help but wonder how ED and HW must have felt filming those scenes, and I feel especially bad knowing it was one of HW's final episodes (Thank god she got to be part of the episodes surrounding Bob & Kim's anniversary after that). I get that budget cuts were heavy at that point, but this was just ridiculous. I would have probably rather not seen a Hughes celebration at all than seeing this half-assed attempt at one (although I am glad we got to see Helen).

Anyway, REALLY long post short: I just can't agree that the show was good in late '09. It was one of the worst times for the show. Although I will admit I liked the Never Surrender tour, and the cameos from some former characters

Link to post
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
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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.