Jump to content

What was the fatal blow to your show?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

ATWT: Many, many reasons:

1) The dismissal of Martha Byrne

2) The death of Ben Hendrickson in real life

3) The idiotic transformation of characters (e.g. Damian Grimaldi, Vienna Hyatt, etc)

4) Hiring ABC "names" (Roger Howarth, Stuart Damon, Lynn Herring)

5) A constant trotting out of useless minor characters (Audrey, Dani, Spencer, Evan Walsh IV, The Z Twins, Ameera, Professor "Scarf")

6) Letting a great character like James Stenbeck be killed by a useless, annoying twit like Audrey Coleman.

7) And last but not least, that godawful Ciccone Clan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

So true about GH agressively rewriting history! The Rick Webber return and Heather's obsession with Luke with were the most ridiculous. I mean, I watched GH religiously from 1978 til 1986 and I don't recall Tony Geary and Robin Mattson ever sharing a scene together. The Rick Webber was a huge head-scratching WTF! Short-term shock value stunts that are executed with little thought about how they ruin the integrity of the characters and the show turn viewers away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

AW: I agree that the 90 min. expansion and Texas spinoff hurt AW, but the show still went on for another two decades. Not sure how that was the fatal blow.

Most people would say Frankie's murder in '97. That definitely had an impact but a few months later AW wrote out John Bolger and Robin Christopher whom were a fan fave couple. The show then went on to write out Kale Browne/Anna Holbrook/David Forsyth. They were all popular vets that drove story for years! (Didn't Matt Crane and Robert Kelker Kelly leave around this time voluntarily? Tho Matt returned near the end.)

This was a mass exodus for a show already on the brink. I feel this is what put them over the edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

B&B: Fear of change. Taylor/Ridge/Brooke is death. You could see the moments, around ten years ago, that they threw potential development out the window, when Brooke and Thorne broke up and she went after Ridge again. This is what led to the endless stories about Brooke being debased, which are the epitome of not knowing what to do with a character. They went on to repeat the same story with Stephanie again and again, with Amber...any attempts to create a new dynamic were hesitant and short-lived. Brad Bell's need for a security blanket has destroyed any of the soap essence. It's just a brutal circle interspersed with trite "issue" stories Brad uses to show everyone what a great guy he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Was just going to say that. Even in 2003 (which was still a great year) you could see and feel the rot setting in.

It's painful that Alden is back in the Bell universe and not writing for Y&R but being wasted away at B&B. If there is ever any person that can possibly restore the show to what it was, she's it. Although I'm afraid there might have been just too much damage done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In a way B&B almost changes too much. How many young ingenues have they thrown at Rick? How many failed relationships is Bridget gonna have? How many new families has B&B introduced in the past 10 years to take the place of the Spectras? How many random men is Taylor going to have sex with in between marriages to Ridge?

Every 2 years it's like a whole new cast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it's always been a superficial change. They were starting to make permanent, needed changes in the late 90's/early 00's and they backed off. Since then they bring people in and never want to do anything with them, unless they can be used as some type of wooden figure women can be thrown at (like Nick).

They go back to Brooke/Ridge/Taylor, Stephanie/Brooke wars, so many times, they have done an incredibly poor job of developing the kids of B/R/T, it is incredibly bizarre that Stephanie and Eric have four healthy, living children and only 1 ever gets a storyline.

I think Brad Bell also looks down on the type of fun and flair the Spectras used to bring. His ideas of camp are just tacky and borderline offensive, and for some reason now they seem to involve some type of quasi-rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it was the decision to gut the Matthews family. They were AW's core family and viewers were deeply invested in most of them. They were also a contrast to the rich and powerful, without being an overly pronounced contrast, the way the Frames were. The Frames were also populated by actors who wouldn't stay around, whereas most of the Matthews probably would have.

The show tried again and again to build a new family unit and it never worked. They just had Mac and Rachel, and their kids, who had to be aged and aged until finally Jamie was pushed off the show, and then the friendship ties of Cass, Felicia, and their loved ones. There was still something of a void. So the show was put in a position it shouldn't have been in, where someone like Frankie was pushed into being this huge heart of the show, when no show can survive putting one character in that place. It's the same thing that killed GL when they decimated years of family and continuity and all that was left was Maureen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There had been mistakes made on B&B before this, but I remember in 2003 that, while I still very much enjoyed the show, a lot of stories felt like stuff thrown against the wall in the vain hope that something sticks. It was relentless. Macy went through 7 years of storyline in less than a year. Her return from the dead, the reconciliation with Thorne, Thorne sleeping with Darla and getting her pregnant, Macy's hysterectomy, her hook-up with Deacon, the baby custody stuff, her death... all stuff that wasn't necessarily bad but the pacing hurt incredibly and made it all feel desperate and like they were grasping at straws. To top it all off, there was that death that was never shown, but then there was a memorial, it was all handled so badly. Let's not mention Sheila's return (what a horribly executed and paced piece of crap) and Nick coming in and all the hoola.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'll go even further. For me it was killing off Taylor the last time. I dont know but the show lost alot of heart for me when they did that. Bringing back Macy felt like the only thing they could do to make up for that at the time but then they went and killed her off within a year again

I think out of all the soaps, surprisingly B&B is the most consistent. No matter what they do, they ALWAYS default back to Stephanie, Brooke, Ridge, Eric and to a lesser degree Taylor. They always reboot things back to how they once were. At the core, things are still very much the same way they were 20 years ago. Brooke and Taylor are still fighting over Ridge. Stephanie is still trying to get rid of Brooke. The other Forrester kids continue to be ignored. These are like core B&B themes that unfortunately never change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Y&R - I always say Bill Bell stepping down as head writer, though the show was still good, it wasn't as good after he left. Kay Alden going was the true end though, the show fell apart after that. Honestly it would have been great if the show ended with Jill and Kay being forced to live with each other and the Abbotts getting back Jabot and Victor and Nikki reuniting etc... the storylines in 98/99 could have easily wrapped up the show and it wouldn't be the tragedy it is today.

Days - I would say JER, I do like the possession stuff and Kristen and co. but it changed the tone of the show and it was never the same, I will say he did a great job with the other stories around that time, though Hope/Gina was a bust to me.

B&B - The endless Taylor/Ridge/Brooke triangle. If they had sense they would have had Brooke and Ridge marry in 1997 and have Taylor give birth to Thomas without Brooke knowing Ridge was the father, then maybe have Brooke have some complicated disease that caused her to be sterile making Taylor the only one who ever had Ridge's child, thus continuing the triangle without the back and forth. Brooke going after Thorne and the total decimation of her character was ludicrous. After the marriage to Grant and the nervous breakdown they should have redeemed the character. Then they should have moved on. At that point they should have focused on different characters more such as Macy's new found family, that didn't seem to last long, I also agree the pacing of stories has been terrible and the incestuous tone of the show is laughable to most casual viewers I talk to.

I guess these are more JTS moments, though I think it was around these periods these shows quality declined and that is what has ultimately caused the erosion of viewers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But is that damaging or consistency? Brooke made quite a bit of progress in her relationship with Thorne only for her to go right back to Ridge for no reason. The same thing happened to Taylor in her relationship with Nick. It's gotten so bad that the show feel suffocating whenever one of the characters gets into a "new" cause it will eventually end up with them regressing anyway.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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