The problem with shows like Revenge, OUAT, and Scandal is that they are too limited in their stories and featuring one major arc as opposed to numerous arcs introduced at different paces.

I think new writers should be made to watch old episodes of Dallas, Knots landing, even early seasons of Dynasty to see how a serial drama should be written and plotted.

Dallas and Knots Landing started as episodic one hour dramas, same in format as The Waltons or Eight Is Enough. The problem with the newer generation of soaps is they assume you will care from moment one and find it all oh so fabulous (Melrose 2.0). A TV show needs to have some time to create the characters so you eventually care enough to watch them serialized but there just is no time for that anymore. I think it took Dallas three years to blossom into a full blown serial, by which time the audience watched all the characters in problem of the week episodes and an occasional two-part story.

The problem with shows like Revenge, OUAT, and Scandal is that they are too limited in their stories and featuring one major arc as opposed to numerous arcs introduced at different paces.

I think new writers should be made to watch old episodes of Dallas, Knots landing, even early seasons of Dynasty to see how a serial drama should be written and plotted.

I agree. However, this is the problem: If the show doesn't have a major/central arc, in other words if it doesn't have a HOOK/gimmick, people aren't gonna even watch it.

Tell them it's a show about a neighborhood and a newly wed couple moves in and it's about their lives? They'll say it's boring and won't even care to sample.

The story of a woman having an affair with the President of the United States? ZOMG. (And they might still not watch).

Network audiences today mostly need the shocking twist, the "high concept," the unique one could say. It's why something like PARENTHOOD or FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS suffer and can't find a big audience, despite FNL's amazing awesomeness.

Which is sad, considering the fact that, let's say GREY'S ANATOMY, which was always about various stories with various paces, is still around. (Regardless of quality). But it did start 10 years ago, where the TV climate was arguably different.

Edited October 12, 201312 yr by YRBB

However, this is the problem: If the show doesn't have a major/central arc, in other words if it doesn't have a HOOK/gimmick, people aren't gonna even watch it.

Sad, but true. Even worse: more often than not, it seems a particular series is more about the hook than about the characters; and the hook is often something that cannot be sustained over a long period of time.

Would love to see both on the air again with Dallas on TNT the same night....retro 80's

I agree with the general notion that the primetime "soaps" today are written much narrower than the old ones were. That central umbrella story takes over the whole show, and you don't really care about the characters as characters -- they're just pieces of the umbrella story's puzzle. It sets the whole tone of the show, for better or for worse. Revenge, which I still enjoy, will always be shrouded in darkness and devoid of anything light because that's what the central story will always be. Nothing wrong with that, mind you, and I don't need it to be anything else, but that's what makes it different from something like Dynasty.

Take Knots Landing and Dallas, with their upbeat, bouncy theme songs. Melodrama out the ass, but each episode begins with this bouncy disco music, and the first scene is usually low-key/light-hearted. Very same episode could be dark and menacing later on, though. They were able to go from one extreme to the other because those layers were just there. The characters were more like real people who had happy and dramatic moments.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I wonder whether they would be better off doing a reboot or remake of FC rather than a continuation.

They could just start again at the beginning -- with Chase and his family's arrival in Tuscany Valley -- but with some tweaks, such as:

-- Making Maggie Cole and Vickie's stepmother rather than mother in order to allow for the creation of a new character (the real mother) who arrives at some point (hired by Angela, of course) to cause trouble for the Giobertis.

-- Introducing Melissa and Carlo Agretti at the start of the series, thereby setting up the Melissa/Lance/Cole triangle and Angela/Melissa rivalry sooner rather than later.

-- Combining Emma and Julia into one character (as Lance's emotionally fragile mother) and having Richard Channing on as Angela's son from the start.

Like Michael Swan's Richard in the pilot.

All interesting ideas, but I'd much rather see someone just rip those riffs off and create an entirely new show in that case. I wouldn't want to see the characters and relationships reworked. If it's going to be Falcon Crest or any primetime soap, I'd perfer a continuation or prequel. The idea teased for the Dynasty reboot was a prequel. I don't know if that's what they ultimately pitched, but Joan hinted that that was the direction in which Richard and Esther were going. I would find that incredibly interesting if done well: the three Colby brothers, their big sister and parents; young Blake and Ben; Alexis' and Sable's mothers who were sisters... Sian Phillips would be excellent as the matriarch of that clan.

First of all, WHAT?!!

Second of all, FALCON CREST before KNOTS LANDING? Especially when all the principal players on KL are still alive and kicking?

And i want to ad the actors from KL aged a little better. No offence to Lorenzo Lamas but the girls and WIll Moses didn't age that well. Even Susan Sullivan, i don't think looks that great with the red hair on Castle.

Except for maybe Joan Van Ark, the men and women of KL aged really well (maybe with a tiny bit of help.) I still see Ted Shakleford on Young and Restless occasionally, I've kept up with Donna Mills and I know Michele Lee always looks good. I don't know about Bill Devane but Kevin Dobsons i beleives hasn't changed much since i saw him a couple of years ago on something.

Knots had a good aging cast and Joan looked fine on Dallas this year. Plus the younger actors like Nicollette Sheridan, Stacy Galina and Brian Austin Green still look good.

And i want to ad the actors from KL aged a little better. No offence to Lorenzo Lamas but the girls and WIll Moses didn't age that well. Even Susan Sullivan, i don't think looks that great with the red hair on Castle.

Except for maybe Joan Van Ark, the men and women of KL aged really well (maybe with a tiny bit of help.) I still see Ted Shakleford on Young and Restless occasionally, I've kept up with Donna Mills and I know Michele Lee always looks good. I don't know about Bill Devane but Kevin Dobsons i beleives hasn't changed much since i saw him a couple of years ago on something.

Knots had a good aging cast and Joan looked fine on Dallas this year. Plus the younger actors like Nicollette Sheridan, Stacy Galina and Brian Austin Green still look good.

I have to agree, the fact they all look good, are around and are (probably) still capable of doing this makes it surprising to me. And I love the point about Nicollette Sheridan and Brian Austin Green, who I think are still pretty recognizable and could be good publicity. Especially since everything that happened with Sheridan and HOUSEWIVES? Oy. I can already see the "fired actress returns to original soap" or whatever headlines. I would argue the only person FALCON CREST has that would be comparable to that is Lorenzo Lamas.

Not only that, but everybody you want to see from Falcon Crest is dead. I LOVED how they rebooted the show in season 9, but most people hated that, so they're bound to hate this since there is really no one they can bring back. Another huge shock is that nobody brought back Dynasty. Joan Collins, Linda Evans, Heather Locklear, Emma Samms, Jack Coleman (who still gets high profile gigs), Gordon Thompson and John James are all perfect for a reboot. Not only that, but you have a good amount of next generation to play off. It's weird that they don't attempt this.

Not only that, but everybody you want to see from Falcon Crest is dead. I LOVED how they rebooted the show in season 9, but most people hated that, so they're bound to hate this since there is really no one they can bring back. Another huge shock is that nobody brought back Dynasty. Joan Collins, Linda Evans, Heather Locklear, Emma Samms, Jack Coleman (who still gets high profile gigs), Gordon Thompson and John James are all perfect for a reboot. Not only that, but you have a good amount of next generation to play off. It's weird that they don't attempt this.

well i don't know. Dynasty was a product of it's time. it was the 80's, big shoulder-pads, big money, power. Now we have "real housewives." Knots Landing was universal and it showed that by spanning into three decades. It started when everything was still very 1970's and it went right into the early 1990's. If they had brought Donna Mills back, It absoltely could have gone on for several more seasons.

I just hate to reboot something and have it not be a go. or like 90210, it goes on for several seasons and it still doesn't even come close to being like the original. I am still shocked that the show went on for five seasons. it was a very sad comparison to the original. West Beverly looked completely different. The Peach Pit looked completely different (and then dropped out of sight.) it was just awful. I know in the Original Gabrille Carters was in her 30's but the rest of the cast were teens or young enough to play teens. The new cast were all older....playing HS teens. I don't even like to think about it.

This could either be amazing or an epic disaster. Either way I'm in.

Not only that, but everybody you want to see from Falcon Crest is dead.

I think that would depend on what everyone would want to see. If we're talking about Angela, Chase (who might not be dead, but anyways), Maggie, Melissa, then I would agree. That's why I suggested up-thread doing a "re-set," if you will, telling the story again from the very beginning. I realize Jane Wyman is irreplaceable, but I also think another, equally formidable actress could come in and re-invent and reinterpret her role.

Either way, though, if Julia were made part of this re-boot, then they might have to recast. Last time I checked, Abby Dalton had retired -- and besides, it wasn't as if she was THAT good for the series overall, know what I mean?

Edited November 6, 201312 yr by Khan