Jump to content

Unpopular Soap Opinions 2016


Recommended Posts

  • Members

 

The Supercouple was mainly 80s phenomenon.  HW and execs wanted to copy what Luke and Laura wrought and who can blame them?  But before Luke and Laura, couples consisted of two well constructed characters who eventually got together, usually after a series of well written conflicts.

 

 

I'm not saying that it's  imperative that a character be single before pairing them off (if you can though, that's ideal) but the idea of bringing a character on a soap for the express purpose of being coupled with another character strikes me as unsustainable for the life of the new character as well as the coupledom and the show.  JMO but the focus on pairing couples is one reason why the writing for everything else deteriorated and eventually those same couples suffered in the long run.  

These shows now lack a sturdy foundation of characters built on strong personal narratives, no wonder why these writers struggle to create storylines on these soaps!  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

The Supercouples were built up so much as destiny pairings that once they were married any conflicts had fans up in arms. They had been through so much to get together that it didn't ring true that the next problem would tear them apart.

That problem always existed though.

Bill Bell set up Bill and Laura and Doug and Julie as supercouples and once they finally were together it was hard to find more long term story for them.Bell was gone by then so who knows what he would have done but subsequent writers went with an unpopular interloper (Kate Winograd ) for Bill and rape/murder trial for Doug and Julie before splitting them up as a result of Julie's disfigurement and Doug's sudden marriage to Lee.

On AW once Steve and Alice were together he was killed off.

On Y&R Victor & Nikki were a hot couple but Bill Bell split them up successfully with the Jack/Ashley story.Although viewers were upset Nikki and Victor were being split,the quality of the writing kept us enthralled.It was character based.Victor was intrigued by Ashley,the business woman quite the opposite of flighty Nikki,who enjoyed the attention of Jack a charmer who offered her what Victor couldn't  or wouldn't.

I think Agnes Nixon was successful in splitting up Cliff and Nina by introducing Steve Jacobi and putting Nina in the workplace.It acknowledged that Nina was still young and inexperienced and challenged by a man completely different to Cliff.

The difference with these couples was the character flaws were used successfully so the break ups played out convincingley (while still leaving hope for reconciliation)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When I look at my favorite couples like from ATWT, Bob and Kim Hughes or Tom and Margo (before they became completely boring) and Lucinda Walsh and John Dixon they were all individuals first before they became couples.  That's my main and essential point.  When they did split up from each other (and each did sometimes multiple times and over the span of years) most writers weren't at a loss for what to do with them outside of a relationship, because the characters had strong personal narratives already in place.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

My UO would be that although I don't like Jean Passanante, and I especially hate her work on AMC (which was just heinously awful), I don't believe she ruined ATWT (I put that on Goutman #1, P&G #2, and that sick hack Sheffer #3, and even then the show still had real potential in the end), I don't believe she's ruined GH (which has been a mess since 1997 or 1998), I don't believe she ruined OLTL (which fell apart around 1994 or 1995, Gottlieb and Griffith left and when Malone began losing focus). She is a grindingly mediocre, forgettable scribe who has hung around because the soaps don't want any better. But all the excessive focus on her, especially here, doesn't match most of her actual onscreen output or track record. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't hate any of the players (Hope, Liam, Wyatt, Steffy, Ivy) in this cesspool. I just wish that Brad made them more round, complex characters instead of being flat characters on a constant merry-go-round. All they have to offer is their constant switching of partners. 

 

Even when Ridge used to bounce back between Brooke and Taylor, all of them could stand on their own and had things to offer to the canvas out their triangle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I don't hate Hope and Rafe together on Days. I am not a fan of the forced writing telling us, "LOVE THEM AS A COUPLE!!!!", but I think the characters and actors have a pleasant, easy chemistry.

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.



  • Recent Posts

    • Bo has a bad history with kids named Zach. (too soon?)
    • Christie said in her interview this week that she recently started taking acting classes again, and has been doing some work in England, so that helped her to jump into Carrie for this (as well as it being all so familiar, it really was home.)
    • Andrea Barber aka Kimmy Gibbler did have a few scenes with Drake too, when he first came on. Christie came in the middle of that storyline 
    • Carrie, as played by Andrea Barber, was at Bo & Hope's wedding. She was the flower girl. The ringbearer was Zachary Parker, the little boy that Megan tried to pass off as her and Bo's son. Andrea's Carrie was at Tony & Anna's real wedding (Aug. 5, 1985). She appeared for the last time on March 21, 1986. Christie's Carrie debuted on April 14, 1986. It appears that Carrie remained in Salem, just off-screen, during that near-month. Christie picked up with what Andrea had been playing, apprehension over John.
    • I don't think she is. I think she just created some really boring characters and for some reason doesn't know what to do with them.  But let's say that she is being force to write these characters that she doesn't like or want to write for.......that's a really bad sign that the creator of the show is being told what to do from the very beginning.  With so many EPs, I was worried there could be too many cooks in the kitchen, too many people giving notes - all those EPs are representing companies who have a stake in the show.    Canada continues to be one episode ahead. Thursday's US episode is another lacklustre episode, even with Leslie in it.  We'll see if Friday or Monday's episode in Canada will be a repeat. 
    • Like a lot of soaps, once relatives left, they kinda dropped off the face of the earth and out of conversations. I don't know why writers do that. If they just don't want to confuse viewers, or don't think it matters, or want the liberty kind of revise history to make their stories work. After Josh left in '84, he's barely mentioned. Even when Billy's railing against Kyle and refusing to accept him, it'd be the most natural thing in the world to say "Kyle's NOT by brother, JOSH is!" and I don't think he ever really says that.  The only writer I can recall who didn't do that is Doug Marland on ATWT. 
    • IIRC, there is a line during this time period where Reva says something like Marah is her first-born child, which fans were not thrilled with.  Dylan makes a few appearances through the rest of the show (and a much later recast that isn't really worth talking about, with a face that is familiar to you). He will make one briefly during 1997, if you get that far.
    • Another great episode.  GH has been pretty good this year, loading up the chamber, because now there's many bullets to fire, and another one was fired today when Nina found out Michael is the father of Sasha's baby.  I hope this secret comes out at the hearing.  I've also liked the slow burn with Gio/Emma. There's just so many things to look forward to on this show now.  GH is finally back to being really good. 
    • I'm all for it. Get them Nina!   

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I am blown away that Christie Clark is 51, and she debuted 39 years ago. They gave her a lovely script today.  But, I could not think of any other examples in culture of someone able to jump right back into the skin of a character, after virtually retiring from acting years ago. I was trying to recall if Carrie left for a bit with Anna after Roman died (because she wasn't at Bo & Hope's wedding), and then returned as a pre-teen Christie?  Or if she was just SORASed off-screen?  But, whenever I see the character I am reminded how much more trauma she's endured than Sami, and yet she remains such a nice person.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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