Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Watching Days and GH today and seeing both use the same plot over and over again. What plots have been overused? Days with their twins and bring back characters back from the dead and now GH and the usual taking prisoner to prison only to be in an accident….thats been done over and over on GH in the last year or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Baby-switching and back from the dead have been used too much

And Who's  the Daddy.  Sick of all of those.  Every plot point on GH is a variation of one that happened to the character already

Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing/switching paternity tests.  These people get into hospital records easier than their own bank accounts.  Dopplegangers and twins dug up by Victor Newman.  Victor continually torturing people in the name of protecting his famileehhhhhhhhhhh when all he really is doing is getting his jollies from torturing people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything on Soaps is overused from like 30 or 40 years ago, Get with the modern times and right stuff that is part of this era. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sick of back-from-the-dead stories,  ESPECIALLY when it pertains to characters who have been resurrected multiple times.  (Yes, Andre DiMera, I'm looking at you.)

Edited by Khan
Link to post
Share on other sites

Soaps need to stop haphazardly killing off characters for Sweeps and ratings-  they always believe they can resurrect the character or bring back a never before seen twin.   Although we've all suspended believe, especially when the actor/actress is a favorite but those back from the dead stories are one of the reasons why soaps don't get the respect that they should have over the years.

 

Also Y&R has had this thing since Pratt started writing, where they put all these supposedly important details offscreen. You're on like 5 days a week and can't fit in an affair between two characters??? We have to find out in flashbacks after one of them is dead?!  Or what about writing in a whole entire backstory that was previously unknown for a character we practically watched grow up onscreen from teenage to adult years?  One character had a wild party and caused the paralysis of a previously unheard of character that returns out for revenge?  

 

If only soaps would stop messing with the show/character's history and write something current that is based on where the character is at present.  It might actually work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true dramatistdreamer! They're so quick to off someone knowing they always have an out. At least primetime usually sticks to a death and it matters. Soaps are so flippant with it that it has no impact. Bo's been shrugged off over on DAYS, Will is long forgotten ...

 

Soaps are stuck in a recycled rut of soap tropes and cliches. It's wash, rinse and repeat. It doesn't help that we keep rehiring the same fired head writers of past soaps. Soaps used to think outside of the box. Soaps used to have an impact. I think they still could but with the lack of a budget, checked out actors, and recycled headwriter trash, we'll never be out of this rut. And when soaps try, they're trashed and looked down upon (AMC/OLTL). I never heard so much whining about the Cassandra story. Soaps aren't meant to always be cheery and romantic. I'd like some actual grit every once in a while. I'm still just so bummed that venture "failed" (though IMO it didn't; I believe the audience was there, the money wasn't).

 

Anyway ... good idea for a thread!

I also don't necessarily mind things "off screen" every once in a while, to surprise the audience, but it's becoming a lazy way to do things. I have the issue when important conversations are off-screen, then we find out said characters had a conversation we never saw. I think the Nick backstory thing was clearly a stretch and I don't love when they pull something like that. It's really a matter of how it's handled and written. Of course it's often poor ...

 

And it would be nice if the writers actually understood the characters they were writing for. You can tell when a scriptwriter cares or knows the characters. So many times a story can come from the character itself and it doesn't have to be what the soaps cling to and call storytelling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole flashbacks to tell a story that could've been told onscreen is a lazy plot device used in prime time too.

 

 

Maybe so but prime time doesn't have the same reputation as daytime, which has always been the redheaded stepchild of onscreen entertainment.  Daytime, even at the height of its popularity, never got the respect that primetime TV got for doing essentially the same caliber of work.  Daytime has to work twice as hard to be taken half as seriously. 

 

@KMan101, I don't necessarily mind doing minor things offscreen but there's a way to do it where you can drop little crumbs here and there, that at the time, may not necessarily tell you anything but when the reveal comes, in retrospect, an audience realizes those breadcrumbs were actually little nuggets that added up to a lot of information collectively, so the audience doesn't feel bamboozled, like the denouement came out of nowhere or worse, that they were purposely tricked.  You can have red herrings and all that, but when the reveal happens, audience should be able to look back and have a "Aha" moment and realize that it actually all makes sense, surprises and all.  If they're like "WTF, where did that even come from?!", the story has failed.  JMO.  Many of the stories I see on today's soaps wouldn't pass a Graduate level dramatic writing course.  I should know (LOL).

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole flashbacks to tell a story that could've been told onscreen is a lazy plot device used in prime time too.

 

 

Maybe so but prime time doesn't have the same reputation as daytime, which has always been the redheaded stepchild of onscreen entertainment.  Daytime, even at the height of its popularity, never got the respect that primetime TV got for doing essentially the same caliber of work.  Daytime has to work twice as hard to be taken half as seriously. 

 

@KMan101, I don't necessarily mind doing minor things offscreen but there's a way to do it where you can drop little crumbs here and there, that at the time, may not necessarily tell you anything but when the reveal comes, in retrospect, an audience realizes those breadcrumbs were actually little nuggets that added up to a lot of information collectively, so the audience doesn't feel bamboozled, like the denouement came out of nowhere or worse, that they were purposely tricked.  You can have red herrings and all that, but when the reveal happens, audience should be able to look back and have a "Aha" moment and realize that it actually all makes sense, surprises and all.  If they're like "WTF, where did that even come from?!", the story has failed.  JMO.  Many of the stories I see on today's soaps wouldn't pass a Graduate level dramatic writing course.  I should know (LOL).

it's a lazy plot device period but it has nothing to do with reputation.  I'm just pointing out that it's not an exclusive to soaps thing like the other stuff mentioned.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

@KMan101 The Cassandra storyline was great, most of AMC 2.0 was good.

 

Hated how the soap press treated it along with OLTL 2.0

 

 

The trafficking storyline was pretty relevant (IMO), it still is as human trafficking persists.  I really loved that fact that AMC 2.0 took this on when network daytime soaps don't appear to want to.  And two of the least liked characters on the canvas (Colby and David Haywood) showed compassion and friendship to Cassandra and Angie.  It was unexpected but somehow it worked!

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to post
Share on other sites

@KMan101 The Cassandra storyline was great, most of AMC 2.0 was good.

 

Hated how the soap press treated it along with OLTL 2.0

 

 

The trafficking storyline was pretty relevant (IMO), it still is as human trafficking persists.  I really loved that fact that AMC 2.0 took this on when network daytime soaps don't appear to want to.  And two of the least liked characters on the canvas (Colby and David Haywood) showed compassion and friendship to Cassandra and Angie.  It was unexpected but somehow it worked!

I'm still pissed Soap Opera Digest shitted on the story and Colby

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...