Guess ds users will never like corrie. That show can never do right for doing wrong on here but any other soap can get praise on here just for a actress sneezing well in a scene. Corrie on fire at the mo
It's funny. Outside of the usual complaints: Sean, Michelle and Fiz. I personally feel the oposite, Corrie rarely gets any criticism. Even when it is awful, people defend it and stick by it. Especially the press, whereas EE is completely torn apart for the smallest thing.
This post is full of constructive criticism to make the show on fire, just now the plots may be interesting but it's not 2004 standard. I think 2003-2004 were stand out times for Corrie and it's been slowly declining since, with a few peaks here and there.
It's funny. Outside of the usual complaints: Sean, Michelle and Fiz. I personally feel the oposite, Corrie rarely gets any criticism. Even when it is awful, people defend it and stick by it. Especially the press, whereas EE is completely torn apart for the smallest thing.
This post is full of constructive criticism to make the show on fire, just now the plots may be interesting but it's not 2004 standard. I think 2003-2004 were stand out times for Corrie and it's been slowly declining since, with a few peaks here and there.
I agree with this wholeheartedly, I think Coronation Street does not receive enough criticism. I am referring to criticism of the show itself of course and not media coverage of it's stars.
2003-2004 was indeed a golden period but it is perfectly achievable again. A back to basics approach with a focus on character would allow this to happen again. By getting the most out of the very established and very new characters the Street manages to be extremely entertaining and set for the future. Generations will always grow old and die away but in the past the show has always managed to regenerate with great characters. They are not doing that now and the results of having neglected character for a decade are being laid bare
Different opinions really do add to the debate, but when the sensationalist dust settles on the events of the last week I don't believe the show is firing on anything like full throttle
Every soap is sensational now, no soap not even corrie can go back to its roots and the way it was once. It wouldn't survive! It was dying back in 1995 like the way it once was and need a revamp. Eastenders story with Lucy is so sensational they all are.
It just annoys me on here the way know one is ever happy with corrie. Forever gets stick on this forum for everything. All the other soaps are just the same but oh no corrie always the one everyone has a go at
When Coronation Street do sensational story lines, as seen in 2010-2011, it does it really well and it's so entertaining. Im glad that we are finally getting some high drama this summer, it seems well overdue.
Im intrigued as to how they will bring back Jim Mcdonald, but at least it will give Liz more to do. Despite having a brilliant low key return, I think she now needs more material like she got in 2011 upon her brief exit plot.
Don't want to copy out all the posts but I agree with Auntie Soap's opinions. Corrie is dire at the mo. Far too much of Fizz, Michelle and Tina, although one problem has been solved!:D
The "comic" writing is so embarrassing I hide behind a cushion. Unfortunatly Steve in no comic actor, in fact.he is not a very good actor, the "Gangnam" dancing was awful, toe curling embarrassment notice Miss" I'm too good for soap, I should be doing Shakespeare at least" Michele didn't join in eh?
It seems to be the same few characters that are in every episode, doing the same old things. Do they get paid by the episode? People disappear for weeks on end with no mention of them.
The writing is bad, the directing is abysmal, performances are just being phoned in instead of being made to act as the character instead of acting like their own personalities.The buck stops with the producer and Mr S Blackburn almost ruined Emmerdale beyond repair and now seems hell bent on doing so to Corrie. Character changes being just one of his many ideas.
The few good s/l are either rushed or made so unbelievable that TPTB are treating us like gullible fools, their attitude seems to be "shove on any old tosh, the numpties will put up with any old crap, once the music starts"
Every soap is sensational now, no soap not even corrie can go back to its roots and the way it was once. It wouldn't survive! It was dying back in 1995 like the way it once was and need a revamp. Eastenders story with Lucy is so sensational they all are.
It just annoys me on here the way know one is ever happy with corrie. Forever gets stick on this forum for everything. All the other soaps are just the same but oh no corrie always the one everyone has a go at
It doesn't though. Barely anyone has a go at Corrie. Their is at least one thread a day with people "having a go at" EE or Oaks. With Corrie you barely see one a week.
Coronation street gets away without alot of criticism because of it's longevity and loved old faces. It's like when your gran says something rude or politically incorrect and everyone brushes it off as their generation, rather than challenging them. Whereas EE or Oaks are the younger brother who says the same thing and everyone has their opinion on what he said.
I think it's about time people started realising Corrie isn't perfect. But it's easily fixed, but it needs to be done soon before more damage kicks in.
As for the sensationalist talk, that's not the problem. Sensationalist material will always be part of the fabric but it only works when it's character driven. The Lucy plot has been at success because it's about Ian, Peter, Lauren, Whitney, Sharon, Phil etc, it's characters acting as they should be, getting right to their core and understanding them. Whereas in comparrison Tina and Peter was ridiculous. Tina was a girl with morals, and a good comaps. But that was all forgotten as soon as Peter winked at her.
I love Corrie and it is in no need of an overhaul in my opinion.
I agree. But the OP is a great example of why fans of any long-running show or film series are the very last people producers should listen to. We only have to look at what happened to Doctor Who in the 80s to see what happens when a show is produced to please diehard fans, not the general audience. And, lest we forget, Coronation Streetis still appealing to the general audience. Look behind the overnights - which are increasingly becoming less important to executives - and we see that Corrie can still break the 40% audience share (it did so on Monday). In a multi-channel world, it can still attract 4 out of every ten people watching TV in this country. Whether artistic standards have slipped is subjective. Percentage figures are not.
I started watching Coronation Street in the 1970s. That "golden era" of Stan and Hilda, Annie and Fred and Bet and Betty. The time when it was dubbed the "best sitcom on the box".
Except, not everyone at that time did think it was a golden era - something which is often forgotten. Some viewers who had been watching from the start thought it had become too comedic and silly and complained it had lost its 60s grit. Had DS been around in 1978, doubtless there would have threads lamenting the "artistic decline" of Coronation Street.
But why had the Street changed? Because society had changed and become more flippant. Initially the Street didn't respond to this and by 1974 ratings were dropping alarmingly. One can see this paralleled in that other 50 year plus British iconic series, the Bond movies. People blame Roger Moore for the 70s Bond films becoming more comedic. But, again, it was more to do with producers responding to changes in society. Some fans hated those films, but it was done for survival and it worked.
Which brings us to the modern world. Of course Corrie has changed. But so has society. People watch television in very different ways. They have more choice. They have been exposed to different things. Attention spans are shorter. Instant gratification is king. We might not like that. But to deny it is to be Canute-like. The days when the show could run a major story about Mavis' new hat or Vera haranguing Jack with the rolling pin were wonderful. In their day. Today it would be ratings death. Like it or loathe it, that is the climate that Coronation Street producers are working in. They did not create it, but they are having to respond to it because there are an awful lot of jobs and money at stake. Yes, there are fans who have a UKIP no-blacks-no-gays mentality, but frankly, they are sticking their heads in the sand. There are Doctor Who fans who loathe the new era of the show too; they look back nostalgically to a time of poor effects, wobbly sets and dubious acting and claim it is superior to the slicker product that sells so well today. It's almost as though they resent its recent success somehow. And doubtless there are some Bond fans who wouldn't embrace any new Bond film unless it was somehow produced in 1966 and starred a 30-something Sean Connery. Never mind that the most recent gritty film in the series was the most financially successful of the lot even allowing for inflation. ITV is a commercial company. It does not - and cannot - produce cosy nostalgia telly for a dwindling number of die hard fans.
And anyone who believes it can is living in a fools' paradise.
The op hasn't once said they want it to become a sitcom. You are putting words in their mouth, they have said 2003-2004 was one of the best eras where sensationalist drama happened but was character driven. Think Katy killing Tommy, Sarah's car crash etc
The op hasn't once said they want it to become a sitcom. You are putting words in their mouth, they have said 2003-2004 was one of the best eras where sensationalist drama happened but was character driven. Think Katy killing Tommy, Sarah's car crash etc
Perhaps if you do me the courtesy of reading my post properly, you'll see I did no such thing. I wrote that Coronation Street was called 'the best sitcom" on TV. And that is what critics said of it in the 1970s.
Corrie (like every other soap) goes through bad stages, let's face it! I'm quite enjoying it at the moment (now that the loooong-drawn-out story of Tina and Peter has reached an end!) After fifty years, there are only so many stories that can be told - so obviously they will have to regurgitate old stories again. Must admit I get a bit fed up of affairs and bloody pregnancies!!
Corrie was rife in the 70's.....until around 1974 - 76 when Crossroads was No 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the top ten for a long time........Corrie was around No 10 in those days!
But they have reclaimed their top spot for a long time now....and I'm sure it will reign!
I agree. But the OP is a great example of why fans of any long-running show or film series are the very last people producers should listen to. We only have to look at what happened to Doctor Who in the 80s to see what happens when a show is produced to please diehard fans, not the general audience. And, lest we forget, Coronation Streetis still appealing to the general audience. Look behind the overnights - which are increasingly becoming less important to executives - and we see that Corrie can still break the 40% audience share (it did so on Monday). In a multi-channel world, it can still attract 4 out of every ten people watching TV in this country. Whether artistic standards have slipped is subjective. Percentage figures are not.
And anyone who believes it can is living in a fools' paradise.
I am a Doctor Who fan and I agree with you.
If RTD had made the revival of Doctor Who just like it had been before. It would have lasted one series and then disappeared.
The last thing that the producers & writers should do is listen to the fans or try to second guess what the fans want to see happen.
They should make what they think is right and try to take most of the fans with them.
This applies to Films and Music as well as TV series.
Having said that I think that there is a problem in that the continual changes in producer does mean that you cannot develop continuity in the story telling.
The amount of times that I have seen past events forgotten about or not developed can be frustrating.
For example at the time I was sure that what Sophie did to her dads bank account would come back to haunt her at some point.
However apart from some occasional mentions nothing ever really happened and it seems as if Kevin has completely forgiven her. Also we don't even know if she is still paying him back.
Look at what happened with Kylie after she slept with Nick. Doing something like that should have caused a permanent break between her and David.
Now, apart from the occasional mention about how it relates to Nicks problems, you might not know anything ever happened.
What is also needed is better use of characters acting in character.
If you need to change the way a character behaves then there has to be a good reason for this (e.g. the way Nick is now).
This may mean that you need more characters floating in and out from the outside to add more story possibilities but it would be better than completely changing a characters personality.
At the moment there are possibilities going forward with Steph and her brother along with Kal's family. Also with Ken & Kevin coming back it should be possible to stabilise the cast for the foreseeable future.
Anyone who thinks Corrie is currently in a bad state clearly wasn't around during the time of Les and Cilla falling through the ceiling in the bath! To me, that time was the worst the show has ever been.
The show has had really weak times before, but in my opinion they always had the characters ready and waiting for quality writing and that is not the case now.
I do look back on when the show was better but I do not want them to recreate the Coronation Street of the 1970s, 1990s etc, but I think they need to look at the ingredients that were in the show at it's various peaks and learn from the past. Turning their back on the past and relegating it to some outmoded arc is a mistake that can and should be avoided.
It's had a very poor few months, but the past two weeks, it's been back to its best, and highly watchable. I really don't think it matters that the show is a lot different to how it was. It has to move with the times in this age of multi-channel TV and internet.
It has to keep viewers happy. Before the digital age, they could get away with having episodes where not a great deal happened, but not any more. It does need to attract younger fans, because they will be the older people of the future.
It doesn't though. Barely anyone has a go at Corrie. Their is at least one thread a day with people "having a go at" EE or Oaks. With Corrie you barely see one a week.
Coronation street gets away without alot of criticism because of it's longevity and loved old faces. It's like when your gran says something rude or politically incorrect and everyone brushes it off as their generation, rather than challenging them. Whereas EE or Oaks are the younger brother who says the same thing and everyone has their opinion on what he said.
I think it's about time people started realising Corrie isn't perfect. But it's easily fixed, but it needs to be done soon before more damage kicks in.
As for the sensationalist talk, that's not the problem. Sensationalist material will always be part of the fabric but it only works when it's character driven. The Lucy plot has been at success because it's about Ian, Peter, Lauren, Whitney, Sharon, Phil etc, it's characters acting as they should be, getting right to their core and understanding them. Whereas in comparrison Tina and Peter was ridiculous. Tina was a girl with morals, and a good comaps. But that was all forgotten as soon as Peter winked at her.
This is exactly what I mean and very eloquently put.
I have no problem enjoying high quality sensational plots - I thought the tram crash was thrilling! But the sensationalism of late, including the fire and murder of Sunita last year is without any originality, nothing is at stake here, we have all worked out the plot from beginning to inevitable ending. It's a complete rehash.
I also disagree with the assertion that producers shouldn't listen to longterm fans. On the contrary they are the ones who remember the highs and why they were such highs. The highs of the early 2000s are not in the dim and distant past.
I don't want Coronation Street to start doing greatest hits and try recreate past characters and storylines but I do want it to reclaim it's heart and realise that there is plenty of room for all that made The Street so glorious in the past along side what modern viewers wanted. They managed it to great effect only 10 years ago.
Anyone who thinks Corrie is currently in a bad state clearly wasn't around during the time of Les and Cilla falling through the ceiling in the bath! To me, that time was the worst the show has ever been.
Nobody is saying that Coronation Street is in the worst place it has ever been in. So far, all that's been said is that it is in a bad place - which it is.
Don't want to copy out all the posts but I agree with Auntie Soap's opinions. Corrie is dire at the mo. Far too much of Fizz, Michelle and Tina, although one problem has been solved!:D
The "comic" writing is so embarrassing I hide behind a cushion. Unfortunatly Steve in no comic actor, in fact.he is not a very good actor, the "Gangnam" dancing was awful, toe curling embarrassment notice Miss" I'm too good for soap, I should be doing Shakespeare at least" Michele didn't join in eh?
It seems to be the same few characters that are in every episode, doing the same old things. Do they get paid by the episode? People disappear for weeks on end with no mention of them.
The writing is bad, the directing is abysmal, performances are just being phoned in instead of being made to act as the character instead of acting like their own personalities.The buck stops with the producer and Mr S Blackburn almost ruined Emmerdale beyond repair and now seems hell bent on doing so to Corrie. Character changes being just one of his many ideas.
The few good s/l are either rushed or made so unbelievable that TPTB are treating us like gullible fools, their attitude seems to be "shove on any old tosh, the numpties will put up with any old crap, once the music starts"
I agree they are all plodding along the characters and the writers are getting stale , the whole story of peter and tina having an affair was ridiculous , even Carla would not go near him in the real world
of course Roy is always good and I love Eva she has such potential
Steve needs a best mate or a feisty woman to work with as he is hopeless on his own and Michelle is barely a singer never mind an actress . Karen carried Steve in the show , kirsty was also an amazing character that they failed to hang onto.
coronation street get rid of good characters time and time again
I remember Ena Sharples she was a brilliant old battleaxe , I was only a kid but she terrified me because I remember women just like her in Manchester with hairnets and loud voices also coats that they never seemed to take off regardless of the weather outside
Anyone who thinks Corrie is currently in a bad state clearly wasn't around during the time of Les and Cilla falling through the ceiling in the bath! To me, that time was the worst the show has ever been.
I agree. But the OP is a great example of why fans of any long-running show or film series are the very last people producers should listen to. We only have to look at what happened to Doctor Who in the 80s to see what happens when a show is produced to please diehard fans, not the general audience. And, lest we forget, Coronation Streetis still appealing to the general audience. Look behind the overnights - which are increasingly becoming less important to executives - and we see that Corrie can still break the 40% audience share (it did so on Monday). In a multi-channel world, it can still attract 4 out of every ten people watching TV in this country. Whether artistic standards have slipped is subjective. Percentage figures are not.
I started watching Coronation Street in the 1970s. That "golden era" of Stan and Hilda, Annie and Fred and Bet and Betty. The time when it was dubbed the "best sitcom on the box".
Except, not everyone at that time did think it was a golden era - something which is often forgotten. Some viewers who had been watching from the start thought it had become too comedic and silly and complained it had lost its 60s grit. Had DS been around in 1978, doubtless there would have threads lamenting the "artistic decline" of Coronation Street.
But why had the Street changed? Because society had changed and become more flippant. Initially the Street didn't respond to this and by 1974 ratings were dropping alarmingly. One can see this paralleled in that other 50 year plus British iconic series, the Bond movies. People blame Roger Moore for the 70s Bond films becoming more comedic. But, again, it was more to do with producers responding to changes in society. Some fans hated those films, but it was done for survival and it worked.
Which brings us to the modern world. Of course Corrie has changed. But so has society. People watch television in very different ways. They have more choice. They have been exposed to different things. Attention spans are shorter. Instant gratification is king. We might not like that. But to deny it is to be Canute-like. The days when the show could run a major story about Mavis' new hat or Vera haranguing Jack with the rolling pin were wonderful. In their day. Today it would be ratings death. Like it or loathe it, that is the climate that Coronation Street producers are working in. They did not create it, but they are having to respond to it because there are an awful lot of jobs and money at stake. Yes, there are fans who have a UKIP no-blacks-no-gays mentality, but frankly, they are sticking their heads in the sand. There are Doctor Who fans who loathe the new era of the show too; they look back nostalgically to a time of poor effects, wobbly sets and dubious acting and claim it is superior to the slicker product that sells so well today. It's almost as though they resent its recent success somehow. And doubtless there are some Bond fans who wouldn't embrace any new Bond film unless it was somehow produced in 1966 and starred a 30-something Sean Connery. Never mind that the most recent gritty film in the series was the most financially successful of the lot even allowing for inflation. ITV is a commercial company. It does not - and cannot - produce cosy nostalgia telly for a dwindling number of die hard fans.
And anyone who believes it can is living in a fools' paradise.
Good post. I get what you're saying as I can't get into the new Doctor Who. But give me Pyramids of Mars, The Seeds of Doom, The Robots of Death (or The Spy Who loved Me) and I am in heaven. TV producers can't cater to these retro tastes they need to get with the modern TV landscape and get the big ratings - tonight. (I'm OK I've got me DVDs:kitty:)
I actually stopped watching Corrie around the time the Katy Harris storyline came to its conclusion. Really for me Corrie lost something with the conclusion of the Richard Hillman storyline. During that storyline I was really gripped. Though there were many implausible elements in the story, the basic strong characters involved (Gail, Audrey) made it captivating for me.
Even though generally speaking I found EastEnders more captivating than Corrie (I liked the location better, thought the characters were more interesting, the storylines faster and more exciting) the solid acting and characterisation of Corrie eventually drew me into many storylines. Like, Sally Webster was so annoying. But as the character was so convincingly played I was gripped by her annoyingness in the storylines.
In the end I also drifted away from EastEnders - I can't really recall exactly why but I guess after seeing so many character changeovers and maybe one or two less than gripping storylines the spell was broken for me. But that's the modern TV landscape when they have to go for big ratings - they can't justify a slow steady payoff.
I just accept shows are different now. I do currently watch Wentworth and understand that it can't be like the original Prisoner as the TV landscape is just different today.
Guess ds users will never like corrie. That show can never do right for doing wrong on here but any other soap can get praise on here just for a actress sneezing well in a scene. Corrie on fire at the mo
Yes, Eastenders is constantly praised and Corrie is always trashed.
Despite the majority of 2010-2014 having the forum filled with constant EE negativity.
Within the past 12 months Hollyoaks has come in for a heavy amount of criticism.
If anything Emmerdale has been the most consistently praised (maybe deservedly so) over the last 18 months or so.
My main gripe with the show since the mid noughties is mainly how average it has become. Watching from 2005 onward it's seemed the writers are just treading water and are afraid to take risks with characters or take the show in new directions.
How many times have we endured the same formulaic story line of normal working class middle aged bloke accidentally killing someone and then covering their tracks for months on end, usually culminating in a damp squib of a finale. It smacks of desperately trying to replicate the glory of the Richard Hillman era... but it's 2014 now and Coronation Street needs to start doing what they did so well in the 2003 - 2004 era : utilizing the classic characters with dynamic fresh blood, incorporating classic comedy with character driven drama.
- Bring back the friendships and sense of community which has been a rich part of the Street's identity from day one. Let's see more of Deirdre & Eileen & Liz propping up the bar in the Rovers , Gail and Sally actually being their for one another in times of need- it'd be great to see how Tracy / Todd would work together as a comedic gruesome twosome double act. Tracy as Todd's **** hag would be priceless to watch! In fairness to Blackburn on this issue, he has done wonders with the Dev and Mary friendship and it is something I would like to see more of in the future.
-Mix up the character interaction and relationships more. I'm bored of Anna only sharing scenes with the Armstrong clan and sometimes Roy, Leanne only ever being with Nick / Gail or Kal, Sophie only sharing scenes with Maddie etc... A feud between Sally Webster and Liz McDonald could be epic to watch - perhaps Liz were to make a drunken pass at Tim?- , create a grumpy old mans friendship group between Steve / Lloyd / Tim / Owen for some light relief in the Rovers, bring about a friendship between some of the younger males in the show - Gary / Luke / Jason/ Tyrone. I also think it's shame we see little of Chesney and Gary's brotherly relationship but is a sad representation of how slack and short sighted much of the shows writing is. In a nutshell more characters in more scenes together !
- Sally & Tim are one of the few examples of progress for the show. They work well together, so please writers lets keep them together rather than have Sally predictably rekindle her romance with Kevin. I think a shock pregnancy story line for Sally could be rather interesting to watch - both for the dramatic potential of her coming to terms with her whole life being turned upside down and also provided opportunity for some great comedy along the way. Also gives us the opportunity to have some emotional scene with life long friends Rita and Gail, to add that sense of continuity to the story line.
-EastEnders have excelled in handling return storylines under D T C and Coronation Street would do well to take a leaf from their book. No dramatic black cab arrivals, with the camera panning on a pair of high heel stilettos - regardless of the fact the ITV Press Office have ensured everyone not living under a rock is aware of the 'shock' arrival. Realistic , under stated and natural returns - as has been the case with Sonia, Honey and Dean- are the ones I've found far more interesting to watch. It helps to make the show feel more real and the audience can relate to it far easier. In terms of who I'd like back I think Tina O' Brien would on the top of my list - there's a wealth of dramatic potential to explore with Sarah arriving back on the street : a teenage daughter, her unresolved hatred of David, she's now got her idea of the sister in law from hell , a new niece and nephew, a potential enemy in Eva as well as the drama within Nick and Leanne's marriage. All this without even having to create their own story lines for her!
- I'd also bring back Amber Kalari to add a new dimension to the Alahan clan which has been severely adrift since Sunita's departure and as a troublesome love interest for Sophie again. Rosie Webster would also be a character I'd like to see back on the Street - she was a great comic character and still has plenty of links to the show. Have her start work within Roys Rolls while the modelling work is running dry ( these chalk ; cheese pairings are what Corrie excells at) and perhaps a flirtation with Luke.
Further down the line on my dream list would be : Claudia Colby ( becomes joint owner of the salon) , Cilla Battersby Brown and Spider Nuggent (adored his relationship with Emily). Bringing back Kirsty Soames in a short story line which would help further uncover her anger issues could be interesting to see, but it's something I would do later.
- As a further point regarding returns, I think having recurring characters who dip in and out of the show as story lines require would help add to the keeping the show marginally realistic - Pam and Bill Webster , Ted Paige , Barry and Helen Connor .....
-Reintroduce Debbie Webster and her family - it allows Kevin to return and have a link to the Street outside of Sally, therefore not allowing him to go stale and also brings in some fresh blood to the Street who have built in ties to a long standing family ( also see : Baldwins, 2004.) I'd imagine Debbie to be abit of a hippy who while quite airy fairy is also staunchly proud of her two children - Daniel (30) and Denise (25). Daniel is quite a laddish but kind man who is training to be a paramedic and could be introduced into a slow burn romance story line with Todd Grimshaw, while Denise is an ambitious and clever woman (shades of Janine Butcher in the character) who opens a Deli on the site of the former Elliott and Sons joinery. She's single and enjoys one night stands with both a newly free Nick Tilsley and Luke Britton, a story line which takes a twist when she discovers she has contracted HIV from a former boyfriend.
-Does Amy fully understand what her mother went to prison for ? If not, perhaps have her discover the full extent of Tracy's crime and have a confrontation. This story line would probably have to be done in a few years time when the actress of Amy can actually pull off such material but I think having Tracy explain to her daughter the motivations behind the killing and feeling remorse would go a long way to redeeming her character in the eyes of viewers who still can't see past the fact she is a murderer. On topic of the Barlows, I'd like to see Anne Kirkbride given some meaty dramatic story line further down the line. One idea I've had in mind for a while would be seeing Deirdre have a full on breakdown as her family's woes become too much to bare and have her disappear for a while. I have no doubt Kirkbride could pull it off.
- Take Beth and Kirk out of their comfort zone. A story line which I think would be interesting to handle would be one in which Beth struggles to come to terms with the fact that she cannot conceive again due to health complications.
- Usually I would be wary of big, sensationalist stunt story lines but if done correctly and actually exploring long term impact then they can sometimes be the game changer a soap needs. This would be something that ,once again, would be done further down the line as the show has over exposed this type of story in the last few years. Scaneiro I had in mind was perhaps Sophie Webster hosting her 20th birthday at the same time as Katy Armstrong is organising her leaving do before she moves abroad to work at an American catering facility - tragically Nick's Bistro which is ripped apart by an explosion with Katy, Maddie , Jenna and Marcus perishing in the flames. One of the key story lines to come from this would be the mysterious nature of the explosion - was it an accident as a result of a depressed Owens shoddy building work? The dodgy work of Tony employing illegal immigrants to work long hours renovating the bistros kitchen? A final desperate act by Chesney to stop Katy from taking Joseph away? IA further story line to come from the explosion would be Nick losing his business and his fall from grace as the press and street residents believe him responsible, Garry suffering a further anxiety attack and Rosie receiving burns on her chest which ruin her chances of a modelling career and destroy her self esteem.
Comments
It's funny. Outside of the usual complaints: Sean, Michelle and Fiz. I personally feel the oposite, Corrie rarely gets any criticism. Even when it is awful, people defend it and stick by it. Especially the press, whereas EE is completely torn apart for the smallest thing.
This post is full of constructive criticism to make the show on fire, just now the plots may be interesting but it's not 2004 standard. I think 2003-2004 were stand out times for Corrie and it's been slowly declining since, with a few peaks here and there.
I agree with this wholeheartedly, I think Coronation Street does not receive enough criticism. I am referring to criticism of the show itself of course and not media coverage of it's stars.
2003-2004 was indeed a golden period but it is perfectly achievable again. A back to basics approach with a focus on character would allow this to happen again. By getting the most out of the very established and very new characters the Street manages to be extremely entertaining and set for the future. Generations will always grow old and die away but in the past the show has always managed to regenerate with great characters. They are not doing that now and the results of having neglected character for a decade are being laid bare
Every soap is sensational now, no soap not even corrie can go back to its roots and the way it was once. It wouldn't survive! It was dying back in 1995 like the way it once was and need a revamp. Eastenders story with Lucy is so sensational they all are.
It just annoys me on here the way know one is ever happy with corrie. Forever gets stick on this forum for everything. All the other soaps are just the same but oh no corrie always the one everyone has a go at
Im intrigued as to how they will bring back Jim Mcdonald, but at least it will give Liz more to do. Despite having a brilliant low key return, I think she now needs more material like she got in 2011 upon her brief exit plot.
The "comic" writing is so embarrassing I hide behind a cushion. Unfortunatly Steve in no comic actor, in fact.he is not a very good actor, the "Gangnam" dancing was awful, toe curling embarrassment notice Miss" I'm too good for soap, I should be doing Shakespeare at least" Michele didn't join in eh?
It seems to be the same few characters that are in every episode, doing the same old things. Do they get paid by the episode? People disappear for weeks on end with no mention of them.
The writing is bad, the directing is abysmal, performances are just being phoned in instead of being made to act as the character instead of acting like their own personalities.The buck stops with the producer and Mr S Blackburn almost ruined Emmerdale beyond repair and now seems hell bent on doing so to Corrie. Character changes being just one of his many ideas.
The few good s/l are either rushed or made so unbelievable that TPTB are treating us like gullible fools, their attitude seems to be "shove on any old tosh, the numpties will put up with any old crap, once the music starts"
It doesn't though. Barely anyone has a go at Corrie. Their is at least one thread a day with people "having a go at" EE or Oaks. With Corrie you barely see one a week.
Coronation street gets away without alot of criticism because of it's longevity and loved old faces. It's like when your gran says something rude or politically incorrect and everyone brushes it off as their generation, rather than challenging them. Whereas EE or Oaks are the younger brother who says the same thing and everyone has their opinion on what he said.
I think it's about time people started realising Corrie isn't perfect. But it's easily fixed, but it needs to be done soon before more damage kicks in.
As for the sensationalist talk, that's not the problem. Sensationalist material will always be part of the fabric but it only works when it's character driven. The Lucy plot has been at success because it's about Ian, Peter, Lauren, Whitney, Sharon, Phil etc, it's characters acting as they should be, getting right to their core and understanding them. Whereas in comparrison Tina and Peter was ridiculous. Tina was a girl with morals, and a good comaps. But that was all forgotten as soon as Peter winked at her.
I agree. But the OP is a great example of why fans of any long-running show or film series are the very last people producers should listen to. We only have to look at what happened to Doctor Who in the 80s to see what happens when a show is produced to please diehard fans, not the general audience. And, lest we forget, Coronation Street is still appealing to the general audience. Look behind the overnights - which are increasingly becoming less important to executives - and we see that Corrie can still break the 40% audience share (it did so on Monday). In a multi-channel world, it can still attract 4 out of every ten people watching TV in this country. Whether artistic standards have slipped is subjective. Percentage figures are not.
I started watching Coronation Street in the 1970s. That "golden era" of Stan and Hilda, Annie and Fred and Bet and Betty. The time when it was dubbed the "best sitcom on the box".
Except, not everyone at that time did think it was a golden era - something which is often forgotten. Some viewers who had been watching from the start thought it had become too comedic and silly and complained it had lost its 60s grit. Had DS been around in 1978, doubtless there would have threads lamenting the "artistic decline" of Coronation Street.
But why had the Street changed? Because society had changed and become more flippant. Initially the Street didn't respond to this and by 1974 ratings were dropping alarmingly. One can see this paralleled in that other 50 year plus British iconic series, the Bond movies. People blame Roger Moore for the 70s Bond films becoming more comedic. But, again, it was more to do with producers responding to changes in society. Some fans hated those films, but it was done for survival and it worked.
Which brings us to the modern world. Of course Corrie has changed. But so has society. People watch television in very different ways. They have more choice. They have been exposed to different things. Attention spans are shorter. Instant gratification is king. We might not like that. But to deny it is to be Canute-like. The days when the show could run a major story about Mavis' new hat or Vera haranguing Jack with the rolling pin were wonderful. In their day. Today it would be ratings death. Like it or loathe it, that is the climate that Coronation Street producers are working in. They did not create it, but they are having to respond to it because there are an awful lot of jobs and money at stake. Yes, there are fans who have a UKIP no-blacks-no-gays mentality, but frankly, they are sticking their heads in the sand. There are Doctor Who fans who loathe the new era of the show too; they look back nostalgically to a time of poor effects, wobbly sets and dubious acting and claim it is superior to the slicker product that sells so well today. It's almost as though they resent its recent success somehow. And doubtless there are some Bond fans who wouldn't embrace any new Bond film unless it was somehow produced in 1966 and starred a 30-something Sean Connery. Never mind that the most recent gritty film in the series was the most financially successful of the lot even allowing for inflation. ITV is a commercial company. It does not - and cannot - produce cosy nostalgia telly for a dwindling number of die hard fans.
And anyone who believes it can is living in a fools' paradise.
Perhaps if you do me the courtesy of reading my post properly, you'll see I did no such thing. I wrote that Coronation Street was called 'the best sitcom" on TV. And that is what critics said of it in the 1970s.
What reason is the op a great example then? If it isn't because you were implying that the op's opinion was outdated?
Society may have changed, but that doesn't mean fans of corrie want to watch crap, out of character stories? Does it?
Corrie was rife in the 70's.....until around 1974 - 76 when Crossroads was No 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the top ten for a long time........Corrie was around No 10 in those days!
But they have reclaimed their top spot for a long time now....and I'm sure it will reign!
I am a Doctor Who fan and I agree with you.
If RTD had made the revival of Doctor Who just like it had been before. It would have lasted one series and then disappeared.
The last thing that the producers & writers should do is listen to the fans or try to second guess what the fans want to see happen.
They should make what they think is right and try to take most of the fans with them.
This applies to Films and Music as well as TV series.
Having said that I think that there is a problem in that the continual changes in producer does mean that you cannot develop continuity in the story telling.
The amount of times that I have seen past events forgotten about or not developed can be frustrating.
For example at the time I was sure that what Sophie did to her dads bank account would come back to haunt her at some point.
However apart from some occasional mentions nothing ever really happened and it seems as if Kevin has completely forgiven her. Also we don't even know if she is still paying him back.
Look at what happened with Kylie after she slept with Nick. Doing something like that should have caused a permanent break between her and David.
Now, apart from the occasional mention about how it relates to Nicks problems, you might not know anything ever happened.
What is also needed is better use of characters acting in character.
If you need to change the way a character behaves then there has to be a good reason for this (e.g. the way Nick is now).
This may mean that you need more characters floating in and out from the outside to add more story possibilities but it would be better than completely changing a characters personality.
At the moment there are possibilities going forward with Steph and her brother along with Kal's family. Also with Ken & Kevin coming back it should be possible to stabilise the cast for the foreseeable future.
We shall See.
I do look back on when the show was better but I do not want them to recreate the Coronation Street of the 1970s, 1990s etc, but I think they need to look at the ingredients that were in the show at it's various peaks and learn from the past. Turning their back on the past and relegating it to some outmoded arc is a mistake that can and should be avoided.
It has to keep viewers happy. Before the digital age, they could get away with having episodes where not a great deal happened, but not any more. It does need to attract younger fans, because they will be the older people of the future.
This is exactly what I mean and very eloquently put.
I have no problem enjoying high quality sensational plots - I thought the tram crash was thrilling! But the sensationalism of late, including the fire and murder of Sunita last year is without any originality, nothing is at stake here, we have all worked out the plot from beginning to inevitable ending. It's a complete rehash.
I also disagree with the assertion that producers shouldn't listen to longterm fans. On the contrary they are the ones who remember the highs and why they were such highs. The highs of the early 2000s are not in the dim and distant past.
I don't want Coronation Street to start doing greatest hits and try recreate past characters and storylines but I do want it to reclaim it's heart and realise that there is plenty of room for all that made The Street so glorious in the past along side what modern viewers wanted. They managed it to great effect only 10 years ago.
Nobody is saying that Coronation Street is in the worst place it has ever been in. So far, all that's been said is that it is in a bad place - which it is.
I agree they are all plodding along the characters and the writers are getting stale , the whole story of peter and tina having an affair was ridiculous , even Carla would not go near him in the real world
of course Roy is always good and I love Eva she has such potential
Steve needs a best mate or a feisty woman to work with as he is hopeless on his own and Michelle is barely a singer never mind an actress . Karen carried Steve in the show , kirsty was also an amazing character that they failed to hang onto.
coronation street get rid of good characters time and time again
I remember Ena Sharples she was a brilliant old battleaxe , I was only a kid but she terrified me because I remember women just like her in Manchester with hairnets and loud voices also coats that they never seemed to take off regardless of the weather outside
what? I LOVED that era
Good post. I get what you're saying as I can't get into the new Doctor Who. But give me Pyramids of Mars, The Seeds of Doom, The Robots of Death (or The Spy Who loved Me) and I am in heaven. TV producers can't cater to these retro tastes they need to get with the modern TV landscape and get the big ratings - tonight. (I'm OK I've got me DVDs:kitty:)
I actually stopped watching Corrie around the time the Katy Harris storyline came to its conclusion. Really for me Corrie lost something with the conclusion of the Richard Hillman storyline. During that storyline I was really gripped. Though there were many implausible elements in the story, the basic strong characters involved (Gail, Audrey) made it captivating for me.
Even though generally speaking I found EastEnders more captivating than Corrie (I liked the location better, thought the characters were more interesting, the storylines faster and more exciting) the solid acting and characterisation of Corrie eventually drew me into many storylines. Like, Sally Webster was so annoying. But as the character was so convincingly played I was gripped by her annoyingness in the storylines.
In the end I also drifted away from EastEnders - I can't really recall exactly why but I guess after seeing so many character changeovers and maybe one or two less than gripping storylines the spell was broken for me. But that's the modern TV landscape when they have to go for big ratings - they can't justify a slow steady payoff.
I just accept shows are different now. I do currently watch Wentworth and understand that it can't be like the original Prisoner as the TV landscape is just different today.
Yes, Eastenders is constantly praised and Corrie is always trashed.
Despite the majority of 2010-2014 having the forum filled with constant EE negativity.
Within the past 12 months Hollyoaks has come in for a heavy amount of criticism.
If anything Emmerdale has been the most consistently praised (maybe deservedly so) over the last 18 months or so.
How many times have we endured the same formulaic story line of normal working class middle aged bloke accidentally killing someone and then covering their tracks for months on end, usually culminating in a damp squib of a finale. It smacks of desperately trying to replicate the glory of the Richard Hillman era... but it's 2014 now and Coronation Street needs to start doing what they did so well in the 2003 - 2004 era : utilizing the classic characters with dynamic fresh blood, incorporating classic comedy with character driven drama.
- Bring back the friendships and sense of community which has been a rich part of the Street's identity from day one. Let's see more of Deirdre & Eileen & Liz propping up the bar in the Rovers , Gail and Sally actually being their for one another in times of need- it'd be great to see how Tracy / Todd would work together as a comedic gruesome twosome double act. Tracy as Todd's **** hag would be priceless to watch!
-Mix up the character interaction and relationships more. I'm bored of Anna only sharing scenes with the Armstrong clan and sometimes Roy, Leanne only ever being with Nick / Gail or Kal, Sophie only sharing scenes with Maddie etc... A feud between Sally Webster and Liz McDonald could be epic to watch - perhaps Liz were to make a drunken pass at Tim?- , create a grumpy old mans friendship group between Steve / Lloyd / Tim / Owen for some light relief in the Rovers, bring about a friendship between some of the younger males in the show - Gary / Luke / Jason/ Tyrone. I also think it's shame we see little of Chesney and Gary's brotherly relationship but is a sad representation of how slack and short sighted much of the shows writing is. In a nutshell more characters in more scenes together !
- Sally & Tim are one of the few examples of progress for the show. They work well together, so please writers lets keep them together rather than have Sally predictably rekindle her romance with Kevin. I think a shock pregnancy story line for Sally could be rather interesting to watch - both for the dramatic potential of her coming to terms with her whole life being turned upside down and also provided opportunity for some great comedy along the way. Also gives us the opportunity to have some emotional scene with life long friends Rita and Gail, to add that sense of continuity to the story line.
-EastEnders have excelled in handling return storylines under D T C and Coronation Street would do well to take a leaf from their book. No dramatic black cab arrivals, with the camera panning on a pair of high heel stilettos - regardless of the fact the ITV Press Office have ensured everyone not living under a rock is aware of the 'shock' arrival. Realistic , under stated and natural returns - as has been the case with Sonia, Honey and Dean- are the ones I've found far more interesting to watch. It helps to make the show feel more real and the audience can relate to it far easier. In terms of who I'd like back I think Tina O' Brien would on the top of my list - there's a wealth of dramatic potential to explore with Sarah arriving back on the street : a teenage daughter, her unresolved hatred of David, she's now got her idea of the sister in law from hell , a new niece and nephew, a potential enemy in Eva as well as the drama within Nick and Leanne's marriage. All this without even having to create their own story lines for her!
- I'd also bring back Amber Kalari to add a new dimension to the Alahan clan which has been severely adrift since Sunita's departure and as a troublesome love interest for Sophie again. Rosie Webster would also be a character I'd like to see back on the Street - she was a great comic character and still has plenty of links to the show. Have her start work within Roys Rolls while the modelling work is running dry ( these chalk ; cheese pairings are what Corrie excells at) and perhaps a flirtation with Luke.
Further down the line on my dream list would be : Claudia Colby ( becomes joint owner of the salon) , Cilla Battersby Brown and Spider Nuggent (adored his relationship with Emily). Bringing back Kirsty Soames in a short story line which would help further uncover her anger issues could be interesting to see, but it's something I would do later.
- As a further point regarding returns, I think having recurring characters who dip in and out of the show as story lines require would help add to the keeping the show marginally realistic - Pam and Bill Webster , Ted Paige , Barry and Helen Connor .....
-Reintroduce Debbie Webster and her family - it allows Kevin to return and have a link to the Street outside of Sally, therefore not allowing him to go stale and also brings in some fresh blood to the Street who have built in ties to a long standing family ( also see : Baldwins, 2004.) I'd imagine Debbie to be abit of a hippy who while quite airy fairy is also staunchly proud of her two children - Daniel (30) and Denise (25). Daniel is quite a laddish but kind man who is training to be a paramedic and could be introduced into a slow burn romance story line with Todd Grimshaw, while Denise is an ambitious and clever woman (shades of Janine Butcher in the character) who opens a Deli on the site of the former Elliott and Sons joinery. She's single and enjoys one night stands with both a newly free Nick Tilsley and Luke Britton, a story line which takes a twist when she discovers she has contracted HIV from a former boyfriend.
-Does Amy fully understand what her mother went to prison for ? If not, perhaps have her discover the full extent of Tracy's crime and have a confrontation. This story line would probably have to be done in a few years time when the actress of Amy can actually pull off such material but I think having Tracy explain to her daughter the motivations behind the killing and feeling remorse would go a long way to redeeming her character in the eyes of viewers who still can't see past the fact she is a murderer. On topic of the Barlows, I'd like to see Anne Kirkbride given some meaty dramatic story line further down the line. One idea I've had in mind for a while would be seeing Deirdre have a full on breakdown as her family's woes become too much to bare and have her disappear for a while. I have no doubt Kirkbride could pull it off.
- Take Beth and Kirk out of their comfort zone. A story line which I think would be interesting to handle would be one in which Beth struggles to come to terms with the fact that she cannot conceive again due to health complications.
- Usually I would be wary of big, sensationalist stunt story lines but if done correctly and actually exploring long term impact then they can sometimes be the game changer a soap needs. This would be something that ,once again, would be done further down the line as the show has over exposed this type of story in the last few years. Scaneiro I had in mind was perhaps Sophie Webster hosting her 20th birthday at the same time as Katy Armstrong is organising her leaving do before she moves abroad to work at an American catering facility - tragically Nick's Bistro which is ripped apart by an explosion with Katy, Maddie , Jenna and Marcus perishing in the flames. One of the key story lines to come from this would be the mysterious nature of the explosion - was it an accident as a result of a depressed Owens shoddy building work? The dodgy work of Tony employing illegal immigrants to work long hours renovating the bistros kitchen? A final desperate act by Chesney to stop Katy from taking Joseph away? IA further story line to come from the explosion would be Nick losing his business and his fall from grace as the press and street residents believe him responsible, Garry suffering a further anxiety attack and Rosie receiving burns on her chest which ruin her chances of a modelling career and destroy her self esteem.