In these plays the plots have all been based on a really serious dilemma - shall I help my mother to die, an I marrying a rapist, separated siblings in adoption, husband leaving a double life - but done nothing much with them.
I think that audience is entitled to expect that these issues will be treated with a bit more depth. You get the impression that the writers just did not know where to take the plots to.
I caught one on replay. Brother and sister separated by adoption. Thought it was very lightweight and it didn't really deal with any issues or go anywhere. There again, what can you portray in half a hour? I used to like Moving On as it showed, well, people moving on
In these plays the plots have all been based on a really serious dilemma - shall I help my mother to die, an I marrying a rapist, separated siblings in adoption, husband leaving a double life - but done nothing much with them.
I think that audience is entitled to expect that these issues will be treated with a bit more depth. You get the impression that the writers just did not know where to take the plots to.
I didn't see the first one, but I think that these plays are based upon the emotions surrounding the issues, rather than coming to any concrete conclusion.
That certainly appears to be the way the actors are treating this.
I'm quite happy with serious issues being addressed in this way. There are no easy answers to any of the dilemmas presented. And that's why I think the endings have been left open.
Also, I really don't see how the writers could have addressed these issues in any more depth in the allotted time.
Perhaps I'm happy enough with the way these plays are presented because I'm an avid reader of short stories, so I'm used to this form of presentation.
Not saying they couldn't have been better, but I think they are pretty much okay.
I caught one on replay. Brother and sister separated by adoption. Thought it was very lightweight and it didn't really deal with any issues or go anywhere. There again, what can you portray in half a hour? I used to like Moving On as it showed, well, people moving on
....and at least each episode of Moving On was 45 mins.
I caught one on replay. Brother and sister separated by adoption. Thought it was very lightweight and it didn't really deal with any issues or go anywhere. There again, what can you portray in half a hour? I used to like Moving On as it showed, well, people moving on
I agree with this. Moving On has been a much better series and I have enjoyed them. Secrets, though, has been about nothing much and then ending with no proper ending. All a bit of a waste of half an hour really.
I thought The Conversation was really good, I am guessing she stood there because she thought back to her conversation with her sister outside the church and realised that the girl who he raped was her. And the fact he had been violent towards her before and how he acted in the last scene just made her rethink it all and maybe she realised she made a mistake. Because of what her sister said on the way up the stairs.
Her sister and husband were both very allusive to what actually went on and the fact that the first thing he said when confessing was mentioning her sister.
I thought The Conversation was really good, I am guessing she stood there because she thought back to her conversation with her sister outside the church and realised that the girl who he raped was her. And the fact he had been violent towards her before and how he acted in the last scene just made her rethink it all and maybe she realised she made a mistake. Because of what her sister said on the way up the stairs.
Her sister and husband were both very allusive to what actually went on and the fact that the first thing he said when confessing was mentioning her sister.
I don't agree.
Put yourself in the sister's position. Would you really not say anything if your rapist started going out with your sister? They were clearly a close family so it simply does not make sense that the sister would have welcomed someone who had raped her into her life as a future brother-in-law.
It is hard enough to accept that the sister would say nothing if she just vaguely suspected that he had raped another girl, but it is 100% implausible that she would be prepared to be bridesmaid while she watched her sister marry her rapist.
Comments
I think that audience is entitled to expect that these issues will be treated with a bit more depth. You get the impression that the writers just did not know where to take the plots to.
I didn't see the first one, but I think that these plays are based upon the emotions surrounding the issues, rather than coming to any concrete conclusion.
That certainly appears to be the way the actors are treating this.
I'm quite happy with serious issues being addressed in this way. There are no easy answers to any of the dilemmas presented. And that's why I think the endings have been left open.
Also, I really don't see how the writers could have addressed these issues in any more depth in the allotted time.
Perhaps I'm happy enough with the way these plays are presented because I'm an avid reader of short stories, so I'm used to this form of presentation.
Not saying they couldn't have been better, but I think they are pretty much okay.
The little girls name in last night's was Sophie Thompson. I thought only one actor could have a particular name or is it age determined?
I agree with this. Moving On has been a much better series and I have enjoyed them. Secrets, though, has been about nothing much and then ending with no proper ending. All a bit of a waste of half an hour really.
Her sister and husband were both very allusive to what actually went on and the fact that the first thing he said when confessing was mentioning her sister.
I don't agree.
Put yourself in the sister's position. Would you really not say anything if your rapist started going out with your sister? They were clearly a close family so it simply does not make sense that the sister would have welcomed someone who had raped her into her life as a future brother-in-law.
It is hard enough to accept that the sister would say nothing if she just vaguely suspected that he had raped another girl, but it is 100% implausible that she would be prepared to be bridesmaid while she watched her sister marry her rapist.
Only one member of Equity can use a name - it isn't parliamentary law.
Why the heck would you give your home number to a clinic when you are using them for your 'other' family