In the title really, do you think that It's important that soaps paint a realistic picture of what life is like in that part of the country? Or do you think soaps are just for entertainment and can be totally unrealistic and It wouldn't bother you? Also, which soap do you think is the most & least realistic?

I think It's an interesting talking point.
Poll coming up.

To me, realism is the very essence of soaps, whatever that definition may be.

To me it is important.

I suppose you spend most of your time disappointed then

Soaps reflect reality. They don't portray it. Not by a long shot.

We haven't met before, have we?

I think it's important. It's ok to suspend belief to a point - we know for example that characters are exaggerated personalities due to the nature of a soap opera- but when they act and behave in ways which are stupid - it's really irritating.

The least realistic for me is definitely Hollyoaks- largely due to the lack of aftermath of events, particularly death and the lack of impact it has in people.

The most realistic is probably Eastenders. It has the least disasters, everyday events like the outcome of the trial today and people seem to genuinely care about others and have a vested interest- or Ben and Paull

Yes it matters a lot, it's in my eyes why the soap's are not as popular as they once were.

Many of the times people call soaps unrealistic what they're complaining about is actually just poor writing or storytelling. Lack of realism isn't automatically bad and depends on the situation.

This is pretty accurate and dare I say the way it should be. Soaps are not an educational tool but an entertainment that sometimes portrays issues that they try to portray accurately whilst still being relevant to their characters and trying to entertain.

If somebody is suffering from any of the problems that characters in soaps have they should seek help (e.g use the helplines that the soaps often put up after the program) rather than copycat and sort of actions of characters as they are strictly for entertainment.

Obviously it can't be always 100%, but it should be as real as it can be, you have to believe what you're watching.

Ok soaps are set in present the day and the current world and therefore they need to have a degree of realism for us to identify with the characters / situations / stories etc and to become so invested in following these stories so many times a week. Whilst sometimes suspension of belief is required for the purpose of drama or plot device it should not be so common place that it detracts from the story or the show itself. i think the problem is that soaps have in recent years appeared to have moved away from good storytelling using solid characters and instead prefer sensationalism and short term shocks to grab the audiences attention. By doing this the suspension of belief is heightened and some viewers then find this discouraging. this is the reason I no longer watch Hollyoaks as the shocking twists and turns they kept employing just felt like cheap tricks with no substance or real meaning. DTC also did this at EE (so pleased he's gone) so I'm hoping SOC is not going to go down the same route.

I have to say no it doesn't matter it's entertainment that matters more than anything, we get enough realism in real life.

On the whole real life for most people is pretty mundane it's just a matter of work, eating, sleeping and going to the toilet, is that the kind of realism people want to see in soaps, I certainly don't.

This 100%


I agree that the writing is often poor.

Soaps (or serial dramas) originally WERE realistic. Look at any old episode of Brookside, Eastenders or even vintage Coronation St, and the storylines had an edge of realism. Both Brookside & early EE were realistic & gritty. It's only in latter years soaps have become more fantasy and comedeic. The ITV ones are sometimes borderline farcical (although, I've not watched ITV soaps for many years, but from what I can gather they're pretty-much the same).

Perhaps it is overkill. Too many episodes, so the writing suffers. I'm a believer that less is definitely more!

I'm on the fence. I think some of the issues in Emmerdale are realistic , eg Belle Dingle's mental health problems, but a lot of ED isn't. I can only suspend disbelief so far so I like a mixture of both.

I think to an extent soaps have to be realistic to be believable but due to the fact that they're an ongoing drama, the lives of the characters in the show are never going to be that realistic due to the amount of drama that happens in their individual lives, but as for day to day stories go, then they have to be realistic enough.

But last nights episode seemed to me to be less like an eastenders episode and more like an educational tool/fly on the wall documentary with the express desire of sending out a serious message to all that were watching it.

It felt very heavy handed to me, like they were piling it on with a trough....

I voted for the on the fence option

I don't watch television in general for realism. If i wanted realism, then i would watch the history or discovery channel. But the odd bit of realism is nice and welcome.

No. Its a drama and should remain that way. The moment soap becomes realistic would mean it would become a documentary. That is why soaps used to be better. They wanted to tell a good story rather than give a Disney happy ending to everything.

I think both has it's place. I find soaps should throw characters into ridiculous situations they would probably never find themselves in in real life ( at least not all the time over and over again) but how the characters react in those situations should be realistic.

Which often gives me a hard time watching Hollyoaks cause the characters react anything but remotely realistic more often than not
Especially looking how serial murderers only have to look a bit sad and all is forgiven and people end up dating the guy who killed their parents....

Great thread Ben and great post Miss MM.

All series, long running or short are an invitation to step into another world and the soaps have certain parameters, conventions etc which have set that world in place over a number of years.

Taking EE as an example I don't expect reality per se but I do expect heightened reality. If a dragon struts into the square as Billy Mitchell's long lost brother thats clearly not acceptable. If Billy struts into the Game of Thrones universe and a dragon eats him for being a boring drip that's OK within the parameters of GOT. From glancing at threads on here Hollyoaks has morphed into a very heightened sense of reality with twins having secret babies and regular deaths. That seems OK for the HO universe. I wouldn't want it in EE.

But - EE's claim to realism has been slipping for years. And it's really started to grate. I don't mind a secret relative or two but EE has had far too many turn up in the space of 2 years. That particular conceit has run dry for me and none of them have been worth the fuss. The nadir was probably Kat Slater finding out from a bun that she gave birth to a secret son.

Similarly Phil's invincibility and yearly car crashes no longer interest.

The Bobby storyline started well but descended into farce when Lucy's father meekly accepted her stepmother dumping her corpse and went on honeymoon with said stepmother. Once the storyline ended half the square was colluding in the framing of an innocent man, including a woman whose son was attacked by the real killer and his own daughter moved in with the family that framed her father!

This post is far too rambly already so I won't go into how long term characters like Sharon Watts have been diminished with the re writing of their back stories, shrugging off of death, forgiveness of Phil, loss of previous funds etc.

Having said all that if a suspension of disbelief is required for a stupid storyline that I enjoy I will be hypocritical and welcome it. Kat's story is bollocks but I loved the episode when she found out! And the episode when Sharon met Gavin was great - just a shame the rest of it was rubbish.

Don't think I've ever seen you write more than a sentence



*mwah*

It took half an hour on this blooming phone KK! I was losing the will to live half way through!

I think soaps are supposed to be realistic, but they're really not

Coronation street is ridiculously unbelievably far fetched. Look at all the stuff that happens on it pffttt yeah right nothing ever happens on my street

The Platts are the best soap family, but also the most unrealistic. No family could ever have as much grief as they get.

Apparently every one of Gail's husbands (except 2) are dead, David is a psycho, Nick was nearly killed by David for shagging Kylie, now he has brain damage, Callum was buried under the annexe, both Max's parents have died within a year so a 10 yr old boy is now an orphan, Callum terrorised the family for months, Sarah had a mental breakdown, Bethany is probably gonna become anorexic cos of bullies and Kylie was stabbed to death just as she was starting a new life in Barbados with David and the kids yeah right! Cos that'd really happen in real life wouldn't it?

Yep - talking buns are definitely a step too far

It's important to me.