• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Soaps
Corrie - Writers treating viewers with contempt
James J
07-09-2016
I really want this stamped out of Corrie.

Examples from tonight's episode:

1. Tracy to Audrey: "Don't worry, we're very affordable! I'll bring the flowers over later."

- She wouldn't say "the flowers" she would say "I'll bring them over later". Stop assuming viewers are that dumb they won't know she's talking about flowers. They were outside a bloody flower shop for christ's sake, it couldn't be more obvious even to a casual viewer.

2. Eileen to Phelan/Vinnie: "Hiya! Just coming to check on Jason's investment!"

- She wouldn't say "Jason's investment" .. she'd say "Just popped in to see how it's all going." Again really stilted dialogue.

I get the writers are trying to let casual viewers know what's going on but it's just so frustrating that the dialogue comes across so artificial as a result. Stop treating viewers with contempt and let them wonder what's going on and pay attention to understand the dialogue.

This sort of thing happens all the time. Phone calls answered within 2 seconds, characters saying in one breath without gaps: "Hello? Yes I'm ringing about a hotel booking. What do you mean there's no rooms left tonight? Thanks for nothing bye!"

It's so unrealistic, it's so frustrating. It's lazy, appalling and shoddy.

Sort it out Coronation Street, this sort of stuff should be stamped out. The most important thing in this programme arguably is its dialogue and if you can't even get that one right.

As an aside the show has been diabolical since Kylie died, if it's not better by November time I really am worried for the show going forward.
little-monster
07-09-2016
All depends who was behind it

It wasn't Jonathan Harvey was it?
James J
07-09-2016
Originally Posted by little-monster:
“All depends who was behind it

It wasn't Jonathan Harvey was it?”

It varies from bad to toe-curlingly bad, but it's a problem in Corrie a lot of the time.

It was Mark Wadlow.
sorcha_healy27
07-09-2016
Originally Posted by James J:
“I really want this stamped out of Corrie.

Examples from tonight's episode:

1. Tracy to Audrey: "Don't worry, we're very affordable! I'll bring the flowers over later."

- She wouldn't say "the flowers" she would say "I'll bring them over later". Stop assuming viewers are that dumb they won't know she's talking about flowers. They were outside a bloody flower shop for christ's sake, it couldn't be more obvious even to a casual viewer.

2. Eileen to Phelan/Vinnie: "Hiya! Just coming to check on Jason's investment!"

- She wouldn't say "Jason's investment" .. she'd say "Just popped in to see how it's all going." Again really stilted dialogue.

I get the writers are trying to let casual viewers know what's going on but it's just so frustrating that the dialogue comes across so artificial as a result. Stop treating viewers with contempt and let them wonder what's going on and pay attention to understand the dialogue.

This sort of thing happens all the time. Phone calls answered within 2 seconds, characters saying in one breath without gaps: "Hello? Yes I'm ringing about a hotel booking. What do you mean there's no rooms left tonight? Thanks for nothing bye!"

It's so unrealistic, it's so frustrating. It's lazy, appalling and shoddy.

Sort it out Coronation Street, this sort of stuff should be stamped out. The most important thing in this programme arguably is its dialogue and if you can't even get that one right.

As an aside the show has been diabolical since Kylie died, if it's not better by November time I really am worried for the show going forward.”

Great post James.

The dialogue is dire and so contrived
James J
07-09-2016
Originally Posted by sorcha_healy27:
“Great post James.

The dialogue is dire and so contrived”

Utterly abysmal. I've requested in the Corrie thread for the thread starters to include a public poll to rate the episode. I think we should start voicing our opinions with scores - maybe TPTB will start to notice how dissatisfied we are!
little-monster
07-09-2016
Originally Posted by James J:
“It varies from bad to toe-curlingly bad, but it's a problem in Corrie a lot of the time.

It was Mark Wadlow.”

I still haven't got over when Tim called Sophie a "big lezzer". Not only was it random but it was so out of character.
pete137
07-09-2016
"I'll have a pint of lager"
James J
07-09-2016
Originally Posted by pete137:
“"I'll have a pint of lager"”

UGHHHH literally strength give me

Just have them say "pint please, usual" or "same again". I appreciate they're not allowed real beers so can't say "A pint of Stella and a Harveys please" but god damn it at least cover it up!

Also annoys me you never see people in Rovers drinking lager, it's ALWAYS ale which looks fake as hell as well I'd like to add. At least the beer in Emmerdale looks real. It's little things like this which really wind me up. Complacency and it's rotten to the core. If I were in charge I would obsess over tiny details like this, I'd have a rule that a minimum of 3 cars must be parked on the street at all times, things like this, they all add up.

I need to lie down.
mivi
07-09-2016
The writing is abysmal. Toe curlingly embarrassing.
Everything is contrived, sensationalised and too many coincidences.
claremonts
07-09-2016
I feel as if sometimes the writers look at what they have written and think "that'll do to keep the viewers happy" - well it doesn't!!
Jack_Clinton
07-09-2016
And?

Does it matter if Tracy mentioned flowers. It might sound more professional for Tracy to mention what the object is in conversation, (I.e. in this case - flowers)

To me, Eileen sounded sarcastic.

I clicked on this thread, thinking it was started by another homophobe annoyed at the recent scenes involving Billy and Todd kissing.
callumfreeman
07-09-2016
I want to understand why Audrey is buying flowers from someone who ruined her grandson's wedding and seems to get on fine with her. Mind you Johnny did the same a couple of weeks ago, must be that memory wiping device Tracy uses after carrying out her dastardly schemes.
danyell
07-09-2016
Originally Posted by little-monster:
“I still haven't got over when Tim called Sophie a "big lezzer". Not only was it random but it was so out of character.”

Really? Won't the PC brigade think that was a homophobic comment and complain immediately? I guess it's different when it's women's sexuality. That's generally treated as a joke or not taken seriously.
Wolfsheadish
08-09-2016
Originally Posted by James J:
“I really want this stamped out of Corrie.

Examples from tonight's episode:

1. Tracy to Audrey: "Don't worry, we're very affordable! I'll bring the flowers over later."

- She wouldn't say "the flowers" she would say "I'll bring them over later". Stop assuming viewers are that dumb they won't know she's talking about flowers. They were outside a bloody flower shop for christ's sake, it couldn't be more obvious even to a casual viewer.

2. Eileen to Phelan/Vinnie: "Hiya! Just coming to check on Jason's investment!"

- She wouldn't say "Jason's investment" .. she'd say "Just popped in to see how it's all going." Again really stilted dialogue.

I get the writers are trying to let casual viewers know what's going on but it's just so frustrating that the dialogue comes across so artificial as a result. Stop treating viewers with contempt and let them wonder what's going on and pay attention to understand the dialogue.

This sort of thing happens all the time. Phone calls answered within 2 seconds, characters saying in one breath without gaps: "Hello? Yes I'm ringing about a hotel booking. What do you mean there's no rooms left tonight? Thanks for nothing bye!"

It's so unrealistic, it's so frustrating. It's lazy, appalling and shoddy.

Sort it out Coronation Street, this sort of stuff should be stamped out. The most important thing in this programme arguably is its dialogue and if you can't even get that one right.

As an aside the show has been diabolical since Kylie died, if it's not better by November time I really am worried for the show going forward.”

Excellent post. In my opinion the writing is the root cause of all that's wrong with Corrie nowadays.
notdebbiedingle
08-09-2016
Originally Posted by callumfreeman:
“I want to understand why Audrey is buying flowers from someone who ruined her grandson's wedding and seems to get on fine with her. Mind you Johnny did the same a couple of weeks ago, must be that memory wiping device Tracy uses after carrying out her dastardly schemes.”

Not just Nick's wedding either!! How f***ing disloyal is she being to her own daughter?????

FFS this is the bitch who tried to get Gail sent down for a murder she didn't commit, purely so she could get her own sentence reduced for a murder she DID commit!!
Thankfully Gail hasn't such a short memory, despite her recent regular bouts of senility!!

Sadly the distinct improvements we noticed in writing & continuity a couple of months ago are seeming further & further in the past now & things are starting to go back to how they were in the worst times of Blackburn's reign!!
Time for more ripping up sessions from Ms Oates' deputy imo!!
Alistair_Carmol
08-09-2016
Originally Posted by danyell:
“Really? Won't the PC brigade think that was a homophobic comment and complain immediately? I guess it's different when it's women's sexuality. That's generally treated as a joke or not taken seriously.”

Your post has confused me, the first half is about the "PC Brigade" re the "Lezzer" comment, (which to me is about people taking offence to easily taking things too seriously) but the second half seems to indicate you don't feel that women's sexuality is treated seriously enough?
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map