He was producer (02-04) for one of Corrie's best periods, and so I think he should still be respected for that. But let's face it, that was 12 year ago and he's clearly run out of any ideas for the show, much as he might love his job and love Corrie, it's time to go.
Corrie - Is Kieran Roberts holding the show back?
2 of 3
Originally Posted by James J:
“Utterly pathetic post. Thought better of you Andy!”
“Utterly pathetic post. Thought better of you Andy!”
You can't critisise ITV or any show on ITV according to Andy. You should know that James.
I think Andy thinks everything at Corrie is tickatee-boo, and its at its best right now.
To answer your question, yes I do think Kieran Roberts is holding back to the show. I think he will squash any bold moves Kate Oates wants to make, and is only seeing Corrie as in perfect health consistently. Look at the storylines on screen we've had in the last few years. Awful. TRuly awful. Lloyd and Andrea storylines. You would think anyone could see how poor these were, but tbh, I don't think they are that bothered. As long as they still have viewers watching religiously.
Originally Posted by broadshoulder:
“That's the problem. He keeps the producers in check so they can't get rid of those they want too.”
“That's the problem. He keeps the producers in check so they can't get rid of those they want too.”
Corrie do axe long term characters when he came back in 2006 into his new role as Executive Producer and Steve Frost came in as producer characters like Mike Baldwin and Fred Elliot were axed.
Originally Posted by ewoodie:
“The other soaps may fluctuate but Corrie remains consistently bad. It's amateur, the values still lie in the 70s and some of the set is a memorial to past characters.”
“The other soaps may fluctuate but Corrie remains consistently bad. It's amateur, the values still lie in the 70s and some of the set is a memorial to past characters.”
I've watched a couple recently; and you've encased its problems in a nutshell for me.
I'd add to that ; a third of the cast is deadwood and what's left are mostly unlikeable ..
Anyway; it has its fans so I'll leave it lol
To be honest I don't think Kate Oates is all that.
Roberts must take his share of the blame but Oates last year at Emmerdale was awful. Mcleod isn't much better mind.
Roberts must take his share of the blame but Oates last year at Emmerdale was awful. Mcleod isn't much better mind.
Originally Posted by All Of Me:
“Corrie do axe long term characters when he came back in 2006 into his new role as Executive Producer and Steve Frost came in as producer characters like Mike Baldwin and Fred Elliot were axed.”
“Corrie do axe long term characters when he came back in 2006 into his new role as Executive Producer and Steve Frost came in as producer characters like Mike Baldwin and Fred Elliot were axed.”
That was 10 years ago.
Curly Watts and Martin Platt were also axed. But if that was still something they weren't afraid to do then the likes of Fiz, Sean and Michelle who add zilch and are played by atrocious 'actors' would be long gone.
Originally Posted by LHolmes:
“That was 10 years ago.
Curly Watts and Martin Platt were also axed. But if that was still something they weren't afraid to do then the likes of Fiz, Sean and Michelle who add zilch and are played by atrocious 'actors' would be long gone.”
“That was 10 years ago.
Curly Watts and Martin Platt were also axed. But if that was still something they weren't afraid to do then the likes of Fiz, Sean and Michelle who add zilch and are played by atrocious 'actors' would be long gone.”
Don't think Curly was axed when Kieron Roberts was there. Martin was axed under Tony Wood.
Just because you and others on here don't like Fiz Sean and Michelle doesn't automatically mean they should be axed they're popular characters outside this forum.
The biggest issue doesn't surrounding casting but the preservation of sets to the extent the show is stuck in a timewarp, and an unwillingness to improve the production values - with regards to cameras and direction - to be closer to a drama series than a soap.
Yes we're in HD now and that's great but the show still looks (in SD) like something from the late 90s. And believe me they have the money and resources to make the show look less dated. Things like this are important, and overlooked. Just because it's a "soap" doesn't mean it should look like one. IMO it should look and feel like a drama series visually, but one that happens to air five times a week. So I'm talking better lighting, better use of camera lenses and angles, and so on.
Moreover the preciousness with sets (e.g. Rovers interior being magically recreated after it was burned to the ground in 2013) is a real issue and I think someone like Kieran Roberts would be the person ordering this cannot change.
Yes we're in HD now and that's great but the show still looks (in SD) like something from the late 90s. And believe me they have the money and resources to make the show look less dated. Things like this are important, and overlooked. Just because it's a "soap" doesn't mean it should look like one. IMO it should look and feel like a drama series visually, but one that happens to air five times a week. So I'm talking better lighting, better use of camera lenses and angles, and so on.
Moreover the preciousness with sets (e.g. Rovers interior being magically recreated after it was burned to the ground in 2013) is a real issue and I think someone like Kieran Roberts would be the person ordering this cannot change.
Originally Posted by LHolmes:
“That was 10 years ago.
Curly Watts and Martin Platt were also axed. But if that was still something they weren't afraid to do then the likes of Fiz, Sean and Michelle who add zilch and are played by atrocious 'actors' would be long gone.”
“That was 10 years ago.
Curly Watts and Martin Platt were also axed. But if that was still something they weren't afraid to do then the likes of Fiz, Sean and Michelle who add zilch and are played by atrocious 'actors' would be long gone.”
Don't you think Corrie has lost enough long therm characters recently they've lost Deidre, Carla, Jason, Peter (although he's coming back), Emily, and Kylie. To me axing more long term characters just for the sake of it would be stupid at this point. They need to keep some characters with a long history on the show.
Originally Posted by All Of Me:
“Don't think Curly was axed when Kieron Roberts was there. Martin was axed under Tony Wood.
Just because you and others on here don't like Fiz Sean and Michelle doesn't automatically mean they should be axed they're popular characters outside this forum.”
“Don't think Curly was axed when Kieron Roberts was there. Martin was axed under Tony Wood.
Just because you and others on here don't like Fiz Sean and Michelle doesn't automatically mean they should be axed they're popular characters outside this forum.”
Curly left in 2003, right in the middle of his tenure.
Originally Posted by All Of Me:
“
Just because you and others on here don't like Fiz Sean and Michelle doesn't automatically mean they should be axed they're popular characters outside this forum.”
“
Just because you and others on here don't like Fiz Sean and Michelle doesn't automatically mean they should be axed they're popular characters outside this forum.”
Yes, it does
If characters add nothing then replace with characters who add something to the show.
You have the mentality as kieron roberts
Originally Posted by Steve Soapbox:
“I'm not a Corrie fan but I tuned in for several weeks recently and was shocked at how amateur and shoddy the show is on all levels.
The production standard is like something out of the 1980's. The actors just stand rigid and talk in every scene; there's zero behaviour or subtext and virtually all plot is conveyed through really 'on the nose' dialogue. How thick do they think the audience is?
The only movement experienced in most scenes is between the cutting of shots, otherwise everything else is static.
Scenes are also staged in a ham theatrical way with everyone stood in completely unnatural positions, like some amateur theatre production.”
“I'm not a Corrie fan but I tuned in for several weeks recently and was shocked at how amateur and shoddy the show is on all levels.
The production standard is like something out of the 1980's. The actors just stand rigid and talk in every scene; there's zero behaviour or subtext and virtually all plot is conveyed through really 'on the nose' dialogue. How thick do they think the audience is?
The only movement experienced in most scenes is between the cutting of shots, otherwise everything else is static.
Scenes are also staged in a ham theatrical way with everyone stood in completely unnatural positions, like some amateur theatre production.”
I completely agree with this. I watch rarely these days, but had it on the other day and there was a scene set in the bistro. All the members of staff were stood completely still talking, even though they were supposedly at work. It would make it feel much more real if they made some small tweaks to the direction of the show - people doing their daily tasks while chatting, perhaps picking up glasses or cleaning.
Corrie feels stale and lazy in its production values, although the picture quality is good. I don't know how much responsibility Kieran Roberts has for this, but as the person at the top he is ultimately responsible for his team's output.
Point is despite the endless issues raised on here -do ITV really care what the viewers think any more?
If they did, they would have begun addressing those years ago
Instead they see it as loyalty type program & think viewers will watch even if half the cast of TOWIE were paid to appear in it
We have all said the same things many times
On too often, too many poor actors, awful stories etc etc, full of tick box issues
Its strengths in the past was it was a kitchen sink drama had gritty northern realism & very strong cast & storylines plus the humour & didn't take itself too seriously
You only have to look at programs such as The Street & Happy Valley
They are successful due to location filming excellent storylines plus actors that look like ordinary normal people which we empathise with & can relate too
If they did, they would have begun addressing those years ago
Instead they see it as loyalty type program & think viewers will watch even if half the cast of TOWIE were paid to appear in it
We have all said the same things many times
On too often, too many poor actors, awful stories etc etc, full of tick box issues
Its strengths in the past was it was a kitchen sink drama had gritty northern realism & very strong cast & storylines plus the humour & didn't take itself too seriously
You only have to look at programs such as The Street & Happy Valley
They are successful due to location filming excellent storylines plus actors that look like ordinary normal people which we empathise with & can relate too
Originally Posted by Sun Glasses Ron:
“Point is despite the endless issues raised on here -do ITV really care what the viewers think any more?
If they did, they would have begun addressing those years ago
Instead they see it as loyalty type program & think viewers will watch even if half the cast of TOWIE were paid to appear in it
We have all said the same things many times
On too often, too many poor actors, awful stories etc etc, full of tick box issues
Its strengths in the past was it was a kitchen sink drama had gritty northern realism & very strong cast & storylines plus the humour & didn't take itself too seriously
You only have to look at programs such as The Street & Happy Valley
They are successful due to location filming excellent storylines plus actors that look like ordinary normal people which we empathise with & can relate too”
“Point is despite the endless issues raised on here -do ITV really care what the viewers think any more?
If they did, they would have begun addressing those years ago
Instead they see it as loyalty type program & think viewers will watch even if half the cast of TOWIE were paid to appear in it
We have all said the same things many times
On too often, too many poor actors, awful stories etc etc, full of tick box issues
Its strengths in the past was it was a kitchen sink drama had gritty northern realism & very strong cast & storylines plus the humour & didn't take itself too seriously
You only have to look at programs such as The Street & Happy Valley
They are successful due to location filming excellent storylines plus actors that look like ordinary normal people which we empathise with & can relate too”
Production values can go a long way... the cast is good as an ensemble - the production values cheapen it and make it look worse. They could certainly improve a lot by improving and modernising the way it's directed, shot and post-processed. It is about 10 years behind equivalent drama on TV across all genres.
Shooting the show more like The Street, Happy Valley, Cold Feet, would help the show no end. Even the best scenes now are carried by those actors, there is zero in the way of direction skill which helps amplify or enhance these scenes. Coronation Street looks far too clinical, clean and shiny. It should be deeper in contrast, a little darker, with much better and realistic interior and exterior lighting, and more variety in shots (wide angle and shallow depth of field shots). In post the show should have some subtle but noticeable camera filters and other techniques used to give it a gritty, modern feel. This would not only add to the realism of the show and bring it back to its roots in some ways but also give the viewer the impression it's not a pound shop operation.
Visually the show is washed-out HD and looks cheap, despite being clearly shot with the best equipment in the business. This clinging on to the pre-HD visual look is part of the reason why soaps are dying out; they simply don't realise they aren't of the visual and artistic level of equivalent dramas. It looks as though it could have been shot on an iPhone at times.
Back in the day, the show could easily compare visually to dramas shown on the networks. At some point, drama moved forward; soap did not.
My issue is this programme is a multi-million pound operation and has state of the art equipment with which to shoot, produce and edit with. I can only imagine it's someone like Kieran Roberts demanding the visual style of the show remains stuck in the 90s and pre-HD era, because that's "how Corrie should be". I disagree, move with the flipping times like every single every other genre.
The hilarious thing is it's probably more effort to create the current visual style with the equipment they have, it's a deliberate thing, but it's utterly misguided. Phil Collinson's era showed signs of movement in the right direction but it fizzled out and is back to being as stale as ever. It's absolutely deliberate that the show looks dated in appearance, just like it was deliberate to rebuild the Rovers, Kabin and Dev's almost brick for brick inside and out after the respective disasters. It's a refusal to move with the times, born of an arrogance the show is perfect in a time warp.
Corrie have not entered the HD era at all, and this shows. It just looks like second rate television, no matter how good the scripts are.
Originally Posted by Mark_Washingto1:
“Don't you think Corrie has lost enough long therm characters recently they've lost Deidre, Carla, Jason, Peter (although he's coming back), Emily, and Kylie. To me axing more long term characters just for the sake of it would be stupid at this point. They need to keep some characters with a long history on the show.”
“Don't you think Corrie has lost enough long therm characters recently they've lost Deidre, Carla, Jason, Peter (although he's coming back), Emily, and Kylie. To me axing more long term characters just for the sake of it would be stupid at this point. They need to keep some characters with a long history on the show.”
There'd still be plenty of long running characters around without those three. For me they are the worst of the worst. Although you could throw in people like Sinead and Kirk too.
I don't think much of Maria but I think she's salvageable so I'm not for throwing the baby out with the bathwater but some are beyond hope and Michelle, Sean and Fiz definitely fit that category.
Originally Posted by Kate Ford fan:
“Michelle is an amazing character. Why would they get rid off her?”
“Michelle is an amazing character. Why would they get rid off her?”
The show is lucky to have her.
Originally Posted by KornerKabin:
“Some thrilling discussion on this thread, incredible.”
“Some thrilling discussion on this thread, incredible.”
Are you being sarcastic KK?
Originally Posted by KornerKabin:
“No, James.”
“No, James.”
Okay! Hope you're okay, odd to see you so short of things to say! Go on, splurge, I love reading it and so do many others!
Originally Posted by James J:
“Okay! Hope you're okay, odd to see you so short of things to say! Go on, splurge, I love reading it and so do many others!”
“Okay! Hope you're okay, odd to see you so short of things to say! Go on, splurge, I love reading it and so do many others!
”
Very down this week, in an especially dark place tonight so not really feeling up to much. Reading all of the posts on this thread has cheered me up a bit though so thanks.
Originally Posted by KornerKabin:
“Very down this week, in an especially dark place tonight so not really feeling up to much. Reading all of the posts on this thread has cheered me up a bit though so thanks.”
“Very down this week, in an especially dark place tonight so not really feeling up to much. Reading all of the posts on this thread has cheered me up a bit though so thanks.”
I hope it's nothing to do with missing the thread, we all forget things sometimes!
Originally Posted by broadshoulder:
“Yes, it does
If characters add nothing then replace with characters who add something to the show.
You have the mentality as kieron roberts”
“Yes, it does
If characters add nothing then replace with characters who add something to the show.
You have the mentality as kieron roberts”
The likes of Ken Rita Audrey won't be around forever you need others to take over from them and Fiz Sean Michelle are three of the ones who will.
2 of 3
