|
||||||||
KK's Sunday poll: '10 things I hate about soap' |
| View Poll Results: '10 things I hate about soap' | |||
| Sensationalist plots |
|
32 | 47.06% |
| Lack of long-standing characters |
|
11 | 16.18% |
| Too much deadwood |
|
35 | 51.47% |
| Bad acting |
|
29 | 42.65% |
| Bad writing |
|
40 | 58.82% |
| Bad storylining |
|
41 | 60.29% |
| Bad pacing |
|
35 | 51.47% |
| Too many spoilers |
|
25 | 36.76% |
| Unrealistic sets |
|
13 | 19.12% |
| Boring storylines |
|
26 | 38.24% |
| Cringeworthy comedy |
|
39 | 57.35% |
| Too many returnees |
|
9 | 13.24% |
| Too many departures |
|
4 | 5.88% |
| Too many episodes |
|
24 | 35.29% |
| Poor continuity |
|
38 | 55.88% |
| Too much focus on ‘big’ weeks (BGT Week, ‘Super Soap Week’) |
|
28 | 41.18% |
| Too many issue-led plots |
|
17 | 25.00% |
| Over-reliance on stunts/explosions |
|
28 | 41.18% |
| Casting famous people |
|
25 | 36.76% |
| Badly reworked opening titles/music |
|
8 | 11.76% |
| Other |
|
13 | 19.12% |
| Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 68. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in? | |||
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
KK's Sunday poll: '10 things I hate about soap'
What are the Top 10 things that you just can't stand about soaps in 2016?
Multiple choice poll. You can choose more than 10, don't let me stop you
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: With MyAndy!
Posts: 15,200
|
I think the fans are the biggest problem. Esp the obsessive ones
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
Quote:
I think the fans are the biggest problem. Esp the obsessive ones
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 69,009
|
Too many episodes and sensationalism by far for me.
Ill add social media obsessives/shippers too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
Quote:
Too many episodes and sensationalism by far for me.
Ill add social media obsessives/shippers too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,686
|
Boring storylines and deadwood characters. Corrie has had that problem for years until very recently, where it's seen an improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Emmerdale
Posts: 4,290
|
Boring characters/Uninteresting characters
Repetitive storylines High sensationalism Poor character dev. Too much shouting (one of the reasons I switched off EE) |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,308
|
Quote:
Boring storylines and deadwood characters. Corrie has had that problem for years until very recently, where it's seen an improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Birmingham - 1000 trades
Posts: 2,727
|
I voted for all bar 2 - lack of long standing characters (because I think Corrie has enough) and other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: With MyAndy!
Posts: 15,200
|
Quote:
Do you mean me?
![]() And then just the plain obsessive character ones. Not all of its bad.its good to be passionate about things its just detrimental to others at times |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Losing the plot and not caring
Posts: 68,975
|
A lot of things I hate about Soaps but for me most of them are covered by the Bad Writing one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Another time, another place..
Posts: 24,641
|
Quote:
Too many episodes and sensationalism by far for me.
Ill add social media obsessives/shippers too. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
Quote:
No i mean the ones who go on twitter posting abuse towards actors. The ones who slate the slow no matter what it does. You know when they shout and say they want less sensationalism then when they get it still aren't happy and change tack and call the show boring and it meed sensationalism
And then just the plain obsessive character ones. Not all of its bad.its good to be passionate about things its just detrimental to others at times |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 31,001
|
Bad writing and bad acting have to come top for me. Bad writers and actors should be got rid of as soon as it becomes obvious, and they should certainly never be asked back.
My other is the overuse of a handful of characters whilst others, often played by excellent actors, are left undeveloped and wallowing in the background. |
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,664
|
Bad story telling and bad writing for me. It always ruins it no matter what the storyline is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 69,009
|
I need to add block storytelling to this. I hate it
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Alcohol aisle in Tescos *gulp*
Posts: 12,043
|
One of the ones I voted for was unrealistic sets. It really does make a huge difference to a soap when it actually feels like it's set in the real world, as opposed to it's own little insular bubble where characters aren't allowed to have lives outside of the bubble. For example in Corrie, having nights out at the Bistro or stag/hen parties in the local pub. With Whitney's hen in EE, it was good and refreshing to see them all head 'Up West' (even though this is only a recent thing for EE as well) as opposed to having it in the Queen Vic.
Too much focus on big weeks was another option I chose. It's annoying when a soap only puts a real effort into writing, directing, storylines and pace for 'big event' weeks, namely BGT week and episodes near the NTA's for Corrie, and during DTC's era on EE (particularly after the 30th) for Halloween or Christmas episodes. Hollyoaks also used to suffer this problem of being rubbish then having a set of decent episodes if a big stunt was coming up. It's annoying because you're just sat there thinking 'why can't soaps be this good all the time?'. Over reliance on stunts and explosions, and when they are just paved over and forgotten about within a short space of time to make way for the next one. Yes, stunts are great when done properly, allowing the characters to be at the forefront, not the stunt itself. Even though the aftermath was horrendous, I really enjoyed Emmerdale's Helicopter Crash. I thought it was excellent how several separate stories all came together (Val faking her death, Debbie and Ross' affair being exposed and Chrissie/Robert divorce) and culminated in this amazing stunt which affected the majority of the characters in almost a chain reaction fashion; i.e. Chrissie setting fire to Robert's car which sent the gas canister up into the helicopter that crashed onto the wedding reception. The stunt came second and the characters came first. In contrast, Corrie's Victoria Court Fire was practically the opposite, it was all about the stunt and there was so many horrendous moments throughout that whole week, as well as it being littered with SOR's, the main one sticking out for me was Liz's deadpan reaction to her granddaughter being inside a burning building, practically taunting Tracy with it. IIRC, the aftermath was poor for this also. That's another annoying thing in soaps is the lack of aftermath, especially with big storylines. When looking at soap stunts, the huge 'Blockbuster' style stunts (using Corrie's Tram Crash and Emmerdale's Plane Crash as examples here) the difference with aftermath is huge. Unfortunately, the Tram Crash was soon over, everything was built back up as if it never happened. It is hardly referenced, the only time I think it was was in Dec 2011 when they held a memorial, but other than that nobody mentions it. Due to how huge the stunt was, there was potential to get a good amount of material out of that stunt and the catastrophic effects it had on the Street and it's residents. But no, it was quickly dealt with ready to have 'The most exciting arrival for 2000 years' back. Whereas with Emmerdale and their Plane Crash (plus other catastrophic disasters such as the Kings River Explosion), it is still even now mentioned. The effects on the village at the time were immense, an example of this was Chris Tate being paralysed from the waist down and Eric Pollard accused of killing his wife Elizabeth (a story which came to a head 17 years later in 2010). That does link into continuity, not forgetting huge events which have happened. A lesser example would be when Phil in EE was shot by Shirley in 2014, when Ian heard he said 'What, again?' and it's the things like this that help to make the show more realistic. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Dorothy Fish Common Room
Posts: 31,209
|
Poor casting choices. Sometimes the issue isn't with the character itself, but the person playing the role.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
Quote:
One of the ones I voted for was unrealistic sets. It really does make a huge difference to a soap when it actually feels like it's set in the real world, as opposed to it's own little insular bubble where characters aren't allowed to have lives outside of the bubble. For example in Corrie, having nights out at the Bistro or stag/hen parties in the local pub. With Whitney's hen in EE, it was good and refreshing to see them all head 'Up West' (even though this is only a recent thing for EE as well) as opposed to having it in the Queen Vic.
Too much focus on big weeks was another option I chose. It's annoying when a soap only puts a real effort into writing, directing, storylines and pace for 'big event' weeks, namely BGT week and episodes near the NTA's for Corrie, and during DTC's era on EE (particularly after the 30th) for Halloween or Christmas episodes. Hollyoaks also used to suffer this problem of being rubbish then having a set of decent episodes if a big stunt was coming up. It's annoying because you're just sat there thinking 'why can't soaps be this good all the time?'. Over reliance on stunts and explosions, and when they are just paved over and forgotten about within a short space of time to make way for the next one. Yes, stunts are great when done properly, allowing the characters to be at the forefront, not the stunt itself. Even though the aftermath was horrendous, I really enjoyed Emmerdale's Helicopter Crash. I thought it was excellent how several separate stories all came together (Val faking her death, Debbie and Ross' affair being exposed and Chrissie/Robert divorce) and culminated in this amazing stunt which affected the majority of the characters in almost a chain reaction fashion; i.e. Chrissie setting fire to Robert's car which sent the gas canister up into the helicopter that crashed onto the wedding reception. The stunt came second and the characters came first. In contrast, Corrie's Victoria Court Fire was practically the opposite, it was all about the stunt and there was so many horrendous moments throughout that whole week, as well as it being littered with SOR's, the main one sticking out for me was Liz's deadpan reaction to her granddaughter being inside a burning building, practically taunting Tracy with it. IIRC, the aftermath was poor for this also. That's another annoying thing in soaps is the lack of aftermath, especially with big storylines. When looking at soap stunts, the huge 'Blockbuster' style stunts (using Corrie's Tram Crash and Emmerdale's Plane Crash as examples here) the difference with aftermath is huge. Unfortunately, the Tram Crash was soon over, everything was built back up as if it never happened. It is hardly referenced, the only time I think it was was in Dec 2011 when they held a memorial, but other than that nobody mentions it. Due to how huge the stunt was, there was potential to get a good amount of material out of that stunt and the catastrophic effects it had on the Street and it's residents. But no, it was quickly dealt with ready to have 'The most exciting arrival for 2000 years' back. Whereas with Emmerdale and their Plane Crash (plus other catastrophic disasters such as the Kings River Explosion), it is still even now mentioned. The effects on the village at the time were immense, an example of this was Chris Tate being paralysed from the waist down and Eric Pollard accused of killing his wife Elizabeth (a story which came to a head 17 years later in 2010). That does link into continuity, not forgetting huge events which have happened. A lesser example would be when Phil in EE was shot by Shirley in 2014, when Ian heard he said 'What, again?' and it's the things like this that help to make the show more realistic. ![]() Agree with you on all counts and love your details descriptions. Stunts/disasters is one thing in particular that annoys me so much. Corrie's latest disaster (David's car crash and explosion) saw them papering over the cracks of the disaster quicker than ever, with all of the residents (including children) happily back drinking in the Rovers after its windows were blown out and glass was sent everywhere. They even had Ruby and Hope sitting in one of the booths that was on the receiving end of most of the glass. It's things like this that push the believability of the show and make me want to switch off. Emmerdale's plan crash is a great example of a disaster changing the face of the show forever. The entire village was destroyed, so much so that it had to be rebuilt and was eventually renamed. Now that is how to use a disaster in the best possible way. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Alcohol aisle in Tescos *gulp*
Posts: 12,043
|
Quote:
Incredible post atti!
![]() Agree with you on all counts and love your details descriptions. Stunts/disasters is one thing in particular that annoys me so much. Corrie's latest disaster (David's car crash and explosion) saw them papering over the cracks of the disaster quicker than ever, with all of the residents (including children) happily back drinking in the Rovers after its windows were blown out and glass was sent everywhere. They even had Ruby and Hope sitting in one of the booths that was on the receiving end of most of the glass. It's things like this that push the believability of the show and make me want to switch off. Emmerdale's plan crash is a great example of a disaster changing the face of the show forever. The entire village was destroyed, so much so that it had to be rebuilt and was eventually renamed. Now that is how to use a disaster in the best possible way. ![]() Yes, reverting back to normal is one thing but the latest Corrie one really did take the mick, because like you say everyone was back drinking in the Rovers as if nothing had happened. The only person who really had injuries was Anna. Both Gary and Lily miraculously (almost ridiculously) appeared to be fine despite a car had landed on them and David also seemed to walk away from the crash just fine as well. Another thing was that David was suicidal, he was planning to kill himself as well as Clayton yet this seems to have been forgotten? As if he is perfectly fine now and not suicidal or depressed in the slightest. Corrie's Tram Crash should have rivalled Emmerdale's Plane Crash and had similar consequences to it. Like you also say, the Plane Crash changed the village completely, where most of it was rebuilt and the name was changed from Beckindale to Emmerdale, therefore allowing a near clean slate for the show. With Corrie and the Tram Crash, things shouldn't have been built the same as they were before, but then again, it's the same show that rebuilt the Rovers exactly the same after the 2013 fire as it was before. The Tram Crash was a wasted opportunity to really shake the street up. Instead of Dev's shop they could have converted that into a house, and the Joinery/Bistro could have become something else. Quite rightly, the Plane Crash is regarded as one of the best stunts in soap history. It is a perfect depiction of how to do a mega stunt and utilise it fully for both the aftermath and the devastating consequences. I was on ED Wiki before and apparently during one of the other big stunts on Emmerdale a character said "We've had a plane crash and got through that, we will get through this" and it is excellent to see TPTB have not forgotten this huge event, despite how it occurred 23 years ago. Apparently the last mention of it was by Lawrence White last year. Had Corrie followed through with an aftermath and had the crash change the Street (not completely) it would have been a much harder hitting disaster imo. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
Quote:
Thanks
![]() Yes, reverting back to normal is one thing but the latest Corrie one really did take the mick, because like you say everyone was back drinking in the Rovers as if nothing had happened. The only person who really had injuries was Anna. Both Gary and Lily miraculously (almost ridiculously) appeared to be fine despite a car had landed on them and David also seemed to walk away from the crash just fine as well. Another thing was that David was suicidal, he was planning to kill himself as well as Clayton yet this seems to have been forgotten? As if he is perfectly fine now and not suicidal or depressed in the slightest. Corrie's Tram Crash should have rivalled Emmerdale's Plane Crash and had similar consequences to it. Like you also say, the Plane Crash changed the village completely, where most of it was rebuilt and the name was changed from Beckindale to Emmerdale, therefore allowing a near clean slate for the show. With Corrie and the Tram Crash, things shouldn't have been built the same as they were before, but then again, it's the same show that rebuilt the Rovers exactly the same after the 2013 fire as it was before. The Tram Crash was a wasted opportunity to really shake the street up. Instead of Dev's shop they could have converted that into a house, and the Joinery/Bistro could have become something else. Quite rightly, the Plane Crash is regarded as one of the best stunts in soap history. It is a perfect depiction of how to do a mega stunt and utilise it fully for both the aftermath and the devastating consequences. I was on ED Wiki before and apparently during one of the other big stunts on Emmerdale a character said "We've had a plane crash and got through that, we will get through this" and it is excellent to see TPTB have not forgotten this huge event, despite how it occurred 23 years ago. Apparently the last mention of it was by Lawrence White last year. Had Corrie followed through with an aftermath and had the crash change the Street (not completely) it would have been a much harder hitting disaster imo. We've discussed the physical impact of the tram crash many times before and it will continue to bug me for as long as Corrie continues. Yet another missed opportunity. It's an insult to viewers that the viaduct, shop and Kabin were rebuilt identically as they were before. Of course, the ITV production team gleefully say that parts of the corner shop and viaduct were rebuilt 'with slightly different bricks to leave a lasting impression' but surely the lasting impression should've been for that part of the set to be completely redeveloped? Sometimes I wonder if the people in charge of Corrie live on this planet! The latest 'stunt' is another great example of a lack of any long-term impact. Anna is currently injured but what's betting that she's back working in the cafe, screeching her head off every five seconds before Christmas? Gary and Lily being unharmed was ridiculous in itself but what got me even more was that David went from deranged and suicidal man bent on killing Clayton to happily having a cuppa in the kitchen with his mum in the very next episode? ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,175
|
Quote:
Poor casting choices. Sometimes the issue isn't with the character itself, but the person playing the role.
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Herr Flick's dungeon
Posts: 5,939
|
For me it's got to be
Bad writing, acting and storylining Boring characters and storylines Bad continuity Stories not living up to the media hype, i.e. Who killed Lucy? |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,706
|
Quote:
For me it's got to be
Bad writing, acting and storylining Boring characters and storylines Bad continuity Stories not living up to the media hype, i.e. Who killed Lucy? 'Who killed Lucy' is a great example. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Alcohol aisle in Tescos *gulp*
Posts: 12,043
|
Quote:
Forgot to add that you're so right about a disaster providing more material for future episodes, not being something that is neatly tied up in a couple of weeks. Corrie's tram crash, for instance, should've opened up dozens of new stories when actually it did precisely nothing. The characters who died have all been forgotten and the only big 'game changer' was the Molvin reveal and even that was forgotten about within a few months. There were no storylines that the tram crash itself actually instigated. Ridiculous.
We've discussed the physical impact of the tram crash many times before and it will continue to bug me for as long as Corrie continues. Yet another missed opportunity. It's an insult to viewers that the viaduct, shop and Kabin were rebuilt identically as they were before. Of course, the ITV production team gleefully say that parts of the corner shop and viaduct were rebuilt 'with slightly different bricks to leave a lasting impression' but surely the lasting impression should've been for that part of the set to be completely redeveloped? Sometimes I wonder if the people in charge of Corrie live on this planet! The latest 'stunt' is another great example of a lack of any long-term impact. Anna is currently injured but what's betting that she's back working in the cafe, screeching her head off every five seconds before Christmas? Gary and Lily being unharmed was ridiculous in itself but what got me even more was that David went from deranged and suicidal man bent on killing Clayton to happily having a cuppa in the kitchen with his mum in the very next episode? ![]() ![]() The ITV production team seem intent on keeping the Street the same way it was since 2003(ish). God knows why, it's just stale. Even when they moved the set over to MediaCity from Quay Street, it still is exactly the same as it was before, even down to Tyrone and Fiz's house still looking like a Duckworth museum! It's ridiculous how they refuse to change the set of the show, it desperately needs to modernise and move with the times but it's still stuck in a time warp. Just like Sinead's 'life changing paralysis' from the Bus Crash, Anna will soon be back being a screeching harridan fishwife as if nothings happened. That's what I mean regarding David, why the complete U turn? He has spent the last few weeks building up to killing himself and Clayton, he needs help not for all of it to be brushed under the carpet. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:29.





