|
||||||||
Are our soaps in crisis? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newport Beach
Posts: 986
|
Are our soaps in crisis?
DS Article:
They may adorn the front pages of the cheaper TV mags and still manage to fill many inches of the tabloids but the question I’m asking is: are our soaps in crisis? Some people seem to think that the soaps are untouchable pieces of the schedule but history teaches us that this simply isn’t true. Brookside was a vital building block when Channel Four began broadcasting but two decades later was brutally dispensed with, having lost both its way and its audience. If we are to believe Michael Grade’s autobiography, it may have suffered its fate years earlier had it not pulled its socks up. More now than ever, the television climate will not lend itself to keep shows running merely for the sake of tradition. Family Affairs disappears from our screens shortly, not because it’s a particularly bad show, but because the ratings it achieved can be gained with cheaper programming. So even if the big guns of the soap world can still attract the biggest crowds each day, that may not be enough to keep them on our screens forever, particularly when other cheaper formats can pull nearly as many viewers, often at a fraction of the cost. If these shows are to retain their place in the schedules they can’t afford to jettison viewers and recent barmy storylines may pull in a big audience at their denouement but can actually have the more damaging effect of turning off regular viewers. It’s Coronation Street that is currently a cause for concern. One of the greatest creations in the history of ITV, it made its reputation by featuring strong northern characters, in particular strong women and getting the blend between the gritty, the mundane and the comedic just right. It also managed more or less to be true to its own history. Not anymore. I’ve been despairing of what I perceive as a drop in quality for some time. The whole Cilla-Les-Status Quo thing was symptomatic of the show’s descent into the sort of unbelievable pantomime that has besmirched Emmerdale for many years. Characterisation and plot development has been gradually replaced by cartoon-like performances and incredible plots. Pantomime style villains now carry out bad deeds for the sake of it. The heart of the show seems to have been lost. The emergence of Mike Baldwin’s hitherto unmentioned family in the last couple of years seems to have marked the beginning of the decline but the last straw for me is this completely unbelievable storyline concerning Dev Alahan and his hordes of secret kids. This is completely at odds with everything we’ve seen from the character so far and is made even more unbelievable by the fact that there was never even a glimmer of a mention of them when Mad Maya was torching all his shops. Just how far do they expect us to suspend to belief? I’ve spoken to many people who care about the show and they actually feel let down by this latest turn of events. If they needed a device to write out Shobna Gulati (one of the better members of the current cast incidentally) then why not just bring loopy Maya back to bump her off? Just as daft, you may say, but at least it would be a more believable continuity than this latest debacle. I gave up all hope for Emmerdale long ago, though they do occasionally manage to throw up a good episode. The exit of Seth Armstrong was sensitively done and showed just how good the likes of Paula Tilbrook can be when given the opportunity. EastEnders also seems to be suffering from the need to present us with a lack of believability in its storylines. They spent weeks carefully crafting the downfall of the Mitchell empire yet within three weeks of Phil’s return, he’d got it all back with no mention of where he’s supposed to have got the cash from. This was the Phil who was caught red-handed on an armed robbery but walked free with just a glib one-line explanation. We just don’t buy it. The whole Den’s murder storyline has more holes in it than a trawler net and smells just as fishy. How on earth are we supposed to believe that Stacey would get off scott free for providing a false alibi to a murderer? As for Johnny Allen, he seemed a good character at first but his personality seems to be all over the place these days, depending on who is writing the script. Billy Murray was a great catch for this show and he has been completely wasted, much as Leslie Grantham was on his return. Quite frankly we deserve better from our flagships and if we don’t get it, they may not be around in years to come. -------------------- I agree with nearly everything said above. Do you agree... are our soaps in crisis?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Let the war begin....!!!!
GOOD (but room for improvement )SOAPS: CORRIE HOLLYOAKS GREAT (Okay as they are) SOAPS FAMILY AFFAIRS EASTENDERS EMMERDALE NEIGHBOURS HOME AND AWAY |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 717
|
i agree, the drop in quality has been right across soapland. There is no reason for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 528
|
I agree with it all and the bits about Corrie are so true. I've been saying it for months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Sunny Side Of The Street
Posts: 40,106
|
If they still showed soaps twice a week or even once a week like they used to,then the quality would improve.
This would leave plenty of space for comedy shows like "George and Mildred". (how I miss them!) |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Likes: Pete, Nikki
Posts: 1,920
|
Id say Corrie is safer than Eastenders despite liking Eastenders more, but generally both as well as Emerdale are safe for years yet
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 528
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJMilz14
Id say Corrie is safer than Eastenders despite liking Eastenders more, but generally both as well as Emerdale are safe for years yet
I don't itv did money if corrie drops in the ratings they would axe it. the bbc don't need money. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: innit tho'
Posts: 5,642
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crystal Clear
I don't itv did money if corrie drops in the ratings they would axe it. the bbc don't need money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonze
So you are saying that even if EE was total pants the BBC wouldn't scrap it because they would still get the licence fee?
![]()
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: innit tho'
Posts: 5,642
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intosoap
EE will never dissapear from our screens.. I know you are not saying it will.. but the other channels will bid for it
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 22,354
|
The Corrie bits are 100% spot on. I don't really agree with the rest though, I think Emmerdale has been fantastic and produces great episodes even at the amount they have to churn out.
I don't believe the big 3 will ever leave our screens |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonze
All I'm saying is that it is unrealistic to assume that the BBC will not scrap a program, even EE, if it is not pulling in the viewers.
BBC would drop any show not pulling in viewers - but EE still is.
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
I see it as Corrie is still going strong and pulling people in because it has the potentail to be a great soap which it was last year. The last intresting storyline for me was Katy Harris killing her dad.. Stories such as Craig and Keith having a pig in their garden isn't funny, just pure sillyness.
Emmerdale is still going strong and has very good episodes and produces great drama and i dont agree that it has slipped. EastEnders for me; has patches of good and bad stories.. Last year EastEnders was total rubish repeating the Dennis/Zoe/Sharon story - but it has pulled it's self out of the gutter and is now very good. If EastEnders had the stories Coronation Street has had it would get slated even more.. But at the moment Corrie thinks they can get away with being silly. Thanks for reading my views..!
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Here in spirit!
Posts: 9,605
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattPond
I agree with nearly everything said above. Do you agree... are our soaps in crisis?
![]() I am also pleased to see that the author has picked out detrimental aspects of all soaps to lend credibility to the article, rather than concentrate on one particular programme. I hope that attention to detail and above all credibility return to our soaps sooner rather than later. The alternative is too horrendous to contemplate - the eventual scrapping of our soaps (despite the high viewing figures) for programmes which will bring in similar ratings but at a fraction of the cost to make. That can only mean more reality tv - a prospect that fills me with absolute horror. In my opinion, there are already too many of the 'celeb' or 'reality' programmes on our screens. I fully respect others' rights in wanting to watch this type of programme, but adding more reality shows at the expense of our soaps would drive me to turn off, rather than tune in. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Here in spirit!
Posts: 9,605
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJMilz14
Id say Corrie is safer than Eastenders despite liking Eastenders more, but generally both as well as Emerdale are safe for years yet
Particularly if they are a station which is run by accountants (i.e. ITV.) That doesn't mean that the BBC is safe either. The new regime is looking to downsize and is looking for more cost effective ways of spending the licence fee. If they latch onto a reality show which brings in comparable ratings to EE but costs a fraction of EE's budget to make, I'm quite sure they would look at axing EE too. Let's face it, 'reality' tv does in general cost a heck of a lot less to produce than drama/soaps/comedy. Last edited by DenWatts : 26-11-2005 at 21:28. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 11,177
|
To original poster: No.
![]() -Brodie |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,722
|
Actually none of our soaps are really in crisis if we are honest.
The only crisis is that of the media deciding which one to slag off next. What the media would really like is after they have convinced evryone that either Eastenders or Coronation street needs to be axed, is then for the channel to axe it and then they could start a campaign to bring it back, pathetic really. All TV shows have ups and downs its nothing new and will always be that way. |
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 8,044
|
Reality TV, I'm sure, will eventually run out of steam and disappear. There is evidence that US audiences are getting fed up with it, and UK will inevitably follow. Soaps though have always been around and always will be. I think cutting down on episodes to 3, or even 2, a week would have an impact on quality and I would be more than happy to make that sacrifice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London Town
Posts: 3,535
|
I agree with all the points made in the article, although I don't agree that our soaps are in crisis as such. I just think that there has been a decline in quality.
I've just seen a clip of Corrie featuring Raquel on "Parkinson", from about ten years ago. It reminded me of just how good Corrie used to be. Whatever its biggest fans may say, it is very, very rare that the show touches those heights now. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,806
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crystal Clear
I agree with it all and the bits about Corrie are so true. I've been saying it for months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Coronation Street, Manchester
Posts: 5,213
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollo and Gonch
I've just seen a clip of Corrie featuring Raquel on "Parkinson", from about ten years ago. It reminded me of just how good Corrie used to be. Whatever its biggest fans may say, it is very, very rare that the show touches those heights now.
The current Dev/Sunita storyline is so unbelieveable, I wouldn't mind if this had been developed, over a long period of time, mainly from the Mad Maya episodes. But this all came out over a period of two or three episodes. It doesn't make sense. There are many characters who are underused, and then those who are used too much, the current stroyline with Kirk/Molly/Fizz is absolutely dreadful, they've brought in this character who hasn't been developed, and is just there to provide a few cheap laughs. This isn't the Coronation Street we know and love. I really care about the show, which is why I hate to see it like this. It isn't in crisis, but there has been a drop in quality. This week provided a shimmer of hope, and maybe next year, the show can get back on track. We can only hope. Anyway, those are my views. I remain a loyal viewer of course, but I do think it can improve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 280
|
i agree nearly all the soaps need to go up a notch to make it onto the great radar, but all in all i don't think they've been at all dreadful this year.
Hollyoaks is actually realy good at the moment, though the plank of wood that is Jez ruins it with his acting that is by far woodener than pinocio. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Newcastle on Tyne.
Posts: 15,665
|
Too many episodes by far, was it 6 or 7 for C.Street this week?
Who wants to watch that many when the quality is so low? |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,484
|
I agree - too much quantity, not enough quality.
I still enjoy Corrie but it's at a low point I agree. Emmerdale is always reliably consistent IMO and EastEnders is the best it's been in years. I agree that the Dev storyline in Corrie is utter tripe, and the explanation of Phil's release/Stacy not being charged is very lazy writing. If we think back to 1998/1999, the soaps were at such a higher level and producing higher ratings along with gripping storylines and great characters. Maybe it's a cycle and things will eventually get better? |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
In the article it says this.. Quote:
Family Affairs disappears from our screens shortly, not because it’s a particularly bad show, but because the ratings it achieved can be gained with cheaper programming.
Is that taking the mick out of Family Affairs saying it is a bad show...?
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:45.




