|Viewing Single Post From: Days not pleasing its audience|
|CatherineEarnshaw||Aug 2 2008, 09:49 AM|
The assertion by some seems to be that the audience isn't willing to accept anything new. I am not against anything new, but it has to be grounded in what the history of the show is (if it applies to existing characters); if it is new characters, they have to be connected to existing characters.|
The last time I remember a writer grounding a character into a consistent point of view was almost fifteen years ago with Sheri Anderson and James Reilly with Billie and Austin.
Since then, the characters seem to change for the exigencies of the plot. Nicole is a prime example. She starts out good; then with no explantion, she turns bad.
Then, her character blows in the wind over the next few years as the plot dictates. I find it hard to care about her (or any character) when their behavior isn't based in their history.
As for the supercouples, too much history has happened to see them with anyone else for most fans imo. So the trick is to give them new obstacles without trying to assassinate or destroy what made them appealing in the first place. Deidre and Drake, Peter and Kristian and Mary Beth and Stephen are consistently paired (even through the bad wrting) because the fans want it because they love their chemistry.
So soaps should be a blend of new and old but history must be respected. Any self respecting soap writer needs to read Marland about history.
|Days not pleasing its audience · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion|