|
Post by sheepiefarm on May 23, 2008 16:27:49 GMT -5
Okay this board has raced on while I was composing - oh to have a quicker brain!
But just to add based on what's now been said - in gay storylines all we get is the "triangle" or break-up story. It'd be nice to get something different fer a change.
|
|
|
Post by gastLXXXIV on May 23, 2008 16:30:20 GMT -5
Lola, I honestly do believe Sheepie's right. The poll as it stands is 'loaded' and so not helpful. Everyone agrees--even I--that there must be engaging drama for the audience to care.
And at this point I'm thinking we may not even disagree importantly on the nature of the drama--it could be any of a variety of story lines that generate passion and suspense. So long as--as you put it, Lola--it remains a 'constant' that C&O are truly meant for each other and that they don't betray each other . . . And so long as it's worthy of the investment we make in C&O--not the sort of appalling rubbish that ATWT ill-serves Luke & Noah with . . .
Again, I think that the poll's forcing a choice between 'extremes' is what's making us appear to be at odds / believe we're at odds . . . if we do . . .
I e, the important question is NOT:
no-angst vs angst-in-spate,
but rather:
trite, demeaning angst vs fascinating, stronger/better-for-having-suffered-it angst . . .
I think, also, there's an important place for the presentation of C&O's growing appreciation of each other: in always tenderer words and gesture, always more exquisite kisses and love-making, and yes, given what they've gone through to be together, some non-cliche conversation, between them, re what all this has to come to mean to them . . . what they've come to mean to each other--and so to us.
|
|
|
Post by lolaruns on May 23, 2008 22:45:39 GMT -5
Which really is even more a none-choice as what is offered now. At least it is feasible for somebody to think it is worth not having a storyline as long as the couple stays together (see all the "I would rather have the show write them off than see them break up" opinions). But who exactly would vote for "Yeah, I totally want to see them have a demeaning storyline"? Or against "I want them to have a greatly written in character awesome story"?
This question is much more about "What would you prefer, going the road that is potentially demeaning or potentially great or do you prefer the option with no risks at all even though that has its own downsides just like the other option". Because based on the various statements people have made, it seemed to me it would at least seem feasible that some people would prefer the no risk/no serious challenges option.
Apart from that to me storylines that can be dissolved without problem, that never for one moment threaten the substance of the relationship, THAT are the truly trite and pointless options.
But there is a big difference in wanting something to end in tears (nobody wants that) and taking the stance that tears are a necessary part of the process to make the happy end count in the end. And that in that sense tears aren't a bad thing, they are just part of the process and are to be enjoyed just like any other part. It's one of those no light without dark, no highs without occasional lows, the soup being worthless without having some salt in it. The fact that we want them to overcome challenges doesn't change that there have to be challenges. It's like the difference between climbing Mt. Everest and jumping over a molehill. Both have their downsides, one can be boring and too long and too drawn out to watch so we ultimately lose interest and the other one is pointless. Everybody if allowed to pick freely would pick a decently sized mountain with nice scenery, a nice climb but nothing too taxing. Now that is something everybody can agree on and a truly a pointless non choice.
To me the most fundamental part of the soap opera experience comes from doubt. From feeling, "OMG, this could go either way, but I hope it goes this way" (or its sibling "OMG, these are really scary obstacles, I can't wait to see what the writers come up for the characters to get out of this"). Drama doesn't depend on the bad stuff actually happening, it depends on thinking it *could* happen or the characters believably thinking it could happen. Gregor doesn't have to freak out for the story to be good, but we have to think that there is a chance he might freak out or Christian and Olli have to realistically fear that he might freak out.
Or take Christian post first sex claiming it was all an experiment. How much less interesting would the storyline have been if that hadn't happend? How much less would it have truly touched the characters and allowed them to express their fears and feelings? Or DeRo, how much less tension if people weren't worried over what might happen with Deniz father would find out or wondering how Roman could get back into physical shape for the world championship.
Writing soaps is always a tightrope walk between the bad things that happen and that don't happen. Some of the drama that Ollian experienced is responsible for some of their greatest and most interesting moments. If Christian didn't have any walls then we wouldn't have gotten the really cool scene of Olli breaking down those wallls. At the same time, always going for the most over the top drama option is also boring. As much as it necessary to sometimes go for the drama, it's also extremely gratifying for the characters to don't go for it even if you expect them to (for example, Christian acting surprisingly sane once those walls were broken out instead of playing the drama to the hilt like Craig of JPC; because that would have been repetitive in its own way).
That's the problem though. Ollian might seem unique to us, but in reality VL has done this before. It has done it with Tom and Olli and Carla and Susanne (who after getting together experienced various small scale dramas). And both of these couples ended breaking up eventually because on a soap level those kind of storylines just aren't interesting enough on a soap scale and the writers eventually run out of interesting things to say about these characters. And both relationships suffered from not living up from their previous more dramatic, more interesting predecessors (Carla and Hanna [ended with Hanna dying in Carla's arms] and Tom and Ulli [and this point had ended with them breaking up because Ulli moved to another city and because Tom had chosen Olli over Ulli]).
Maybe that's my difference. For me wanting the most for Ollian as a couple means that I want them to be *it*. I want them to be an A stroryline with all that encompasses, good or bad, rather than be a safe couple that ultimately leaves people cold. And on soaps safe and stable storylines will always play second fiddle to storylines where it feels like something truly is at stake. Again, the point is not to root for storylines where the characters truly lose those stakes. All great storylines end with the charactes winning/keeping those stakes. But what makes them truly great is that the stakes were there and it truly felt like they were at risk. And heck, there are some cases where the characters did lose the stakes (let's say Sonny and Brenda or Luke and Laura), but their failed attempts are still remembered as more higher quality than the couples who never truly risked anything at all. Because the best soap storylines are always about having to bridge potentially mutually exclusive and yet very valid desires. Will A and B be able to get together without ever of them having to compromise their morals and personalities? Will A and B be able to get together even though one or both have an obligation of any sort to C? Will A and B find a way to stay together that doesn't include it costing them thing X?
You say trite, I say classic. Because these are essentially human stories. If you look at Ollian, these are all over the place. You have obligation in the form of Coco, because Coco was a nice and relatable person too in her own way. You have the conflict between love and still relatable desire for status quo and normalcy. To be with Olli Christian had to risk giving this up and while it was obvious to us that it was something useless and overrated to give up, what made it interesting was that it was obviously a big thing for Christian to give up (and he was rewarded for this choice). Boxing is about the desire for dreams/fame/fullfillment vs. compromising personal morality and wanting to stand up for your partner. As well as the fear that these compromises might have a negative impact on the relationship. The thing with Gregor is about Christian in a very real way fearing that he might not be able to have a relationship with Olli without his relationship with Gregor being impaired. Even if we know that Gregor would never do anything like that, to Christian it is still a very real fear and that is what makes the storyline touching.
And to me it just is no alternative to hope that your couple should just rewrite all the rules of soap writing. Because we aren't really inventing the wheel here. Because it is exactly THIS what every fan of every couple has ever hoped for as well. It's what the fans of Sonny and Carly have hoped, the fans of Brooke and Nick and Brooke and Ridge and Brooke and Thorne, the fans of Carla and Hanna, the fans of Carla and Susanne or the fans of Leonard and Cecile. They all hoped that the rules of soaps would be rewritten just for them. There is exactly nothing unique about wishing for that and it's not just a property of the fans of gay or lesbian storylines. The straight fans hope it just as much and they just as much don't get it either. Because even when there are cases where the writers really are behind it and really try it still ends up not working. Or rather the only times when it does work (like certain John and Marlena stories) is when the risk is portrayed in a truly believably and truly gets to the guts of the characters and to their fundamentals. Because characters can't truly show the size of their love if it isn't tested by a similarly sized obstacle. Great love is shown by overcoming great obstacles.
Again, I love Ollian, I think they have great chemistry and a great building up story. But there are countless fans of couples all over the world who can claim the very same thing and we really have no argument of why our storyline should best theirs. Except we can always hope against hope (and we are back to the whole emotionally interactive aspect of soaps which is really as old as time; because every fan who has ever loved any couple on any soap has hoped for exactly that; some get it, some don't. And none get it in a 100% clean and never any scratch or problem kind of way; because the scratches and the problems are the very thing that makes them great).
|
|
|
Post by gastLXXXIV on May 24, 2008 3:38:52 GMT -5
Lola, you are very persuasive as the devil's advocate!
However:
You say that those of us who want an 'exceptional' future for C&O are being unrealistic, because even though we think them special, in the 'soap' universe they're just like any other couple.
But you're misunderstanding us. We don't necessarily expect they'll have an 'exceptional' future. We just want them to.
And as I've said, I don't believe there can be any resolution to the problem of what sort of future theirs should be, if we consider only in the abstract. So/but consider this:
Let's say that through some truly strange twist of fate (worthy of ATWT), you, sheepie, and I came to be in charge of the C&O story line.
Do you think we'd be at hopeless loggerheads, such that C&O would have to be consigned to a perpetual limbo?
Or do you think we'd be able to cooperate interestingly and enthusiastically, come up with a 'development' that would be rich, exciting, perhaps ground-breaking--gratifying for all?
I think the latter. Which is to say, 'appearances' notwithstanding, I suspect there's no fundamental disagreement between us.
|
|
|
Post by sheepiefarm on May 24, 2008 21:11:15 GMT -5
Absolutely - but whose Devil's advocate are you? I - irrevocably agree with your argument. Okay - we now have one person who wants a "safe background story where nothing will harm the stability of ollians love" Tis a shame they have not "argued" their case.
Of course we do! Surely it cannot be too hard to accept (even as an afficionado of soap storylines as you undoubtedly are) that there are people out there (not neccesarily soap buffs) who (for once) want a gay storyline that doesn't descend into the mire as so many have done (see AWZ as an example).
This is rather a strange debate as so far - no-one who has come out in favour of option 1 - has debated their reason for wanting this. Why? Lola - why do you think this is the case? Presumably your reason for instigating this poll was to "bring these people out of the woodwork" So far this does not seem to have happened? Is this because these people care less about the "soap storytelling" of the Ollian characters and care more about the fantasy of a happy gay love story - one which we seem to be constantly denied within "soap storyline telling"?
|
|
|
Post by lolaruns on May 25, 2008 1:59:01 GMT -5
But that's what I'm saying. EVERY fanbase of any couple on any show wants that for their couple. And it just doesn't work because soaps just plain out wouldn't work if couples were like that. It would just be unhealthy for both the couple storyline and the overall show. And Ollian are part of the overarching show VL and have the obligation to contribute to it being an overall successful show. It's not the obligation of VL to turn itself around for us when we just want what everybody wants and there is exactly squat reason to give it to us since chances are we aren't the first or the largest or otherwise special fanbase. All we can hope for is that the writers like Ollian (and none of the actors want to move on to bigger and better things) and that we will get as good storylines as they are willing to give us.
I'm not looking at other gay storylines when I looking at the potential of Ollian (and it should be pointed out that VL HAS done satisfying gay storylines before that had happy endings). I'm look at all soap storylines. And they all work on the "no pain no gain" formula. On a soap scale, Ollian aren't much yet. They have just gotten together with a reasonably dramatic, but not terribly so storyline. Other than that they haven't really brought much to the table. If all Ollian did from now on was be happy and show up in other people's storylines and have minor squabbles I would be happy for them, but I would also think of them as a couple that didn't really live up to its potential. Again, go and read the stories of the various already existing soap super couples (the ones that ended up together) and ask yourself, okay, I'd take that story for Ollian, or that one I wouldn't take. Because eventually Ollian will have to take some of those type of stories if they want to be part of this show. I don't want them to be just pretty good for a gay couple, I want them to be able to compete with the best of couples period. And again, VL has shown that they have done that before with other same-sex couples.
Don't get me wrong. It's not absolutely the only way. They can also work as the contrast story to the main dramatic story even if that means that it is truly that story that is pulling all the weight. (and particularly since the current main story, Lydia and Sebastian, sucks so badly; if Ollian have to be second fiddle so someone, can't it be a *deserving* storyline?)
I don't know about you, but I would pick something with lots of interesting, in character hearbreak and drama with a huge and satisfying payoff in the end. If that means a "tortured split up" portion, a "having severe doubts" portion or a "disagreeing violently on issue X" portion in the middle somewhere, so be it. No pain, no gain. Sure, pain without gain sucks horribly. But no gain or hope for gain also sucks.
In the end being handed an angsty storyline is a privilege. It means that the writers have plans for the characters and that they trust the actors to be able to handle it. And I would hate nothing more than for Christian and Olli to end up as one of those couples who are never able to live up to the energy of their getting together story had (and usually the getting together story is the best and prettiest story for 90% of all soap couples; hence so many soaps trying to drag that part out for as long as possible; It's just a select few that manage to be just as good or even hit their peak with storylines after the initial getting together phase (and it's also the reason why the US couples often split up so quickly and have new hook ups, because the writers don't know how to produce equal drama levels with a couple that is already together); that's why in my eyes they need a story that can rival the getting together story in drama; it doesn't have to be third party drama; it doesn't have be crippling depressing drama; but it needs to be drama of some sort).
I'm with you on the DeRo storyline. I think above all the problem of the story is that it is plain weird. I have no idea who I'm supposed to root for here (and to me THAT is the problem of the story, that the writing is confusing; not that Deniz cheated with a girl, but that the characters make no sense). It's not being told as a typical "Supercouple is derailed for a short while by a detour" story (and it if it is supposed to be the writers are doing a terrible job with it), nor is it told in a way that suggests that Deniz/Vanessa is the supercouple we should be rooting for and Roman is the evil interloper (since the scenes don't play out that way and because Deniz treats Vanessa badly in situations not related to Roman simply out of his own vanity). The whole story reads like the writers don't even know what story they are telling. But devil's advocate, they are still on, they still get weekly moments thrown in to give the fans faith and they will keep getting torrid makeout scenes if the spoilers are to be believed. And who knows? Maybe I'll eat my words because at one point they'll get amazing pay off out of it. Or maybe just the opposite will happen. At this point we don't know. I'd say it's probably still preferable to them not getting any screentime together or just being non-entities storywise (even if they are happy non-entities).
It's kinda like arguing why JP has to date a priest rather than finding himself a nice, sane, good for him, out gay guy who makes him happy. Well, because that wouldn't be much of a story. (and I actually like that Kieron keeps saying "It's not because you are bloke" aka the angst is not about being gay, it's about breaking his vows period and losing the job he dedicated his life to)
I love Ollian. I think they have excellent potential. But to me they are not a full story yet. They are just the beginning of a story. If the writers stopped now and never gave them a real story again it would be like ending the play at act I and never following up on it. Nice try, but not truly satisfying.
|
|
|
Post by gastLXXXIV on May 25, 2008 7:03:50 GMT -5
Precisely: they have just gotten together, so their story as a couple is yet to be told.
In the interest of trying to shed light from a somewhat different angle--or of a somewhat different 'color'--on the topic:
Let's say that the poll were about C&O not as a fictional couple in the soap world, but a real-life couple whom we all happen to know and with whom, for some odd reason, we're brazenly obsessed.
Now, in that case, would we not respond in precisely the opposite way? I e, wish them a placid, non-beleaguered life together, at the risk of their being bored much of the time--and even denying ourselves juicy gossip?
If so, this demonstrates that what we want for others and ourselves in 'real-life' is the opposite of what we wish for in our entertainment--in truth, just a way of saying that, all things considered, we want safe, secure lives for ourselves and our friends, and want our entertainment to provide the antidote for the resulting (if we're lucky) stretches of boredom.
Which is really just the persistence of the child's experience of the world: keen for a Grimm/grim Fairy Tale between the covers of a book--or on DVD nowadays--but she'd scream bloody hell if the wicked witch actually showed up in her room, abducted her, and ate her up.
So I think the important question is this: do we--our appetites and sensibilities--never advance beyond this 'infantile stage'? Do we just want the same 'wicked' thrill, over and over, at age 3, 23, 43, 63, 83?
It depresses me to think so. Certainly, entertainment must continue to serve the same basic human need. But all art undergoes 'sophistication' in order to continue to appeal to the sensibility that is informed by more and more experience. The usual development is the one that reflects the underlying 'human dynamic': upon the basal stratum, a second one is formed from its opposite -- like yin/yang, or theme and countertheme in music.
Which, to return to the matter of C&O, is to say: yes, they are a fictional couple and their raison d'etre is entertainment. But does that mean their only interesting fate is abduction by the wicked witch (i e, the same old threats and pitfalls)?
Or is it possible to conceive a more sophisticated scenario? I e, temper this 'raw' appetite for drama, with subtler, mature, sober taste. I think it is possible, and when I--and I believe, Sheepie--perhaps others of us--say we went something better for them than the cliche, demeaning relationship-Sturm-und-Drang, that's what we mean.
I suspect you'll think I'm being unrealistic about what can be done within this genre, but art is art--whether high brow or low--and inevitably evolves in relation to many influences--some improving and others not. The representation of gay relationships--although, of course, not absolutely new--is still relatively so, and therefore presents a good opportunity for doing something--as Sheepie suggests--a little better.
So some innovative subtlety, and the according of a special respect for C&O's relationship (i e, to a degree, inform it--to return to the original premise--with the sense of their being a real-life couple) are not--to my way of perceiving--'out of bounds'.
|
|
|
Post by lolaruns on May 25, 2008 7:48:14 GMT -5
I do. And to me that is part of the frustatration. It was the same when Nuke started. A lot of people who had never watched soap operas before, never liked them before, didn't have any respect for the genre and didn't even bother watching the whole show suddenly started watching and tried imposing their views on the genre. Which to me is a rude and smallminded view in itself (not to mention extremely belittling towards the thing that gives you what you claim to enjoy).
Yes it's true that we don't want soap type relationships for ourselves. But that is why fantasy and entertainment exist, to show us a fancier, more out there reality than our own. Remember, daytime tv was originally invented for bored housewives who weren't at work at those hours of the day. Women who didn't want to cheat on their husbands and run away from their families but who enjoyed watching the thrill of that on tv. It's not different than watching shows like CSI or Criminal Minds or Law and Order. We don't want to kill or be killed, but we will watched gazillion shows about murder. And yes, you ask the 60 or 80 year old lady who watches just that on tv. So no, we never grow up from wanting flights of fancy that have nothing to do with reality, whether it comes in the form of Agatha Christie murder mysteries, flying guys in spandex, alien spaceships or illicit soapy affairs. Because human imagination is all about not keeping it sane and safe.
Soap operas are all about emotion. Soaps at their best tell beautiful fairy tales in a contemporary setting, true love overcoming obstacles. At best they have a core about the conflict of various human troubles in a heavily metaphorized way. Love vs. Duty, Old Love (reliability) vs. New Love (risk), New Love vs. Memory, Personal Happiness vs. Hurting Others, Overcoming suffering (like the death of a child or an illness). Love vs. Ambition. The reasons why soap operas still exist is because at best they speak to this core of human emotions and gives them something to see themselves in even amidst tons of crazy storytelling. It's all about finding the truth amidst the crazy. And I don't see why revelling in that should be something anybody should be ashamed of. Otherwise you are belittling any person who has ever had a guilty pleasure, whether it comes in the form of soap operas, World of Warcraft, cheesy RomComs or SciFi flicks.
Even if a drive towards more sophistication exist, it doesn't come in the form of a show itself becoming more sophisticated or even a genre becoming more sophisticated, it comes in the form of a new show or a new genre being invented to give people an additional choice.
Maybe that's the difference. I don't think that there is anything demeaning about Sturm and Drang. And if I want clichee for them then only I want the best of clichee. Clichee exist for a reason and the reason is because they just work. If we wanted to outlaw clichee then we would have to outlaw "Boy meets girl" or "Boy meets Boy" (or "detective catches killer" or "hero saves the world") stories, after all they are clichee. But the reason they are clichee is because they still speak to people emotional, no matter how often the story is repeated and reinterpreted by new actors. Finding a lover, leaving one, losing one, being torn these are fundamental human experiences and that is why these stories still touch us even when the very same stories have been told for thousands of years in different forms. And the art is having characters and actors or authors breathe life into these clichees anew with each new telling.
Sure, I'm all for mixing it up. Not always tell the same story, but mix it up. But because there are percentually few gay couples in soaps having gay couples get to play out their soapy potential and get to play *real* soapy storylines and have soapy storylines beyond the getting together phase is a novelity on its own.
|
|
|
Post by gastLXXXIV on May 25, 2008 8:04:25 GMT -5
Lola, I concede. Truly--not just for the sake of peaceable relations!--although those matter to me (as you've doubtless surmised!).
You have a real enthusiasm for the genre, a real feel for it and broad knowledge of it, and--as you say--I have none of those things.
I have real enthusiasm for C&O--and that's probably the extent of it. You're right: I didn't watch before C&O. And I probably will 'relapse' after them. The depiction--convincing and sensitive--of love between two very appealing young men is very, VERY gratifying to me, and so, naturally, I'm loath for it to be threatened, taken away. That's assuredly what's motivating me--all the 'intellectual' argumentation aside.
And, yes, agreed: it makes no sense for some parvenu to decide that just because he shows up, he knows best.
So you've convinced me. And I hope the discussion was not purely frustration for you, and might have at least a few 'redeeming' moments.
It's certainly been interesting--if a little painful at times!--for me.
Thank you. I shudder for C&O--must steel myself! Greg
|
|
j9l45
Junior Member
Posts: 622
|
Post by j9l45 on May 25, 2008 10:05:44 GMT -5
Wow! What a great discussion. I've loved reading both sides. So many great insights. Personally, I voted for angst. I think part of the reason so many people vote for angst in the poll yet in posts want angst-free is timing. People want time to enjoy Ollian as a couple before it all explodes. I want them to have time to snuggle on the couch and dance around the kitchen and give each other exasperated looks as they listen to Judith compare Fabian and Consti for the billionth time. Do I want this to go on forever? No. That would get boring. I want them to have screen time. I want them to have interesting stories (They've both shown they have the acting skills to pull it off, IMO.) But I want a chance to enjoy the high before the inevitable come-down. I wouldn't mind a little light drama before they get to all the heavy sturm and drang stuff. Like how are they keeping their relationship hidden from Lydia? (Is she still living there?) Or maybe Christian can "not freak out" a couple more times. I believe the relationship between C&O has had an incredible amount of subtlety and nuance for a soap relationship. Good lord, they actually talk about their problems in a mature, adult fashion! For those of us following the story via the subtitled YT clips this can lead to even more anxiety about their future. We have no real sense of VL as a whole and therefore no comparison. Has this storyline been a one-off or have the writers been able to create drama for a couple while staying true to the characters (unlike the DeRoVa situation.) So often in soap-land couples are considered great because they have so much chemistry/overcame so many obstacles/are soul mates. Ollian seem to have a relationship that is built on something more substantial. They see each other as individuals (flaws included), and recognize the effort they had to put in to get where they are. This presents an even greater challenge for whatever drama lies ahead. So many of the typical drama cliches (love triangle, little misunderstandings blown way out of proportion, unfounded jealousy, secrets, wounded pride, petty arguments) would just seem so out of character for Ollian. For it to pose real risk to the relationship it would have to be big. Heartbreakingly big. For example, I think one of the few things that could come between them would be their families. Their families are important to both of them. If C&O's families were to somehow have a huge falling out, with neither side being clearly right or clearly wrong, and they were forced to choose, it could create big problems. I think Christian would go through hell, possibly unable to decide. I think Olli would choose Christian, but could end up resenting him. I would hate to see that storyline happen, but it is one of the few I can think of where the stakes would be high enough to truly endanger the relationship. That being said I would like to see them overcome some drama together (for example being out vs. boxing world.) It's nice to have that every once in a while. You are not sure what the outcome will be, but you know they will be together. However, if you have more than one or two in a row, it gets really boring or really cheesy. To paraphrase lolaruns (hope you don't mind): low stakes=low drama=low interest. So I'm torn, as I suspect many others are. I don't want them relegated to the background or lacking in vitality, but I also don't want the thing I love to be destroyed. Oh well, it is that constant internal struggle that makes being a soap fan so much fun. Incidentally, one of the reasons I love VL, AWZ, and HO so much is that they have brought me back to being a soap fan. I gave up on American soaps years ago after Marlena was possessed by the Devil on Days of Our Lives. I had been a lifelong days fan, but . Wow, that was ridiculously long considering it was my first post after introducing myself.
|
|
|
Post by gastLXXXIV on May 25, 2008 11:43:17 GMT -5
Welcome, j9l45 (or do you care to be called something a little less formal?)
Very nice to have your POV. Which strikes me as eminently reasonable. But just now I think anyone's does except my own.
You mention the Devil, and I, the Wicked Witch. I'm thinking the reason she came to mind, is that the ATWT story line's kinda hinting at her: I guess I'm expecting her to show up in some guise or other, and abduct Noah & Luke. Whereupon she shall either fatten them up and have them for supper, or keep them slim and sleek and spy on them having sex. Do you think P&G will conduct a poll to determine which is likelier to increase sales of Airwick?
And there's more of the supernatural: lately characters have acquired the ability to dematerialize / rematerialize: Ameera, Col Mayer, Luke . . . and there's Luke's absolutely total recovery and the re-incarnation of Lily.
Likely, this sort of thing would not work on VL--except in the daydream sequences, where it would, of course, be perfect.
I like very much your analysis / discussion of C&O . . .
|
|
|
Post by tyranamiros on May 27, 2008 4:24:52 GMT -5
Personally, I like the little couple-y, romantic bits as much as the big drama scenes. Unless Olivia's involved--then the drama becomes awesomely melodramatic.
I just worry that writers tend to get into a box with gay storylines, and don't allow them to have regular plots, because it's so focused on being gay. I'd like to see Ollian involved in a story that has nothing to do with their being gay or in a relationship, but I haven't seen writers--not just soap writers--do that successfully, so I'd rather stick with "I'll sing you a love song" and "I got your favorite yogurt" for now.
|
|
|
Post by lolaruns on May 27, 2008 5:16:09 GMT -5
I think timing plays a huge role in any of these polls. For example, if it took place smack in the middle of a really painful or really stupid Ollian story more people might me tempted to vote for no-angst. If it took place in a time period of no-screentime and really insipid storytelling and no on screen affection people might be more tempted to vote for angst simply to break the (unpleasant) on screen pattern. If it took place in the middle of happy times with lots of screentime more people might me tempted to vote no angst because they want the present (pleasant) on screen pattern to continue.
Heh, very funny since in the General discussion board we were just talking about all the interpersonal stuff that couple mess Ollian up (maybe Christian feeling that Olli is too controlling of him, or Christian falling back into his typical relationship attitude [same he displayed with Coco] once the first rush of love wears off, Christian taking a deeper offense to having to lie, Christian having issues with Olli's lack of perspectives or Olli himself taking issues to that; I could also easily picture them squabbling [though I couldn't really picture them breaking up over it] about Oivia related things; if Olli took Olivia's side on some issue and Christian thought he is nuts for doing so]. Of course all those interpersonal stuff are always the pure definition of double edged sword. They can make the best and most in character storylines, but they can also be the most painful ones because they can point out the flaws in couples and characters rather than gloss over them.
BTW, I don't think that soaps don't have any problems (if they had no problems all soaps all across the world would have better ratings). The needs that are echoed here are shared by a lot of people. Which is the reason for the rise of telenovelas for starters. But that is always going to be an unanswered question. People's need for closure vs. people's desire to see more. Which is why you have a whole bunch of shows that start out as telenovelas but end up as soaps (like AWZ or Sturm der Liebe) because the addiction factor kicks in and people keep watching it. It's pretty much an unanswered question.
|
|
|
Post by Difficult Diva on May 27, 2008 11:38:41 GMT -5
Lola - I agree with you about the below, especially the topic about John-Paul dating (SHOCKER) a gay priest. I'm enjoying their current storyline together. I absolutely love it and if that's supposedly wrong (for certain fans), then I'm never going to be right. ;D It's kinda like arguing why JP has to date a priest rather than finding himself a nice, sane, good for him, out gay guy who makes him happy. Well, because that wouldn't be much of a story. (and I actually like that Kieron keeps saying "It's not because you are bloke" aka the angst is not about being gay, it's about breaking his vows period and losing the job he dedicated his life to) I love Ollian. I think they have excellent potential. But to me they are not a full story yet. They are just the beginning of a story. If the writers stopped now and never gave them a real story again it would be like ending the play at act I and never following up on it. Nice try, but not truly satisfying.
|
|
mgh48
Junior Member
Posts: 368
|
Post by mgh48 on May 28, 2008 8:17:40 GMT -5
Reluctantly, I pick drama. It's a risk because for favorite couples, it means the potential break-up might be in the future.
But as someone said: drama = interest
I'd like the couple to be firmly established and in no doubt of their preferences and their love interest, however. O&C's 'get together' is about as far in that direction I need the story to go; now, let's settle-in and see how they deal with the world and the world deals with them.
I'd prefer the 'hiding' from the world to be over and let's get on with how Gay couples deal with the repercussions of being Gay in a still anti-Gay world and how the conflicts drive them closer together. Etc, and so on.
So, yes to drama mindful of the dreadful risk.
Geoff
|
|