|
|
|
If you glide across the surface of ATWT -- like a teenage boy sliding down a polished wood floor in white-socked feet -- you might feel exhilarated and enjoy the thrill of the ride. But as you speed along, you'll miss a lot along the way. And the more times you slide, the more the thrill is diminished. Yet so far, that's the apparent strategy of head writers Leah Laiman and Carolyn Culliton and Executive Producer Christopher Goutman. Lots of flash, lots of change, but ultimately giving the audience little more than a temporary rush of adrenaline. To be sure, there are thrills to be found: Much better music. Lucinda's back. Tamara Tunie returning. More veteran actors featured. Flying golf balls. Characters on window ledges. Hunkier males with washboard abs (and, in case you missed Thursday's episode, squeezable, lickable lower backs and bubble butts). Better lighting. Fresher colors. Different hairstyles. An upcoming new opening for the show. Are all these things good and needed? For the most part, absolutely. But what is all that flash and Goutman's obvious eye for style covering? A lack of story, extremely bad writing, horrendous dialogue, no character development, and a soap poorer in overall quality and almost bereft of any genuine emotion. I'll use two examples to illustrate: 1. Veteran characters and; 2. Character composition and motivation. So we're seeing veteran characters -- e.g., Lisa, Kim, Bob, Nancy -- more frequently. But they are being used no differently. They are trotted out for the occasional appearance, or when they are needed to move someone else's story. Then they disappear. Nancy's mugging was plot driven and served one purpose: To generate a major enough conflict to get Chris out of the Hughes home and establish the break in the family unit. It even resolved itself happily in a neat little package -- Nancy got her watch back -- which would have in real life been highly unlikely. The only two veteran characters who appear to have a chance for a real supporting role in a plot are Bob and Kim in Chris' story. So when you see a veteran character on-screen, pay attention. Are they there driving story? Supporting it? Or, like Lisa at the Argus and Kim at WOAK, is the character there primarily to get the audience to point to their TV screens at home and go, "Look! It's Lisa!". To me, Emma represents the moral foundation of the show, more so than the Hughes. Therefore, for the writers to use the guise of Emma's birthday dinner (where the guest of honor apparently cooked the meal) and the character of Emma as a means to generate sympathy for Carly on Wednesday was inexcusable. I was appalled at Emma's response to Carly's statement that she was glad to be back at the farm and remembered joyous times there. (Emma: "Good ones? Oh, my goodness. . .I hate to be honest about this, but. . .it doesn't seem like those were very joyous times for you, Carly.") To my knowledge, Emma has never hated being honest. What she has -- or had, I should say -- was the graciousness and compassion to know when and where to express it, and in the appropriate way. So of course we cheered when Carly told everyone off. Of course we were glad Jack left in disgust. But was the scene based on real character motivation and composition? Or was this an Emma who was used, like Lisa and Camile, as a "cruelty pawn" to elicit audience sympathy for Carly? Does this sound like a writing team or Executive Producer that respects the characters or, perhaps more accurately, cares enough to structure a real story instead of manufacturing a scene or an event to serve a plot point? Finally, it was cliches, but no real explanation, provided for Emma and Lily's actions. (Emma: "Jack. We love you. We're worried about you.") Do you see the pattern of repetition, not just in story, but in basic scenes and structure? Molly had a birthday last week, Emma had one this week. And why? To get some characters together for whatever reason. The amount of material that is recycled on ATWT by the writing team is unacceptable and, for such a new team, unbelievable! The disregard for character is just as unacceptable. And a new opening, buff boys, pretty girls, and musical montages may hide it temporarily. Eventually, however, ATWT will be revealed for what it is: Lots of style, but no substance.. "We'll do this again soon. And better." That was Margo talking to Alec on Monday as she prepared to leave for home. Margo could just as well have been talking about the stories and scenes on ATWT. They're being done again and again. Unfortunately, they're not being done better. Storylines are already being recycled from the previous writing team. In my last critique, I expressed amazement that Laiman and Culliton have opted to tell the same Emily/Tom story again, with so far no variation. Now we have Molly and Chris. Same housing address. Same female. Different male, but more or less the same family. And so far, no story beyond that. Thank goodness the lights came on in Molly's apartment when Molly and Chris kissed, because Lesli Kay Sterling and Paul Korver generate zero electricity as a couple. With the one thousand directions the character of Molly could go, why take her down a road already traveled? I've lost count of the number of times Alec and Margo have embraced (or Alec has tried to coax Margo to stay the night, or Alec was putting the moves on Margo) when the cell phone has rang and Margo has had to leave, apologizing profusely. It's Casey, it's Katie who can't baby-sit, it's Casey's school, it's Casey again, it's. . .gotten to be unbearable. Bad plotting raises lots of questions, more than Hal and Tom had on Friday at the police station. When, exactly, did Margo fall for Alec? Was it when she learned he was Eddie's father? Or when Alec showed some kind of parental love and concern for Eddie? Was it the aftermath of the hit? I don't know because for so long, I couldn't be sure if Margo's feelings were ever genuine. Now they've slept together. Tom told Margo on Thursday, "I know you don't change your emotions at the drop of a hat." But isn't that exactly what the writers had Margo do? No wonder Ellen Dolan has started covered her face with her hands during scenes and chewing on her fingernails, looking exasperated, uncomfortable, and frazzled. Laiman and Culliton have taken a hacksaw to Margo, and the pieces of her personality and psyche are all over the place. The writers shove characters in whatever direction that best suits the plot-driven story. Whatever propelled Margo to finally sleep with Alec has yet to be explained. For all we know, she just woke up incredibly horny that day. The montage on Wednesday offered a few clues. (It seems her attraction is tied to self-esteem issues.) But when a montage, no matter how perfectly scored musically, begins substituting for real dialogue and character development, you have a big problem. I keep waiting for the Laiman and Culliton team to start creating their own stories. (The Alec/Margo/Tom mess is a continuation from the previous regime.) And what have Laiman and Culliton given us so far? Emily wants Tom. Molly is worried over her next column and afraid Abigail's Mom will see it. Julia and Jake hate each other (but really don't, wink, wink) and are "forced" to work together. Jack and Carly make a bet that she won't lie until the end of December. Chris is searching for his place in the world. Not only is all of this unoriginal, it's kindergarten basic. Conversations that ought to unfold over a maximum of two scenes are, though threadbare in content, stretched out over an entire episode (Margo and Tom's argument on Thursday; Margo and Alec's conversation on Friday; Jake and Julia's golf course gabfest on Monday). We don't have storylines so much as little subsets of artificiality loosely and clumsily woven together like a knitters' first afghan. As the plots have been pared to a minimum, so have the characters become one-dimensional and/or their multi-faceted stories whittled down to nothing. The best and easiest example is Carly. Since giving Parker to Hal, Carly and her storyline have gone nowhere! Literally! I'd be paying the writers a compliment if I said they have taken the character in a circle, symbolically, if you will, from Java back to Java. But they haven't even done that. They've barely moved Carly's story at all. Denise is stuck running on a treadmill to nowhere, too. She's now Hope's Mom, her character boxed in so tight that it also has stalled the character of Ben. Holden is once again relegated to "supportive husband." Lucinda's getting more airtime, but what is she really doing? Nothing, aside from dropping big hints about Eddie's paternity. Jake's the man of action. Lucinda sits at Jake's desk at the City Times and pontificates. Then she makes her daily threat to fire Jake. Camille -- Gosh, I don't even know Camille any more! One day she's taking swipes at Carly, the next she's applying to be John's lab assistant. Same thing with Julia. The characters have been dumb-downed, narrowed and pigeonholed so much that you can define them in one or two words. (Barbara=Wife/Designer; Denise=Mother; Julia=Reporter; Carly=Misunderstood, for now, it appears; Ben=Boyfriend/Doctor; Emily=Pathetic). And if you have trouble, the writers are all too willing to help you out. (Hal to Tom on Friday: "Tom, I'm a cop. Not a marriage counselor.") The characters don't seem like real people anymore, and that makes them harder to identify with. They're as cartoonish as their actions and dialogue. I used to be able to glean from a story a character's motivation -- why they acted the way they did, what they wanted, what they dreamed or desired. Now I'm having trouble recognizing people, much less knowing what they want. Julia and Jake were trapped this week on ATWT, and not just in sand on a golf course, or out on the ledge of a hotel. They were also trapped in an endless stream of bickering and shouting attempting to pass for comedy and story. Laiman and Culliton seem to be big on two things: Humor and yelling. Regrettably, not much of what they write is really inspired or funny, and after a while, the yelling can bring on a headache. Jake and Julia shouted and screamed the "cutesy" dialogue Culliton and Laiman love throughout Monday and Tuesday's episodes, conversation which sounded nothing like how real people communicate. But cute quips aren't the only dialogue trend the writers are fond of. Now the characters tend to say everything twice. Julia: "That is a boat! THAT. . .is a boat, Jake!" Margo: "Why? Why me? Why? You could have any woman in the world. . .your whole life. Why me? Why?" Julia to Jake again: "You have a cell phone! YOU. . .have a cell phone!" Margo again on Thursday: "Would you stop it, Tom? Would you please just stop it?" And if the characters are not saying things twice, then one character is saying something, only to have it parroted back to him/her. Chris on Monday: "I wouldn't want to get caught in that storm out there." Molly: "No, no. You wouldn't want to get stuck there. . .in a downpour." Then there are the lines of dialogue that are rotated among all the characters and heard just about daily. Currently, the three most common are: "How DARE you!" (or "How DARE you etc.") and "Who do you THINK you are?" and "What the Hell do you think you're doing?" Finally, there are the cliche lines that pepper every episode: "Tonight is the beginning of the rest of my life." (Carly on Tuesday); "The reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated." (Jake on Tuesday); "Desperate times call for desperate measures." (Holden on Wednesday). I remember when the dialogue was so consistently excellent on ATWT that I raved about it every chance I got. Now the dialogue is an embarrassment, as embarrassing as Lucinda and Lisa's scene when they thought Jake and Julia were dead. But what ruined that scene was not just bad dialogue. It was the total lack of depth and conviction this type of scene must have. Lisa and Lucinda spouted off yet more cliches -- Julia, vibrant girl; Jake, a man of principle and courage -- as if they were having tea and sandwiches and discussing the weather. The "reunion" of Jake and Lucinda (after he overheard Lucinda lamenting his demise) was so hackneyed that the coda of the scene was Tom Eplin and Elizabeth Hubbard's uncomfortable laughter. Did you notice that Lisa and Julia never moved toward each other? If the scene had been written and structured seriously, there would have been emotional embraces all around. But Laiman and Culliton will even play death, or in this case, presumed death, for laughs. If the scene was meant to convey that Lucinda was really quite fond of Jake, then the writers were stating the obvious. But until the storylines and the dialogue evolve to a deeper, more complex and mature level, the obvious is pretty much all we have. I don't think Laiman and Culliton trust their own material, nor the actors portraying the characters, to generate a connection with the audience. Instead of allowing Tom Eplin and Annie Parisse's natural and easy chemistry to mesh and grow, the writers instead hammer the characters and the audience with loud exchanges and enough "snappy" dialogue to fill a CBS warehouse of rejected TV pilots. The Jake/Julia story is horrible. When Alec confronted the couple about breaking into his suite, what was Julia's answer? "Poking around is more. . .fun." Actually, the best scene on ATWT all week was Alec's slow and calculated threat to Jake's family. Why? First, the scene required some much needed stillness and quiet for the implied threat to work. It perfectly suited Michael Wood's hard-as-stone facial expressions and his deep, rich voice. It stripped Tom Eplin of Jake's flamboyance and mannerisms and allowed this good actor to give a performance of amazing subtext and feeling. It forced the writers to script some real dialogue and not more drivel like this earlier doozy from Julia: "No way am I taking a back seat on the Glory Bus." Unfortunately, the writers couldn't leave well enough alone. At one point Jake performed what I now call the "Laiman Lunge". It's when any male character (so far, Holden, Jack, Jake, and Alec) on ATWT lunges at another character right before a commercial. As for Chris and Molly, heavy breathing and musical montages, combined with "no sugar, no milk" lust, currently define them. Chris has another dream about a long-haired brunette, and we're still no closer to knowing what this represents. It goes back to what I said before. ATWT isn't a soap of story, so much as a soap of montages and daily events that the writers seem to be trying to glue together into storylines. The times when a character's actions do seem to mirror his/her personality, for example, Carly's sly yet steady intimidation of Jennifer, are so rare that they stand alone, an isolated sound bite. (I also admit to some surprising satisfaction at seeing Jennifer take a pair of scissors to that BRO Original!) Instead of quips and stand-alone scenes, the writers need to develop some real story, not a new character to "stir things up", and not more plot devices (exploding boats). I'm begging the writers to. . .WRITE! Odds N Ends:
Grade for the Week: D |
|
|