|
|
|
Jack took Carly (or as he referred to her on Monday, his "little Eskimo Princess") to the top of a hill this week on ATWT. Spread out below them was all of Oakdale, the Snyder Pond, the Walsh Mansion, and Luthers Corners. As Carly surveyed everything around and beneath her, she was also accessing her symbolic climb up another hill towards becoming a better person. Carly's hilltop vantage point high, clear, and expansive is perfect for accessing something else: The overall quality of ATWT. Wearing brand new hiking boots and bringing a clean slate and some chalk, it seemed the right time (and place) for me to figuratively look out over all of Oakdale and access the show. And after looking out over that expanse of writing, production values and acting talent that makes up ATWT, what would I write on that clean slate to hold up for all the world to see? Two sentences: "I believe Christopher Goutman has the potential to become one of the best executive producers in the history of ATWT. I also believe Leah Laiman and Carolyn Culliton are the worst writing team in the history of ATWT." A writing team worse than Stephen Black and Henry Stern, you shriek? One worse than Jessica Klein, you exclaim, incredulously? AB. SO. LUTE. LY. As bad as Black and Stern and Jessica Klein were, both writing teams always provided several ongoing storylines. Both tried to establish some foundation from which to build (if not always a clear vision of what the show should be). In fact, Black and Stern proved to be eerily prophetic regarding the current trend in daytime. They introduced a slew of very young and beautiful characters and placed them all in frontburner storylines. Isn't that what most daytime dramas are presently doing? The only difference is that these newly introduced teens are now related to well-established families or characters on the show. What are Abigail, Katie, Jennifer, Chris and Adam, really, other than substitutes with a familial history for the gone but never forgotten Zoe, Sara, Paul, Ryder, and Dani? But don't miss the point. I'm in no away applauding the floodgate of teenage characters taking over soaps. I'm also not suggesting Black and Stern or Jessica Klein were successful head writers of ATWT. What I am saying is that some of the writing teams widely and correctly viewed as below average during their tenures at ATWT at least had ideas and vision. I see very little of both with current writers Leah Laiman and Carolyn Culliton. ATWT desperately needs a large injection of creativity. The show also needs a production and writing team willing to take risks. Risk not merely masquerading as bold or daring, but risk that sits securely in the concrete of well-plotted, character-based story. I realize that going hand-in-hand with risk is the chance of failure, and ATWT has experienced many "looks good on paper" stories that were ultimately unsatisfying on-screen (e.g., Lorraine Broderick's ambitious but misguided reincarnation of David as Reid Hamilton; Jessica Klein's Lew/Camille fiasco; Black and Stern's Easy Access Shopping with Paul, Connor, and Sara). But a show unwilling to go out on a limb, unwilling to take a chance, is a show. . .Well, it's a show just like ATWT is right now. We need a producing and writing team that will go out on that limb, but then not just sit there with arms spread and a self-satisfied smirk on their faces because they had the courage to make the trip. First, there must be a story seed, planted and allowed to grow and develop. Then there must be foresight. Where will this story be six months from now? How will it impact on others? What new story will the resolution start? We need the daring that Lorraine Broderick demonstrated when she inserted Emily into the then-rock solid marriage of Tom and Margo. The risk Broderick took again by telling Camille's breast cancer story, making a young, beautiful woman so frightened by the future that she ran into the headlights of a truck driven by the man who would ultimately show her every reason to keep fighting for her life (Brad). Broderick took a risk again by giving Carly $50 million dollars while simultaneously still keeping the character as vital and needy and driven by no-holes-barred determination. In Broderick's World, money was the sustenance that fed Carly's desire to have it all, including Jack. After she got rich, she still wasn't satisfied. In Laiman and Culliton's world, Carly's wealth is so far an accessory. Carly's windfall was, I admit, a wonderful end to the horrible humiliations rained down on her which I can only surmise was the writers simple way of having Carly "pay" for the sins of the past. Wealthy Carly 2 (or Carly 2000, as she put it herself recently) is perhaps a more honorable and idealized approach to the character. However, it's not nearly as exciting to watch. I'm not saying that Laiman and Culliton's approach can't work. It can, and it may even be interesting to watch Carly explore a new direction in life. But that type of character evolution needs writers more attuned to the intricacies of character and motivation than Laiman and Culliton. And do we really want to sacrifice a one-of-a-kind character like Carly only to turn her into a plate-stamped version of reformed soap opera vixen? The mega-talented Maura West can only pour so much of Carly's personality into her performances. Without a storyline, and saddled in scene after scene with Jack that usually culminates in a kiss, not even West can prevent Carly from becoming boring. Before you bring up the hints of trouble in Hong Kong and the man lurking outside Barbara's doorway on Tuesday and at the fashion show on Wednesday, I propose that the only reason those things have been inserted into the story is that the writers need to accommodate Maura West's maternity leave. In other words, they HAD to come up with something! But if there is some devil from Carly's past still twisting in Hong Kong, then I urge that pointy-tailed demon to begin showing himself. Because if West can't grasp anything solid within the character, she's lost in a Laiman and Culliton Oakdale where kisses masquerade as story and kitchen fires substitute for drama. One of Lorraine Broderick's strengths was that she understood character and extremely important characteristics. If you doubt me, think back on the miracle work Broderick did with Molly, turning her from one of the most reviled characters of all time to one of wide acceptance and increased popularity. Characters under Broderick had dimension and definition. Under Laiman and Culliton, characters have one-dimension (e.g., Denise, Ben, Emily, Jack, Jessica, Chris), and characteristics are interchangeable. For example, as surprising and hot as that kiss was on Friday at midnight between Isaac and Camille, was that really in Camille's character to deep kiss a man she's shared two conversations and a candy bar with? Not the Camille I know. Empty shock value, it was, and a bold example of action motivating character instead of the other way around. But to be perfectly frank, under the Laiman and Culliton regime some characters are less than one-dimensional. They're just there (Abigail, Susan, Lucinda, Julia, Andy). To illustrate, let's look at the evolution of several characters on ATWT under Laiman and Culliton. Kelley Menighan-Hensley's talent can not shake the cloak of pathetic weakness that still completely covers Emily. In a glaring example of how the writers seem to be making it up as they go along, overnight Emily went from loving Tom to despising him. Forget the circumstances that caused it (the police warrant, the search of Emily's home, Tom's betrayal). Focus instead on the rationale behind it. It became apparent to most of us months ago that Emily's all-out pursuit of Tom was obviously not going to work. Lorraine Broderick had done such a very good and believable job the first time that it boggled my mind why Laiman and Culliton would want to retell the story and invite the obvious comparisons in quality and execution. With probably a little insight and a lot of viewer feedback, TPTB finally decided that repeating the past with Emily/Tom/Margo was not the road to take. So, wham, bam, character credibility be damned, Emily turned on a dime. Despite the fractured and rapid way it happened, it will in the long run be a good thing. On Wednesday, as the camera panned up to Emily entering the fashion show in that dynamite short and shiny silver dress (a ravishing Kelley Menighan-Hensley), I interpreted that as Emily walking purposely into the next chapter of her life. Let's hope so, because currently Emily and Kelley Menighan-Hensley are adrift, with no story, no clear direction, and no consistently defined character. Ellen Dolan will be picking up the pieces of the weed-whacker job the writers did on Margo for a long time. Over the past few months Margo became a female Jekyl and Hyde, loving Alec, hating Alec, throwing Tom out, then running back to him. (Even the characters surrounding Margo could not escape atomic fast changes in attitude and loyalty. For example, Hal went from distrust of Margo suspending her from the force, doubting her credibility, etc. to all out support in a matter of days. One day Eddie was yelling at Margo in court about how she killed his father. The next he was talking about how bogus her conviction was and how much he cared about her.) With writing so weak and in such disarray, Ellen Dolan a fine actress began externalizing her performances, playing scenes with her hands in her face, or arms flying, or her hands balled into fists and tugging at the sleeves of her blouse. The character was force-fed the audience five days a week to the point where watching Margo and Tom rehash the murder via a series of silly Alec-the-ghost appearances featuring potted plant digging and incessant tapping elicited incredulous groans from this viewer. Even with Georgia practically giving Margo a witness stand confession on Friday (in a well-written and quietly effective scene), Margo still couldn't put the puzzle pieces together until Georgia ran out of the room and Margo heard the sound of her heels on the concrete. There was finally a climax to our one storyline on Friday -- Alec's murder -- and the writers had to ruin all the good suspenseful material by bookending it with dumb scenes like Eddie's last minute confession, Tom and John suddenly unearthing the blood soaked towel outside Lucinda's guesthouse, and Margo's hacking cough fit and subsequent incarceration of the new policeman serving guard duty. So ask yourself this: Would you mind if Margo and Tom were put on the backburner for a few months? I wouldn't, and I don't mean that as a criticism of Ellen Dolan and Scott Holmes. But Laiman and Culliton have made me sick of Tom and Margo to the point where I need a break from both characters. Jack Snyder was and should still be our primary hero, the knight on white charger racing to the rescue of anyone in need. As with many good young knights, Jack's lines of right and wrong are precisely delineated. When someone crosses that line, Jack can be very judgmental, demanding, and sometimes condescending. It's a wonderful complexity of character (and Jack's major flaw) that Lorraine Broderick first instilled. His very ideals of morality and honor are often his own undoing. That's why Julia seemed such a logical pairing for Jack after Carly. In his eyes, she was perfection not just in appearance, but in her values and her desire for the good, simple life. But Laiman and Culliton have ignored Jack's past with Julia in favor of rekindling his relationship with Carly. It's puzzling because one has nothing to do with the other. Besides, conflict on a soap is always a good thing, so why totally deep six the Jack/Julia connection? Jack's not perfect, but Michael Park plays him with such a combination of sly charm and cocky earnestness that he makes Jack totally endearing. (Only Jack as played by Park could make a turkey pin seem truly romantic.) Laiman and Culliton have also neutered Jack's crave for adventure, a lifestyle that in the past landed him in Memorial Hospital at least three times in one year. From Jack to Jake has passed the mantle of stampeding hero. It's a shame, for while Jake, as portrayed by Tom Eplin, is a more flawed and darker character (thereby more fascinating, some would propose), the character of Jack brings to Oakdale a badge of honor the show needs. Jack and Hal are our male moral compasses. Each represents differing generations, which a show needs. The fact that Jack and Hal are sometimes at odds (I've lost count of the times Jack has deliberately gone against Hal's instructions) wonderfully colors not only their relationship, but the unfolding story. To see Jack whittled down by Laiman and Culliton to a one-dimensional love interest for Carly has been extremely difficult. It's unforgiveable. I want the real Jack back. And why can't ATWT have more than one hero? There's room on the canvas for both White Knight Jack and Dark Avenger Jake. Lorraine Broderick made a mess of the Julia character, so granted, Laiman and Culliton didn't have much to work with. In Annie Parisse, the show has an exotic, intoxicating beauty. Raven haired, tall, leggy, and with a wide, high voltage smile, Parisse is gorgeous from head to toe. Most male viewers would be entertained by having Parisse read the Oakdale phone book. And that's just about what Laiman and Culliton are having Julia do. By isolating Julia with Jake, and by giving the two scene after scene of loud, combative and/or cutesy dialogue, the writers are angering most of the audience by force-feeding us this pairing instead of letting things proceed more naturally. They are robbing Julia from evolving into something anything! on her own. Keep it up and soon the character of Julia will be dispensable. Parisse and Tom Eplin both need to be spread around more. What happened to Julia's mother/daughter-like relationship with Emma? Her budding friendships with Camille and Lily? On the flip side, Eplin's interactions with Elizabeth Hubbard's Lucinda are little more than mildly amusing distractions since there is no story there. And I find myself questioning Jake's hovering around the police station like a Meddling Matilda. It distracts my focus from with whom Jake is interacting. Elizabeth Hubbard has been reduced to playing a "strong woman" cartoon. There she is, kickboxing with her trainer. There she is at The City Times, fetching coffee for Jake. There she is, fluttering around Georgia like a mother bird protecting her nestling. Protective of Georgia one minute, and then blabbing to John about seeing Georgia outside washing -- dirt? mud? -- off her hands in the pool late at night. Subsequently, Hubbard's performances have become broader, more theatrical. During Lucinda's interrogation at the police station on Monday, Hubbard was in and out of her chair, eyes bugging out, hands flaying. Hubbard has also begun stretching her words and sentences in a way that recalls the character of Norma Desmond in Sunset Boulevard. "Hal, I had an ah-point. . .MENT." Laiman and Culliton may have gotten Lucinda out of her wheelchair, but the character remains emblematically paralyzed. Even if they had a solid story supporting them, the coupling of Abigail and Chris would still be disturbing. (Boring, too, but primarily disturbing.) She's sixteen. He's Well, I'm not sure exactly how old Chris is supposed to be anymore. When Ben Jorgenson had the role, Chris seemed to be 18-21. The buff and beautiful Paul Korver comes across as older, around his mid-20s. So we're supposed to root for these two and celebrate in their newfound love while they meet time after time after time at "The Spot"? Not this viewer. It doesn't help when the writers have Abigail say lines like the following on Tuesday after Chris took her to the library: "This is such a great idea! I feel like I'm back in fourth grade again!" That's it, writers! Shine the spotlight right on that jailbait angle! I don't understand the Chris and Abigail pairing any more than I understand what brought Chris and Molly together. (At least with Chris and Molly we can safely speculate it was extreme horniness.) But I can certainly understand why Chris wants to keep his involvement with Abigail a secret. It's humiliating, not only for the character of Chris, but also for Paul Korver! Chris also used to have an edge. With Ben Jorgenson, there was an undercurrent of the sexual and a loose enthusiasm I found quite appealing. Jorgenson was more a skilled reactor than a technical thespian. It didn't make for the most polished of performances, but for me, Jorgenson was exciting to watch. However, TPTB apparently wanted a more traditionally drawn characterization. Now Korver's Chris better fits the Hughes family mold. Korver also has a more professional presence when compared with Jorgenson's animated and natural style. But now I'm wondering what the problem is between Chris and his family. I mean, today's Chris is a pretty angelic guy, aside from going after underage girls. He's gainfully employed, he writes poetry, and he's stopped breaking into Lucinda's for nude swimming and drinking. By turning Chris as wholesome and All-American as Korver looks, the writers have zapped the tension between Chris and Bob, zapped the strain between Kim and Bob because of their differing parental approaches with Chris, and saddled us instead with this gagging romance that only a massive dose of ingenuity could resuscitate. Thank goodness Molly found Chris and Abigail together at "The Spot" on Friday. Perhaps now this will propel this mess forward. And here's my recommendation: If the writers insist on keeping Chris on the frontburner, then break up Chris and Abigail NOW. Get him away from Molly while you're at it. Give Chris a buddy to pal around with. Start moving Paul Korver and Chris around the canvas. Laiman and Culliton seem to run as dry as the Mohave Desert in the idea department. Was Jessica really brought back only to prosecute Margo and provide that extra little plot bump of friend against friend? What a waste of Tamara Tunie, a captivating screen presence and a dynamic actress! In a show desperate for male blood, why decrease air time for the talented Scott DeFreitas (Andy) and bring on Marcus Schenkenberg, another prettier than pretty hunk of man, yet an actor, on evidence of his few appearances, of very limited range. The few men available in Oakdale are "tied" inexplicably or via marriage to one character (e.g., Lily/Holden, Jake/Julia, Jack/Carly, Tom/Margo, Hal/Barbara). Meanwhile, our females go wanting. Romance, anyone, for Emily, Lucinda, Susan, Katie, Jennifer, Molly, Jessica, Camille? Which brings me to one of the few strengths of this writing team. Laiman and Culliton do know how to write romantic scenes. They understand the value of romance and the satisfaction of seeing a couple simply being mushy and in love. Granted, they will take what could easily be accomplished in one scene and stretch it out for an entire episode. (For example, Chris and Abigail at the library on Tuesday.) The series of scenes usually culminate in one or more kisses, most often at the 45 minute and beyond mark of the episode. Romantic scenes are needed. They should be woven around the unfolding storylines. But that's the problem. With Laiman and Culliton, those scenes ARE the storyline. Whether the pairing is romantic (Jack/Carly) or not (Camille/John), there is no story supporting the couple. Even Jessica Klein knew enough to frame the evolving Ben and Camille romance around a story (in this case, prejudice and racism). Compare that with Laiman and Culliton's romances and/or couplings. What is framing the Carly and Jack story? To call the bet that Carly would not lie until Christmas a storyline would be an insult to every viewer of ATWT! It wasn't a story. It was a conversation that dragged on for three months. Where's the story framing Camille and John? Or Jake and Julia? There is none. Heck, we don't even know if these pairings are couples in the making, or just friends, or work colleagues, or just folks passing the time of day. There's such a lack of structure and foresight that characters seemed scrambled together, only to emerge glued in odd pairs. I encourage experimentation, but not just for the sake of experiment. The writers can no more force a couple on the audience than they can slam two people together in a few scenes to see what kind of chemistry they have. (Kiss, Camille and Isaac, kiss!) With no story foundation supporting these people, it leaves the characters (and the actors) exposed to the simplicity of the dialogue and the forced pairings. This week we had a fashion show and a New Year's Eve party at Java Underground. It was a chance to see many of our beautiful female characters on the runway and a lot of the cast in the audience looking their best. It is also where Executive Producer Christopher Goutman really shines. He knows how to give a show a high gloss look, a charged atmosphere, and a freshness. These elements are always on best display at big parties and traditional family gatherings. However, I don't understand why more of the cast was not utilized in the modeling segments. Why couldn't Lily, Julia, Kim, Emily, and Jessica have modeled Barbara's clothes? And the mess-up in music for Carly and Barbara's segments was trite and terribly executed. Barbara accusing Carly of purposely switching the music on Wednesday was simply a replay of Barbara accusing Carly of setting her kitchen on fire on Tuesday. Further, Jennifer, Katie, and Abigail looked extremely awkward trying to find a rhythm and that "runway attitude walk" to the classical music. (The classical music, however, underscored the dramatic scenes going on around the fashion show very well.) And after seeing Carly's fashions accessorized with cowboy hats and boots, I began to think that perhaps Carly should have used some hogs as background props after all. The most radiant model was the stunning Lauren B. Martin, who, admittedly, was given the flashiest designs to wear. Nonetheless, Martin, with her fresh cover girl features and perfect figure, was a knockout. Fashion shows, holiday gatherings, and other special events are not only necessary on a soap opera, they should be a requirement. These events provide a break from the always unfolding stories. Further, if done well they reinforce community, friendships, and/or family ties. But a fashion show was the last thing ATWT needed right now! Why? Wasn't it glamorous and fun, a break from the daily routine? It sure was. But that's not what the show needs right now. What does the show need, then? The show needs several new and evolving storylines. Think about it. Now that the Alec murder mystery is for the most part over, what other stories do we have? Ben and Denise's decision to tell Andy he's Hope's father was actually a Lorraine Broderick story that, I understand, Goutman and Laiman/Culliton originally did not even want to address! What we've mainly got is daily set pieces and events which basically add up to nothing. On Tuesday, it was the fire in Barbara's kitchen, with everything resolved by episode's end and everyone pulling together like one big, happy, extremely dysfunctional family. I tired months ago of Jake being fired by Lucinda (or threatening to resign) at the beginning of an episode, only to have him stay employed by the end of the episode. Now they're each others biggest fans and that's none the more entertaining. Remember Jennifer's ruined school project? How about the day Hal forgot about the Father/Daughter dance at Jen's school? Or the crisis du jour at WOAK? Or the nail-biting day Chris agonized over Abigail moving to Saudi Arabia, only to learn the next day that she was staying in Oakdale? These daily melodrama pieces are merely contrivances to showcase a character or use plot to move threadbare story. It is the soap opera equivalent of a first grade Dick and Jane book. Dishearteningly, it is Laiman and Culliton's preferred writing style. It's why the best episode of this writing team's tenure was the Thanksgiving show. It was a standalone episode, one that was supposed to be resolved by the end of the hour. Fashion shows and special gatherings are perfectly suited to this writing team. It's something they can handle and pull off with little effort and relative ease. However, it makes for lousy soap opera for the remaining 300 days of the year (minus weekends). Finally, the fashion show and New Year's Eve party ironically served as a symbolic snapshot of the show: Lots of style and sparkle (sets, clothes, beautiful people, the Editor of Seventeen magazine) -- that's Goutman, but little to no substance -- that's Laiman and Culliton. With so little attention paid to the big details (story, character development), you can bet that no attention will be paid to the little details. That's why Carly, now flush with one million dollars, is still living at Emma's and hasn't gone to get Parker to live with her. That's why Jake is standing there in the interrogation room alongside Hal and Jack while they question Lucinda as if he's a member of the police force. That's why there are family sleepovers in jail. That's why convicted murderer Margo roamed around the police station like a free woman. It's why Eddie hates Margo on Monday, but adores her on Tuesday. It's why there is no explanation for why Alec, written as a horrible, sadistic murderer who drugged Margo, would later appear in a vision (or whatever) and give Margo clues to his real killer. And for those who would say he was just the messenger, Laiman and Culliton shot down that weak but plausible explanation. Alec often spoke to Margo, giving her direct orders, guiding her along the way. He wasn't the messenger to her subconscious. He was the source of it. Big difference, and totally unexplained by this amateurish writing team. Well, that's not entirely true. I think Laiman and Culliton attempted to explain it. "Logic has nothing to do with the unconscious," John told Margo on Wednesday. After I stopped laughing, I thought, That's probably all the explanation we're going to get! Big details, small details, no details. Whatever the detail, it's often ignored by this writing team. One detail that I'm glad was ignored this week: How Margo managed to get the guard's keys and overpower that big man on Thursday! Laiman and Culliton have made some improvements since they began writing ATWT. So, lest I be accused of being totally negative, I want to acknowledge and praise their efforts. There has been a big change and a marked improvement in the dialogue. Gone are most of the clichι lines. There has also been a big drop in the cutesy banter between two characters that predominated the first few months of Laiman and Culliton's tenure. The flip side, however, is that the writers never delve deeper than the surface with the dialogue. Carly said to Jack on Monday after he had given her the first present, "I've learned a lot about myself. And now I have this. . .clean slate. . .to remind me." The writers left it at that. And so far, here's the only explanation we have for why Georgia (in a wonderfully heartfelt and sympathetic performance by Jaime Dudney) killed Alec: "I love you (Eddie). Oh, I love you so much. That's why. . .That's why this happened. I'm sorry. I'm so sorry." They rarely dig into the subtleties of character, and they rarely allow the dialogue to provide insight or explanation. So while the overall dialogue has improved, it is sparse and only occasionally eloquent. (The best dialogue recently was Emily's tirade to Tom at the police station, where she read him the riot act and said she owed herself an apology for ever getting involved with him.) This writing team does seem to remember to include the veteran cast members more (e.g., Lisa, Bob, Nancy, Kim) if not in actual story, then in scenes where their presence makes an impact. Yes, it's an illusion (They're writing for the veterans!), but it's a good and effective illusion nonetheless. Laiman and Culliton have also injected a big dose of humor into the show. (Granted, some of it is unintentional.) But this writing team makes sure to equally mix the drama with comedy, and that seems to appeal to a lot of viewers. It's also in marked contrast to Lorraine Broderick's writing style, which was more moody, atmospheric and infinitely more emotional. Broderick's humor also came from character, and was not humor for humor's sake that Laiman and Culliton favor (Molly with blue facial cream on, Chris' Arabian Knights fantasy). I truly believed Broderick wanted to move us to tears. And so do Laiman and Culliton. The difference is that Broderick had me crying over her rich, emotional storylines and the connection she helped make between the characters and this viewer. Laiman and Culliton have me crying over all that ATWT could be but isn't, and, alarmingly, what it is steadily and determinedly becoming.
Grade for the Week (and the past few weeks): D+ |
|
|