Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Daniel Avery" data-source="post: 336243" data-attributes="member: 27">It seems to me that every soap has that one character (sometimes more) who gain favor merely by their absence.&nbsp; Whenever viewers are dissatisfied with the current show, they fall back into nostalgia about the time when X character was in town, and how the show could be just as good (or better) if X would come back.&nbsp; &quot;Bring back X to save the show!&quot; I often hear.&nbsp; I usually refuse to allow myself to get too wrapped up in &quot;Bring back X!&quot; campaigns because there are so many instances of such returns of past stars not being the success they hoped or planned it to be.&nbsp; It&#039;s just a totally different soap world these days, and sometimes it&#039;s just better to move forward than look back.&nbsp; At worst, the good memories of X in their original run can (and often does) become tainted by the memories of the disastrous return engagement.If they bring back X, they might not write him or her in the same way, since the writer of the original plots is likely no longer there.&nbsp; The actor might not have the same outlook on the character or on the backstage reasons for the return, having been away for a while and changed as an actor (for good or for bad).&nbsp; No one character is an island on a soap, so X might return and find himself surrounded by an entirely different group of characters than when they were originally on the show, throwing off the &quot;magic&quot; even further.&nbsp; No one character or actor should have the responsibility of &quot;saving the show&quot; placed on their shoulders, even if the people saying it admire the actor and desperately want him or her to succeed.&nbsp; So obviously there are many possible stumbling blocks to making lightning strike twice.&nbsp; In fact, I&#039;d say the deck is stacked against the show having such returns go well, much less &quot;revitalize&quot; the show.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Daniel Avery, post: 336243, member: 27"] It seems to me that every soap has that one character (sometimes more) who gain favor merely by their absence. Whenever viewers are dissatisfied with the current show, they fall back into nostalgia about the time when X character was in town, and how the show could be just as good (or better) if X would come back. "Bring back X to save the show!" I often hear. I usually refuse to allow myself to get too wrapped up in "Bring back X!" campaigns because there are so many instances of such returns of past stars not being the success they hoped or planned it to be. It's just a totally different soap world these days, and sometimes it's just better to move forward than look back. At worst, the good memories of X in their original run can (and often does) become tainted by the memories of the disastrous return engagement. If they bring back X, they might not write him or her in the same way, since the writer of the original plots is likely no longer there. The actor might not have the same outlook on the character or on the backstage reasons for the return, having been away for a while and changed as an actor (for good or for bad). No one character is an island on a soap, so X might return and find himself surrounded by an entirely different group of characters than when they were originally on the show, throwing off the "magic" even further. No one character or actor should have the responsibility of "saving the show" placed on their shoulders, even if the people saying it admire the actor and desperately want him or her to succeed. So obviously there are many possible stumbling blocks to making lightning strike twice. In fact, I'd say the deck is stacked against the show having such returns go well, much less "revitalize" the show. [/QUOTE]

Verification

What month follows July?