On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 10:32:05 +0000, Peter Withey <pete@never.here> scrawled
in the dust...

>In another thread Mike McMillan said:
>
>"The S.W.’s have the power so… ‘Let it be so.’"
>
>When I've seen this said about scriptwriters here and in other groups
>I've often wondered - Do they have that power?
>
>I'm sure somerat knows how it works. Is there an "editorial group" who
>decide the storylines? if yes, are the scriptwriters part of it? Or
>are they just given the storylines, if yes, how detailed and asked to
>write the daily episodes?

I think the scriptwriters are only following orders, the editor is to
blame.

I know she's long gone, but in tribute to TNMF, the Beetle must go!
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959

On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 12:44:31, Penny <spam@labyrinth.freeuk.com> wrote
(my responses usually FOLLOW):
[]
>I know she's long gone, but in tribute to TNMF, the Beetle must go!

(-:

Actually, holding onto Nurse did apply: SoC was much worse.

I say it under my breath, but the present team - seem - mostly, OK,
we've had the usual unfunny "funny" scenes, and the apparently
inevitable constant interruptions (though not for a while I think!) - to
be Doing Good. Certainly, _some_ episodes have been very good. I think
the Alky Alice story has on the whole been very believable (granted, the
problem lasts for ever, so we can't say for sure of course).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Get off my turf!" screamed Pooh, as he shot at Paddington.

On 28.2.22 15:59, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> I say it under my breath, but the present team - seem - mostly, OK,
> we've had the usual unfunny "funny" scenes, and the apparently
> inevitable constant interruptions (though not for a while I think!) - to
> be Doing Good.

Regrettably whilst they are doing better than SoC they fall short in my
opinion.

1. An inability to deliver 6 episodes a week.
2. An inability to establish those present in a wireless friendly
manner (exhibited recently when Mia said Jake or some such once and
never again so I had no idea to whom she was speaking).
3. An inability to write and tell stories about "The Archers" - I
comment on this frequently when I spy cast lists
4. An inability not to open up plot holes - the most recent example is
the complete lack of explanation of Stella renting the bungalow.
5. An inability to maintain character consistency - Hannah vanishes for
months and reappears as a reasonable person and she is not alone.
6. An inability to recognise the age and potential limits that imposes
- Kathy not once discussing retirement as an example, Eddie Grundy, 71
as another.
7. Use of completely inappropriate ret-cons - most obviously having
Brian accept dumped chemicals.
8. An inability to continue with countryside activities - most
obviously the trumped up story to get Will out of being a keeper and the
subsequent sidelining of the shoot.

Need I go on?

--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics

On 01/03/2022 09:56, krw wrote:
> On 28.2.22 15:59, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> I say it under my breath, but the present team - seem - mostly, OK,
>> we've had the usual unfunny "funny" scenes, and the apparently
>> inevitable constant interruptions (though not for a while I think!) -
>> to be Doing Good.
>
> Regrettably whilst they are doing better than SoC they fall short in my
> opinion.

[snip]

> 7.  Use of completely inappropriate ret-cons - most obviously having
> Brian accept dumped chemicals.

I can't help feeling that The Archers would do a lot better with Russell
T Davies as showru^Wscript editor.

john

On 01/03/2022 10:25, John Ashby wrote:
> On 01/03/2022 09:56, krw wrote:
>> On 28.2.22 15:59, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> I say it under my breath, but the present team - seem - mostly, OK,
>>> we've had the usual unfunny "funny" scenes, and the apparently
>>> inevitable constant interruptions (though not for a while I think!) -
>>> to be Doing Good.
>>
>> Regrettably whilst they are doing better than SoC they fall short in
>> my opinion.
>
> [snip]
>
>> 7.  Use of completely inappropriate ret-cons - most obviously having
>> Brian accept dumped chemicals.
>
> I can't help feeling that The Archers would do a lot better with Russell
> T Davies as showru^Wscript editor.
>
> john

Nah, we need Chris Chibnall.

Vicky <vicky.ayech@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 15:59:52 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
> <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2022 at 12:44:31, Penny <spam@labyrinth.freeuk.com> wrote
>> (my responses usually FOLLOW):
>> []
>>> I know she's long gone, but in tribute to TNMF, the Beetle must go!
>>
>> (-:
>>
>> Actually, holding onto Nurse did apply: SoC was much worse.
>>
>> I say it under my breath, but the present team - seem - mostly, OK,
>> we've had the usual unfunny "funny" scenes, and the apparently
>> inevitable constant interruptions (though not for a while I think!) - to
>> be Doing Good. Certainly, _some_ episodes have been very good. I think
>> the Alky Alice story has on the whole been very believable (granted, the
>> problem lasts for ever, so we can't say for sure of course).
>
>
> https://twitter.com/BBCTheArchers/status/1497169316868993024?t=uOiRQibnQAb3bb3H5II6SA&s=19&fbclid=IwAR1kcUqVNzi0c9yHnPiyrsIkHtpE49fWS11nJfOlz9USRl-UFlpkwt3r_Ss
>

Bit vague!

Sincerely Chris