DramatistDreamer

I came across this and found it to be a salient point and the reason why many in the Twittersphere were quick to dismiss Adams, which didn't jibe with the reality in actual NYC neighborhoods. I guess this is the reason why I was so confused about the fact that so many people were claiming not to know who Adams is, while I thought he was probably going to be the candidate that people had the most familiarity with (which can be a double-edged prospect).

I was hoping for something that is focused on the daytime drama, but I guess daytime dramas don't have the caché to stand on its own, even though there are more than enough topics and chapters to explore.

Diminishing returns is an apt description. It's more sad than anything. The fact that people couldn't check their egos long enough to see what damage was being done. Soap fans were terrified of losing these shows, which is understandable but fawning over mediocre at best writing and incredibly toxic writing at its very worst, only helped hasten the demise of this genre, by not demanding better. And nobody please tell me that soap fans didn't have that type of power. We're all acquainted with at least one story of an actor or storyline that got scuttled because of fan outcry. It's never good to be that desperate. Good point about the parallel universes of trashy blog culture. I would also add that while other entertainment had at least, the appearance of balance with the traditional media (arts and entertainment sections of newspapers, etc.), the soaps seemingly became utterly reliant on those toxic blogs, that often seemed like the only game in town. The one or two blogs that tried to do good quality, comprehensive coverage found it tough sledding and are no longer active.

It does, doesn't it? You're welcome.

Did everyone see the trailer for the Frid documentary?

Wow, I had heard about other things after ATWT's cancellation, but not about this. Although, I have respect for human life and it is always sad when a human being passes from this earth, the hagiography surrounding Sheffer, particularly his work on ATWT, after his passing is an aspect that remains mystifying to me. He always came off as flippant about these shows. It seemed like he was only interested in doing well enough to position himself to move onto something "better". When it became obvious that time wouldn't come, the work got even more sloppy.

Neither have I. All I'm saying is that, why should it matter so much to fans whether actors who used to be on soaps talk about their time on them at all? Why does their approval even matter? Fans of horror and sci-fi never seem to care about this, no matter how many "Trekkie" jokes were made over decades. Now, you have a mainstream culture that can't get enough iterations of Star Trek, Candyman and other sci-fi, fantasy and horror. Get Out won Academy awards and inspired a ton of not-so-good imitations. No because Morgan Freeman talked up those genres, but because fans themselves supported the genre, criticized it and inspired filmmakers that would come along and make it even more relevant, to the point of attracting others. By the way, in between those years, the Evil Dead and Candyman, etc. movies sold a lot on VHS and DVD, which likely sustained interest until that next generation of filmmaker, like a Jordan Peele to elevate the material. I have never understood why soap fans don't target the folks who actually to devalue and denigrate soaps. A lot of them are still around, they block the remaining soaps from being good. Isn't Steve Kent still out there making a mockery of the daytime drama? Isn't P&G still letting thousands of hours of classic daytime drama rot in storage? Who deserves more ire? Who is actually showing the most disrespect for the genre? If anybody here has ever worked in television, you'd know some of the denigrating things many of the executives behind some of these television shows say about many of the fans. It just doesn't seem worth it to focus on the actors.

That was March 20, 1987. I'm taking about the 23rd if March, which is a Monday. That episode is not on YouTube. The 23rd is when B&B debuted, isn't it? That would be the same day ATWT debuted in its new timeslots on the East Coast.

We might have discussed this in this thread previously, but I have a question about the first episode that aired in the 2p.m. EST timeslot on March 23, 1987. (because of the debut of B&B in the 1:30p.m. timeslot): Does anybody know what specific stories and characters appeared on that episode? Unfortunately, it's not on YouTube.

Serena was never going to go to the Olympics. She had already expressed reservations about the issues with COVID outbreaks in Japan. She has a toddler to consider.

What really annoys me about all of these articles and think pieces is how they neglect to mention that NYC voters did trust a progressive mayor for two terms and many came away disappointed. People may not want to remember this but DeBlasio was voted into office in his professed progressive 'bonafides' and disappointed in many areas, the reasons are complex in some regards but the current mayor's defiant stance in wanting to credit himself, even for things he has yet to accomplish probably had a hand (even a small one) in the current standing in the mayor's race, although there have been whispers that DeBlasio had a preference for Adams to succeed him. That alone should've told everyone that things were never going to fall squarely on ideological lines. But somehow when it comes to POCs and politics, many would rather claim we're simple "sheep", rather than people weighing the history and making practical decisions.

Honestly, I think it's myth that the majority of actors who have been on soaps are ashamed of having been on them. I think soap fans are being too sensitive on this. The disrespect that the genre gets is mostly by industry executives, those with actual power to decide what we see on our screens. Are there some actors ambivalent about discussing their time on soaps? No doubt ,there have been a few well-publicized examples, but even out of those, I'd separate those who don't want to discuss their time because they felt their performances were subpar, or that they were so "green" that they didn't really know what they were doing. This is just me talking, but I get far more put out by the lack of acknowledgement of these shows' impact on the television and media landscape, as well as the lack of a rigorous critique of its shortcomings and how this may have led it to where it is now.

The New York Times decided to interrupt their regularly scheduled habit of navel-gazing at Trump supporters to try to analyze something that should have been fairly obvious to anyone paying attention for the last decade. And the analysis still falls short.

I shouldn't be judging by today's standards, where there are all kinds of scholarly think-pieces. I'm still hoping for a Ken Burnsian type of documentary series, or at least a Television In America type of series, which gives a robust insight that can't be so easily dismissed by people outside if the genre. The soaps have, even at their height of popularity, not gotten the measure of respect that they should have gotten. JMO, but I didn't see any if those publications helping in that regard.

That's fair. I do wonder though, how far they could take a storyline like that before it starts to plateau. Sierra's not Meg, neither is Lily, so I see them eventually becoming amicable after a few months, whereas, Lily's birth story stretched out nearly two years, and involved several characters. Everybody involved in that storyline got a lot of mileage out of it. Jordana Brewster didn't look anything like Benjamin Hendrickson but somehow, they had truly believable father/daughter chemistry. Tess and Nikki were two characters that I would have liked to see pop in in occasion, especially after the characters left the canvas. I wished the show had thought to ask Brewster to do a cameo after BH/Hal Munson passed away. Did the current production people even remember that Nikki existed?

Does that mean that Y&R will be submitting those scenes of Moses, Lily and Devon at Neil's memorial for next year's Daytime Emmy?

Did someone call Nancy Lee Grahn, Nancy Lee Graham during the show? I thought I saw it mentioned on Twitter last night. I didn't see most of the show but it seemed like the camera shots were tightly focused on a very small group of spectators to make it look like a full audience. I wonder if they taped the audience shots all in one sitting, then spliced the footage in during various segments to make it look like the presenters appeared in front of a live audience. The little that I saw, it looked as if only Sheryl Underwood appeared onstage in front of an actual audience and even then, the angle looked weird, kind of, off. It should be obvious that the soap categories are the least cared about- a complete reversal of when the soap stars provided all the glam and were the main event. The show was just kind of a mess overall.

At random, or maybe algorithm, I came across this NYT interview with Julianne Moore for their Screentest series. It's from about 11 years ago, in which she notes the cancellation of ATWT. Perhaps it has been posted here previously but some people may not have seen it.

Lucinda was old-fashioned in certain aspects. I remember a scene between Lucinda and Craig where they were arguing over Sierra's estranged marriage to Tonio when Lucinda was trying to convince Sierra to stay with Tonio even after the affair with Barbara had been revealed. Lucinda insisted that "a baby needs a father" to an incredulous Craig who chided her by saying something like "How incredibly progressive you are, Lucinda!" and that Sierra needed her friends more than she needed a faithless husband. She also expressed joy and pride in being referred to as "Mrs. Dr. John Dixon". So, Lucinda could be incredibly old-fashioned in some regards. I think that what people may have a hard time with is, the delineation between Lucinda as master of the boardroom but preferring a more "traditional" role on the homestead. If you look at the personal biography of someone like Lucille Ball, you'll see that this is not so uncommon, particularly of women from certain time periods.

What Sierra knew of Lucinda was what others told her. She had never laid eyes on Lucinda until she got out if Montega. Lucinda had a different name when she was married to Jacobo Estefan, Sierra's father. From what I remember, Lucinda had seen Sierra from afar at Bob and Kim's pre-wedding ceremony reception, and actually said "Is that her?" sort of to herself. She hadn't seen Sierra since she left her as a baby. Jacobi, from Lucinda's telling, was a highly chauvinistic, strong-willed, patriarchal man with a despotic disposition, whose word was law. She once said that Tonio very much reminded her of Jacobi, except Tonio was "prettier". That has more logic than the aspect of Martin Guest being able to procure Lily through an illegal adoption, without Lucinda having anything to do with it. I would have loved to see more detail of how Lucinda rose to power. Was it similar to Barbara, who had been a dormat wife previously... until after Guest's suicide? Barbara becoming a barracuda had plenty to back it up, but there were some holes in Lucinda's personal backstory, imo. But yeah, it was actually Martin Guest who handled the adoption. Guess Lucinda was an old-fashioned wife who let the husband handle all those pesky little details.

At least it is unlikely that Ms. Redd was watching because, why would she?

They should have chipped in a few extra bucks to make sure that the Black actresses on their soaps had the right photos and names spelled correctly during the show.

It's nice for Marla and Max in their respective categories (Y&R will be looking to kill someone else for the next Emmy).

From what I have seen of this ceremony, the Daytime Emmys don't seem to give much of a sh*t about the daytime soaps anymore.