EricMontreal22

TELEVISION; Black Family Shares Spotlight in a New Soap Opera

By MIMI TORCHIN; Mimi Torchin is a New York-based writer who frequently reports on soap operas.

Published: March 26, 1989

''Two families, three lifetimes. Daytime drama with a difference. Black and white - in color!'' The on-air promotional spots for NBC's forthcoming''Generations'' drive their message home with fast cuts and throbbing percussion. They suggest that the new soap opera, which will make its debut in the New York metropolitan area tomorrow afternoon from 12:30 to 1 on Channel 4, has something novel to offer fans of the genre: ''Generations'' will introduce daytime television's first black family as a central focus into what has up to now been a conspicuously white-dominated world.

There is more riding on ''Generations,'' however, than merely an attempt to broaden the ethnic demographics within the soap-opera milieu. The network is also hopeful of broadening its profit margin during the advertising-rich daytime hours when viewer loyalty has traditionally been strong.

Set in Chicago and its suburbs, ''Generations'' centers on three generations of two families, one black and one white. Many years ago, the matriarch of the black family was the housekeeper for the white family; today, grandchildren from both families attend college together. The cast, which features several established performers, is headed by Taurean Blacque, formerly Detective Neal Washington of ''Hill Street Blues,'' who plays a self-made businessman.

For more than two decades, blacks have played a visible, if somewhat peripheral role in daytime dramas. When ABC's ''One Life to Live'' had its premiere in 1968, a major story line centered around Carla Gray, a light-skinned black woman who led a double life: as a black woman and as a black ''passing'' for white. She carried on simultaneous romances with a white doctor and a black intern. Pretty daring stuff for 1968. But soaps have never been afraid to tackle controversial subject matter, racial or otherwise, even if often with sugar coating. Currently, more than half of the 11 soap operas on the networks feature story lines with prominent black characters.

But black characters in soap operas, numerous as they are, generally exist in a kind of vacuum. They arrive in town, have a brief moment in the sun (which in soap operas can mean several months) as part of a specific story line, then fade into the background or disappear as suddenly as they came.

Occasionally, the character becomes a participant in the soap opera's everyday life. Another black character may be introduced as a love interest, and once in a while a family member or two is also introduced. Blacks on soap operas tend to be police officers, doctors, entertainers, lawyers or, at the other end of the spectrum, trusted family retainers who are little more than stereotypes.

So, what will differentiate ''Generations'' from already established soaps that feature major black characters? And what will tempt viewers to watch ''Generations'' instead of the primary competition in its time slot, CBS's No. 1-rated ''Young and the Restless''?

Sally Sussman, the creator, head writer and executive producer of the new contender and a former writer for ''The Young and the Restless,'' explains: ''The difference is we're starting from scratch with a core family who happens to be black. That enables us to give them a credibility and importance, a history, that most blacks on daytime don't have.

''I wanted to show the problems and the conflicts of people who are a reflection of the times they were brought up in. The story simply evolved from my desire to portray life in the 90's in a big city. That means blacks and whites living together in a realistic way.''

In that respect, ''Generations'' will, indeed, be attempting something different. But not without hardheaded commercial considerations.

In 1988, according to an A. C. Nielsen report, ''Television Viewing Among Blacks,'' 12.7 percent of all black households with television sets watched soap operas, as opposed to 6.3 percent of ''all others.'' That means, proportionally, that more than twice as many black households are tuned in to the soap operas. Although only roughly 10 million of the 88.6 million TV households in America in 1988 were black, the numbers are still noteworthy. Furthermore, comparison with the figures for the 1985 survey (the first year it was compiled) reveals that while soap-opera viewership among ''all others'' decreased in 1988, it increased among black viewers.

But ''Generations'' is entering the once astoundingly profitable daytime arena in a less-than-favorable climate of declining audiences, steadily falling advertising revenues and rising production costs. Five years ago, the average half-hour episode of a soap opera cost between $200,000 and $250,000 to produce; today, that figure is close to $400,000. Additionally, although NBC is top dog during prime time, it is the third-rated network during the day (10 A.M. to 4 P.M., Monday through Friday). That means ''Generations'' won't benefit from the traditional pattern of soap-opera viewing, which is by network, rather than specific show.

To appreciate why NBC is willing to risk millions of dollars on a new daytime drama in the face of these odds, it is necessary to understand the special nature of soap operas and the circumstances behind the waning profits.

An ingenious symbiosis of intimate and frequently mundane details of daily life and plots laced with unbelievable flights of fancy and much dramatic license, the soap opera indulges the eavesdropper in most viewers. Five days a week, year in and year out, the viewer is the fly on the wall in these characters' lives. That is why a soap-opera fan is frequently loyal for life; thanks to the proliferation of the VCR, even aficionados with jobs outside the home can keep up with their ''stories,'' as they are known to the faithful.

As for daytime's loss of viewers, the biggest decline is between 10 A.M. and 12:30 P.M., a time period in which the networks offer primarily game shows and talk shows to their affiliate stations. On the other hand, from 12:30 to 4 P.M., the time when soap operas are shown, viewership continues, with a few exceptions, to be high. Indeed, soap operas remain the bulwark against a rising tide of financial difficulties on daytime.

''The soaps are still the networks' best defense against multiple competitors in daytime,'' says Brian Frons, NBC's vice president of daytime programming. ''Local stations around the country can buy other game shows and talk shows from syndication, but only network affiliates have soap operas - and that's the unique franchise we offer. They still hold their audience extremely well. There's a higher 'brand loyalty,' if you will, to soap operas than to probably any other form of television.''

Three major factors account for the networks' loss of profits in daytime. First, the game shows - once a font of profitability - have, as a group, lost some of their attraction to both viewers and advertisers and are no longer the moneymakers they once were.

Second, the advent of the 15-second commercial has been a heavy blow to the networks. ''Advertisers feel they can buy a 15-second commercial and it will have about 75 percent of the effectiveness of a 30-second spot,'' says Mr. Frons. ''They either don't reinvest the savings in daytime or don't spend them at all.''

The third factor is that many advertisers have bypassed network programming - except for daytime dramas - in favor of the syndicated market where they can buy more air time for their money. Mr. Frons says, ''The bulk of the money [ on daytime ] is really coming from the soaps. They deliver the 18-to-49-year-old women's group, which is the key target audience. Advertisers seem to view the soaps as a better environment for their spots.''

Thus, a new soap opera would seem the logical way to improve the financial side of NBC's daytime schedule. The network jettisons unprofitable game shows (''Sale of the Century'' and ''Super Password'') and launches a new soap opera, which, if it catches on, can generate a lot of money. The unknown in this equation is whether ''Generations'' is a show that viewers will embrace. NBC is gambling a great deal that it is.

In a new era of network cost-cutting and penny-pinching, NBC, now owned by General Electric, is spending a million dollars just to promote the launch of ''Generations.'' The network has also turned over to its affiliate stations the half-hour that begins at noon, a time slot in which stations frequently present inexpensively produced local newscasts. To further encourage affiliates to carry the new daytime drama, NBC is offering a ''double feed,'' which means that stations can show ''Generations'' either at 12 or 12:30, using the other half-hour any way they choose. In other words, NBC is doing everything it can to give this serial a chance to succeed.

Despite all the emphasis on a single racial group, NBC is confident it will not alienate a significant portion of those multitudinous ''all others'' out there in the daytime audience.

''I hope - I believe the country is beyond that,'' says Mr. Frons. ''The most popular family on television [ ''The Cosby Show'' ] is black. Look at the success of 'Roots' - and that was 12 years ago. I think 'Generations' will be successful if black audiences say, 'I relate to those people. They remind me of my family.' It will be successful if white audiences can relate to these characters simply as people with flaws and virtues. If viewers, regardless of color, don't like these characters, they won't watch them and the show will fail.''

Ms. Sussman is equally pragmatic: ''We're in the business of drama here, not social reformation. I'm not out to change the world. I want to entertain people and captivate them with our characters. What makes people tune in to a soap? Compelling characters, romance and good stories with strong emotional payoffs. Black or white, that's what the daytime audience wants to see - and that's what we're going to give them. In the end, it's all a crapshoot.''

Fans Mourn Loss of an Interracial Soap Opera

By C. GERALD FRASER

Published: March 5, 1991

Washed out by low ratings, television's first interracial soap opera devoted to the adventures and misadventures of black and white families, "Generations," has left behind a group of disappointed viewers, many of them black professionals, still yearning to tune in tomorrow.

After broadcasting 407 episodes, NBC took "Generations" off the air at the end of January. It had lasted for 13 months.

Describing the serial in 1989, as it was about to go on, the network said that it was "a contemporary daytime drama set in Chicago" and that it centered "on the relationships of two families -- one white, the Whitmores; one black, the Marshalls -- whose lives have been linked for generations."

Now it is gone for good. An NBC spokesman, Rob Maynor, said, "If it doesn't deliver, it doesn't stay on the air."

The cancellation annoyed a number of the show's regular viewers. One New Jersey working couple taped the 30-minute show daily for evening viewing. They were perturbed "on the day of the final segment to find out that most of it was superseded by a war bulletin, leaving a seemingly inexplicable ending and adding insult to injury." 'It Was Different'

The cancellation also upset Marsha Hunt, a Philadelphia novelist. "It was a very good show," she said in a telephone interview. "It was different. The story line was not who's sleeping with whom. It showed a real relationship between the two women."

Ms. Hunt did not rest on her disappointment. "I don't sit back," she said. "When people say blacks don't write in, I'm not one of them. When they say blacks don't call in, I'm not one of them." She wrote, she called and she organized "The Coalition to Save 'Generations.' "

She said she had 12 people in 12 states "running groups" that had sent "around a thousand" save-"Generations" letters to local stations, NBC, prospective syndicators and PBS, which they view as a potential broadcaster of the serial.

Ms. Hunt voiced several complaints, echoed in the letters. One was that the serial had been broadcast in poor time slots. In New York, it came on at 12:30 P.M., opposite the No. 1 soap, "The Young and the Restless." In some cities, Ms. Hunt said, "Generations" came on at 2:30 A.M. She also said that the soap had not been given enough time on the air to develop an audience. Were Ratings Accurate?

She questioned whether the show's low Nielsen ratings accurately reflected the number of viewers. "There are few Nielsen boxes in homes in minority communities," she said. A Nielsen Media Research vice president, Jack Loftus, said yesterday that 11 percent of households in the Nielsen population sample are black.

Mr. Maynor, the NBC spokesman, said the network had dropped "Generations" "because it didn't get the size of audience we wanted."

"We wanted more than we had," he continued. "It was the lowest-rated soap opera on the air. It had the smallest audience, it didn't deliver for advertisers and it wasn't attractive to affiliates."

Consequently, he said, the network does not intend to revive the show. Creator of the Show

Sally Sussman, a writer who had received two Emmy award nominations as a member of the writing staff of "The Young and the Restless," created "Generations," serving as both its executive producer and head writer.

In a telephone interview, she said, "I came up with the idea four years ago and sold it to NBC to create the first racially balanced show." She said it had been well received .

"Most shows are given more than two years to find an audience," she said. "The nature of the soap opera business is that it takes two years to find itself and find an audience. The current climate at NBC, in terms of economics, did not lend itself to continuing the show. It was expensive to produce and had a soft advertising market. And they decided to cancel. It was a valid reason from their perspective, but I think it was short-sighted."

In New York, the editor in chief of Soap Opera Weekly, Mimi Torchin, agreed. "It was intelligent and fast moving," she said. "A new show always gets off to a slow start. They're always terrible in the beginning. Until you are in these people's lives, know the background, it's hard to get involved, until you care about them."

The probationary period for most serials is, she agreed, usually two years. For example, she said, NBC dropped "Texas" only after 28 months. She also cited "Loving" and "Santa Barbara" as two long-running soaps that have never achieved high ratings.

Ms. Torchin, speaking of the "Generations" cancellation, said: "Blacks are only 11 percent of the total viewing audience, and there was not enough of a black audience to watch it." She added: "It was known as 'the black soap' in the heartland. There's still a lot of racism and whether it was racism per se, there was resistance."

So Rita Lakin helped create Flamingo Road--the fairly well known mystery author? Who also wrote on the original 60s Peyton Place, and the Next Generation TV movie, Dynasty, etc?

Since lately I've been especially interested in the David Jacobs/Lorimar soaps, I have to ask, just how involved was he? I know he worked at Family (which led to a few primetime soap writers, but also led to the Herskovitz/Zwick domestic dramas like thirtysomething. As I've said on here ad nauseum I wouldn't quite classify them as primetime soaps--though they're some of my all time fave shows, so it's interesting that in a way Family, a show I'malways tempted tobuy on DVD but have not seen yet, seemed to kinda mix these genres--though I know it wasn't truly a serial). And then he submitted a story based around the concept of Scenes from a Marriage, the network said they wanted a drama set in the south, he did Dallas, left after overseeing 8 episodes and repitched his original idea as a spin off and stayed at Knots Landing at least for a little while in some capacity--it seems Knots was his true baby, not Dallas. Yet, I don't think anyone ever classifies him as a headwriter/show runner?

He also was an exec producer on MidlandHeights, and Berrenger's as has been mentioned as well as some other non soaps(the Dr Quinn forerunner, Paradise). Anyway, in the late 90s Ann Margaret stared in a show by him that has been called both Homestead and Four Corners. It ran as a tv movie and for four episodes--does anyone remember this? Was it a primetime soap or something diff? For a show that ran so recently, it seems odd so little exists on it.

The other show he helped create in the early 80s was a late night soap--I think CBS aired it Friday nights at 11:35 (premiering with an hour episode, followed by 35 minute episodes). Behind the Screen, it took place backstage of a soap opera, and Michele Lee made an appearance as herself. This is the only LATE night network soap I can think of (RIP 13 Bourbon St), and ran from late 1981 through to 1982. Does anyone have ANY memory of this? I can't find any clips or photographs and it fascinates me.

10 episodes of UK QAF is all it ran (the first series was 8, 35 minute episodes--dunno why the odd time length--Series two was one movie, or two 50 minute episodes) I belong to imdb,but I don't pay, but I didn't know there was some content you could view--is this new? *confused*

I dunno, I thought Sydney was still in many ways a throwback to those 80s primetime bitch/goddess characters. Played even bigger might have not worked--that said I liked Tracey/Jane Eliot in the role much more I almost hate to say--but part of that is by the time she essentially replaced Sydney, The City had finally found its rhythm and was better as a whole.

I've never seen her CPW or FC work, although I guess nothing would have helped CPW. Nip/Tuck, boy that show went down the toilet.

It sure did...

(But I loved her on CPW)

What did you think of Lauren Hutton? To me she would have been too low-key for a primetime soap.

The people at Falcon's Crest, Central Park West and Nip/Tuck didn't seem to think so

I meant I wasn't sure if we should keep this for the lesser known soaps, but you're probably right.

LOL I'm easy either way I created that Peyton Place thread for instance, simply cuz I didn't think all fans wouldnecesarily see this thread.

There's an old thread in canceled soaps for Dynasty and Knots but they have zero to no posts in them, LOL. I'm sure it's fine to discuss them here

I've only seen the pilot movie and first episode of Paper Dolls--on youtube but I have to say it didn't grab me as much as I hoped it would. It didn't really have any strong soapnames in the behind the scenes area, did it? Who's the Missing You guy? lol

From all I can tell, The Covenant never happened--I really wanna know what this surprising arena was! I think that they start to get it right when they kinda admit that one reason primetime soaps may not be doing as well isn't cuz they're serials, but because they're too similar--really there's only so many nights a week someone wants to watch a show like Dallas.

I kinda forgot all the trashy HBO shows they had--I guess RealSex is still on? (or is it?)

Found some info on IMDB--1985 did indeed bring a Lorimar drama starring Ray Liotta--Our Family Honour which was a TV movie then a series (dunno how long it ran, but under a year). http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0149504/ A viewer critiquemakes it sound like it was more about the mafia than the cop family:

"This mid-1980's series could hardly be described as groundbreaking. A critic called it "a series you can't refuse" and it was a pretty apparent effort at taking advantage of the "Godfather" movies' success. Throw in love between a son from one rival family and a daughter from another, a plot which was already old when Shakespeare used it in "Romeo and Juliet", and you've pretty much got it. That having been said, the show had an expensive, movie-style look about it and a fine cast. Ironically, this probably helped to kill it. Most soap-opera type shows (and this pretty much was that) take a good while to build an audience; with the amount that this show must have cost to make per episode there was little time for that to happen due to the amount of money being lost. (Another problem is that serial-type shows have to be huge hits in order to have more than nominal value as reruns; without huge buzz few viewers will watch again to see the outcome of story lines they already know.) This show was better than lots of the other fare available at the time but suffered also from being against "Remington Steele", arguably a better copy of James Bond-style intrigue (and starring a future Bond) than this was of "Godfather"-style crime wars, and was failing to hold for ABC the audience share which it was being delivered by another high-cost show, "Moonlighting", so it had to go. "

New York Times again--this is the last one I'll type out tonight, lol.

April 8, 1985

Soap Opera Formula Re-evaluated

By Stephen Farber

LOS ANGELES, April 7 - Week after week, two long-running soap operas, "Dallas" and "Dynasty," vie for the top spot in the Nielsen ratings. "Knots Landing" and "Falcon Crest" are generally not far behind. That success rate has inspired the networks to look for more sex-and-glamour-soaked soaps, but not all have been able to repeat the high ratings of their forerunners.

ABC's "Paper Dolls," a melodrama about intrigue in the world of high fashion, and NBC's "Berrenger's," the saga of a department store dynasty, have both failed dismally, and now some network officials are wonderfing if the formula can still produce hits.

"All three networks are beginning to feel that the market may be glutted with serials," said Michele Brustin, NBC's vice president in charge of dramatic series development. Lorima, the company that procues "Dallas," "Knots Landing," and "Falcn Crest" -- all on CBS -- as well as the recently canceled "Berrenger's," has no plans for more serials.

"THe form may have seen its day," conceded Jeff Benson, Lorimar's executive vice president. "We're developing a new series called 'Family Honour,' about three generations of a New York police family. Originally, it was going to have some serialized elements, but we've eliminated those."

CBS has no serials on the board for next year and, for the moment, is not looking to develop any more. Referring to the three successful Lorimar shows, Harvey Shephard, a CBS senior vice president, said, "We have three serials on the air now, and we feel that's enough."

NBC is proceeding cautiously with one show that Miss Brustin called "Semi-serialized." The pilot for the show, "The Covenant," is being shot now, and Miss Brustin described it only as "the story of a family in a very unusual, surprising arena." NBC plans to present theshow as a standard episodic series in the first year, and only if it catcheson will it change to a serialized format in the second year.

Of the three networks, only ABC remains partly committed to the serial form. The network has two new serials in development for the next season; both are coming from Aaron Spelling Productions. One, a low-risk entry, is a spinoff of "Dynasty" (as "Knots Landing" was of "Dallas") called, rather cumbersomely "Dynasty II: The Colbys of California." It will feature a few of the characters from "Dynasty" in a change of venue. The second Spelling serial, "Dark Mansions," a Gothic serial along the lines of the old "Dark Shadows" series, will star Loretta Young, Linda Purl, Melissa Sue Anderson, and Raymond St. Jacques.

Mr. Spelling disputed the network prognosticators who pronounced the serial a dying form. "Just because two shows failed does not mean the serial is bad," he said. "They keep working in daytime. I don't feel the market is saturated. Maybe serials will have to take a new form, and that's why we've given 'Dark Mansions' a supernatural angle."

Because successful serialscan be so lucrative, the networks have been analysing this year's failures to see if they can learn from their mistakes. Mr. Shephard believes that "Paper Dolls" and "Berrenger's" made a fundamental miscalculation. "The serials that do work," he observed, "all have a strong family unit at the center. In 'Paper Dolls' and 'Berrenger's,' there was moreemphasis on business than on family."

In the case ofthecanceled "Paper Dolls," theshow's executive producer, Leonard Goldberg, blames the scheduling of theshow. "A serial must have constant exposure," Mr. Goldberg said. "Otherwise people can't remember the characters. 'Paper Dolls' was preempted three times in the first eitht weeks, and that's fatal."

He acknowledged, however, several of his own errors. "We had far, far too many characters," he said. "We had about 18 or 19 running characters, and we should have eliminated at least a third of those. Also, we needed stronger positive characters. The evil characters are, of course, a lot of fun on a serial, but they must have formidable opposition, and we didn't have any of that."

In the case of"Berrenger's," Miss Brustin said that its Saturday night time slot may have doomed it from the start. "We were expecing a low share to begin with," she said. "But it turned out to be much lower than we could tolerate."

Jeff Benson of Lormar agreed that the soap opera's time slot was a factor. "Our research," he said, "shows that video-casette recorder use is at its highest level at 10 o'clock on Saturday night. Research also showed that people weren't interested in a department store as a millieu."

"If we do another serial," Miss Brustin said, "the arenamust be so unique that people will not be remindedof other shows they're already watching. Or, failing that, there must be a huge star attached to it-- someone whom people have not see for a very long time and are dying to see again. We hope 'The Covenant' will prove both of those qualities correct."

The 81 ABC movie was primetime.

In 83,NBC developed the daytime version with Pat Falken Smith as writer,Doris Quinlan,producer and starring Susan Flannery,

So the pilot cast you mentioned was for the Daytime? Or was there intention fora primetime pilot too?

*edit* I get what youmean--the MOVIE was a possible pilot in itself.

Thanks PR--so it was set to be a primetime show, right?

I'd never seen the original QAF, minus a clip of a scene with Aden Gillen and Chris...blanking on the last name, sorry; the scene aired on one of those LOOK AT THIS SHOCKING PROGRAM WHICH AIRS IN ANOTHER COUNTRY!! specials HBO used to run back when they weren't so far up their own ass. Still, I was annoyed by the early publicity for the show, which kept on about how it was so brave and daring. And then Hal Sparks made some stupid comments which bothered me. I still watched but wasn't really all that impressed. My big problems were I didn't care for the casting of Brian or Justin, the actors didn't impress me and I didn't see any chemistry and I didn't care about their relationship (Justin seemed to pout or smirk in every scene). But certainly that was not a majority opinion and I realize a lot of people loved Brian/Justin and they kept the show going. I mostly enjoyed Ben/Mike and their stories.

The UK Queer as Folk (at least the first short series, the followup series/movie is pretty useless) remains one of my fave TV projects ever. But it has a lot to do with when I saw it in my life (and, as weird as it seems to say now, how unapologetic it was which at the time, just over ten years back, was quite rare--no need to be politically correct with how they show gays, etc, something the American one stuggled with). The acting and scriptwork are flawless though (you mean Charlie Hunnam I believe), and the early American episodes were particularly frustrating because they were based very closely on the early UK episodes but, for instance, the dialogue would be re-written to have a very witless one liner--ie it was all dumbed down. It did get better when it struck its own path (I think maybe C and L should have just been inspired by the UK show and done their own setup, because really much of what brough them down was wanting to do an "everything for every gay and lesbian" show based on a UK show that was purposefully NOT that kind of program).

I remember Hal Sparks making those dumb comments about how much he hated kissing a man, etc. Booo. I think he just wasn't thinking.

Justin is a character I HATED--he was so bratty and obnoxious and seemed to act so priviledged and justified--so did Nathan in the UK series but that felt much more real (partly as he was younger in the UK one--something they changed due to worried censors) and he outgrewit. Neither Justin nor Brian had any character growth (I have no idea why anyone would stay friends with Brian as long as his friends did with the way he behaved), and like you said wereplayed by lesser actors (the UK equivalents were less typically handsome but their acting did a lot for the roles). And of course the couple was never meant to be remotely the endgame, just the catalyst for why these three characters knew each other, in the UK series. In the US one they became some unconvincing "Great Love" story. I didn't know they had any fans to be honest--me and my friends would routinely watch and mock them. I agree with your other comments--you should check out the UK series if you ever have the chance (I know its N American release has been pretty spotty), though it probably won'tbe as impressive looking back on it than it was before the remake, etc. It's also I think the best thing Russell Davies ever did (well I'm pretty mixed on his sci fi writing, though for all its controversy in the gay community I thought Bob and Rose was pretty great too).

What is odd is that it hasn't led to more similar programming. I mean L Word I guess was the lesbian equivalent (and Ithought the first season of L Word was quite strong--I remember the Advocate had a great article by a gay man who said why he thought L Word was much better than the US QAF which I agreed with--but I lost interest in the second year and the later seasons looked pretty ridiculous). But, while I'm allfor more integrated programming with gay characters than just gay ghetto shows,it's odd that with QAF's relative success cable has nothing like it now. The uber low budget crap like Dante's Cove do NOT count, IMHO.

Yeah, they did a decent job on Leap Years of showing a bisexual character. I thought the guy who played him was wooden and dull, but he's gone on to a lot. Garret Dilahunt. I think he was on Deadwood, and played Jesus on Book of Daniel.

I remember those Showtime shows from back then -- Chris Isaak Show, Going to California, Leap Years. None of which are ever shown again or even out on DVD, I believe.

A lot of Showtime stuff vanishes, yet the same reruns of Love Street have aired for over 15 years...

I'd still like to know more about 80s Showtime works, besides their gay sitcom of course, but all their serials like New Day in Eden, that Country Western one by Pat Falken Smith, etc. They've just vanished it seems.

I'mnearly certain at least some of Chris Isaak is on DVD--the rest isn't I don't think. And yes Dilahunt is pretty but bland (He's married to Hurd in real life, I think they met doing a play before the show).

Hey, I saw her in What's New Pussycat? when I was 8 and I've loved her ever since. Underrated lady and troubled, but most of the best ones are

I could be projecting, too. I know they wanted to put a retooled FR in daytime, so maybe I'm putting Scruples under that umbrella.

Geez, that article. This O'Connor fella must have really hated his job.

I've typed out a lot of his reviews (Loving, etc) and he is weird about soaps--I get the impression he kinda secretly likes them and the more recent articles he's a bit less down on them. Still--in the 70s especially even the positive articles about soaps had to mock them. Mainstream coverage of soaps still is pretty poor, but it's actually come a long way. They don't quite feel the same need to list in the most ridiculous fashion ever the plotlines, etc.

I forgot she was in What's New Pussycat!

Naked Josh was a Canadian show (you prob know that--but there was hype and some controversy about the government helping to fund it) though I forgot it got US cable exposure too.

I actually can agree with everything yous ay above. My problems with QAF is partly that the Uk series (which I saw when it first aired and Iw as over there--and was still a teen) was unliek anything I had ever seen before, and I loved it. To see the US (well US/Canadian) version first as a more watered down version with less guts, worse acting (though I grew to like all the actors you singled out), and more sub MTV sex scenes that somehow still managed to be less erotic, really just emphasised all my worse fears. Yet, I have to admit you're right that early on it was still fun in a cheezy way. I guess Cowen/Lipman really falter when they try to take themselves seriously. (Which was another prob for me with the remake--they actually said they wanted to make the show something all gays AND lesbians could relate and identify with... That's a big problem--espexially when Davies structured the original, and it was groundbreaking because of this, so that it was only about a specific group of people and in no way was trying to say that all gays are like this or to have a character everyone could identify with--that was also why he didn't do another full season as the network wanted, because he said there was no more way he thougth he could tell his story with the same character still all friends--they simply wouldn't be, his story was over. Yet the US series tried to repeat Brian/Justin endlessly, when Davies said the point fo the characters in his--the equivalent two--was that it was an infatuation, etc, but once the kid grows up and has had his first seuxal encounter with the older guy there's no reason to make it some great love--that's that. Which is much more realistic in my experience). So I guess they're too ambitious and don't have the talent to pull it off.

And yeah I remember the gratuitous male nudity in Leap Years (which I guess was a massive flop, I've never heard anyone even mention it lol). It doesn't even seem to have an online presence/following like many other recent flop shows have had (such as Williamson's Wastelands). I liked Hurd in it (I believe she's still had a lot of theatre success), and appreciated they had a fairly fluid take on sexuality, but it just wasn't very good (the flashback and flashforward conceit never really seemed to have a real purpose to it IMHO).

I loved Sela Ward on Sisters, at least the first few seasons. Leather jacket, bitter Teddy, rebel with the heart of gold? Loved her. I still have that scene in my head where she protested when an art exhibited was going to be closed -- "I don't want to take a trip on the SS censorship."

Even with the cliched writing and ridiculous stories (Alex's husband being a crossdresser for like three episodes, never to be mentioned again) I think the first few seasons of that show were very entertaining. I have very fond memories of them. The episode where Georgie went back to her old family house for Thanksgiving especially. And they managed to make the conceit work of the scenes of the sisters as kids/teens, the visions of the past talking to the present characters.

It went to hell when it started taking itself too seriously. Georgie's oldest son going bad + the story where Georgie had an evil psychiatrist who lusted after her and made her think her father had molested her (and this man was played by Patricia Kalember's real life husband!) were enough to drive me away from the show for good.

I did like Sela on the show. I think the cast often saved it. I have to admit I'm being too hard on it--and haven't seen it in years. I think my problem was that it did take itself too seriously--it wanted to be a 'real' drama liek thirtysomething but really should have embraced its pure prime time OTT soap element. (They had this same prob with much of Queer as Folk--claiming they were a realistic, relatable series, when the storylines got so over thetop and even kinda oddly mean spirited--like having the ugly character become an instant drug addict and be raped while passedout on the drug, whielthe pretty gay lead is shown doing drugs every night--in a weird way that kinda storytelling remindsme of the later years of Sisters).

I had almost forgotten completely about the "past characters" conceit--C and L had a similar one in Leap Years which never worked.

I thought it was intended to be a daytime soap? Or maybe both somewhere along the line.

I never watched all of Scruples. WeTV was showing it pretty frequently around the same time they were showing Hollywood Wives and Bare Essence a lot. They ran them part-by-part on Monday nights and then showed the complete story on Saturday. Sins, starring Queen Joan, was one of my favorites. Besides Joan, you also had the colossal diva talents of Lauren Hutton and Capucine, who I like to think I am a reincarnated version of (she died two weeks before I was born). Also, Catherine Mary Stewart, who would have been absolutely perfect on Dynasty and/or The Colbys.

HAHA The reincarnation, hey?

I dunno, it doesn't seem like it would work at all as a daytime soap to me but wouldbe perfect for primetime--so I could be projecting.

New York Times again (typos all my own )

Feb 1, 1981

The Formula's the Thing on 'Soaps'

By John J. O'Connor

The scene is set in what appears to be a dank, secluded patch of woodland. Two persons in elegant evening attire, emerged from a large, gas-guzzling automobile. The attractive young woman is anxious to get financial support for her oil-rich but cash-poor father. The middle-aged man with a British accent will agree to marry his nephew, whom he describes as "a Denver version of the Prince of Wales." Scheming Fallon Carrington would prefer to marry the ruthless uncle, Cecil Colby (names are often the most creative element in this enterprise), but he is far too sophisticated to be entrapped by a passing affair. "Passion dies, power remains," he tells her. As if that's not enough, he confesses that "at my age, vengeance is as sweet as sex." Poor bitchy Fallon is overwhelmed by such profundities but still manages to agree to marry Cecil's harmless nephew. In other words, dear viewer, we are smack-dab in the middle of soap opera territory.

At least a year ago, commenting on the growing popularity of CBS' "Dallas," this column predicted, with little fear of contradiction, that the daytime staple of soap opera would become the next dominant trend in prime-time programming. In television, success breeds imitations that, within necessary legal limits, venture close to outright duplications. "Dallas" quickly produced its own spin-off for CBS: "Knots Landing," which has been a bit sluggish in the audience ratings but, with booster shots from periodic guest appearances by Larry Hagman as the notorious J.R. Ewing, is surviving.

On the other hand, the standard format of soaps has no guarantee of automatic acceptance. CBS has already canceled "Secrets of Midland Heights," which dropped to the bottom of the weekly ratings list despite enough sexual entanglements to give pause perhaps even to Judith Krantz. But the trend remains unchecked. In the past month, two new weekly series have donned the sex-and-power mantle of soap opera with an almost shameless determination. NBC's "Flamingo Road," advertised as being from the people who brought you "Dallas" (Lorimar Productions), is on Tuesday evenings at 10. ABC's "Dynasty" -- the source of that scene described above -- ison Monday evenings at 9.

* * *

Starting as a 1942 novel by Robert Wilder, "Flamingo Road" has gone through several adaptations, including a 1949 movie that starred Joan Crawford, Zachary Scott and Sydney Greenstreet. The original offered an insight into Florida politics during the Prohibition. The updated television version isobviously more concerned with sexual shenanigans in the Permissiveness Era. The locale remains Truro, Florida, and major characters are the same, at least in name and general reltionships. Lane Ballou (Christina Raines), on the lam from a mysterious past, moves into a local brothel run by Lute May (Stella Stevens). Anotherpermanent resident is Sam Curtis (John Beck), struggling to advance in business and in his wobbly affair with Lane. Despite their address, these three characters are among the good guys and gals.

The villains ofthe piece areprovided by the town's establishment, particularly the corrupt police chief, Titus Semple (Howard Duff), and the greedy millionaire, Claude Weldon (Kevin McCarthy), who wants "everything the law allows -- and then some." Shuttling between extremes of heroism and villainy are the young politician Fielding Carlisle (Mark Harmon) and his dizzy wife Constance (Morgan Fairchild). Needless to say, Fielding is lusting for Lane, who, while going off temporarily with Fielding, is really hankering for Sam. Understandably confused, Sam tells Lane: "I'd love to stick around to see how you work things out, but I can only take so many cold showers."

In the episode I caught on air recently, Chief Semple was busy bugging all the rooms in Lute May's establishment in an effort to expand his blackmailing activities. In addition to recording a revealing conversation between Lane and Fielding, he discovered that Lane was willing to pay $5,000 to keep a visiting scoundrel from exposing her past. At episode's end, Semple was ominously muttering, "Lane Ballou, you just made your first mistake."

Meanwhile, between crises, Lane be found in the house's cocktail lounge singing songs out of the currently trendy country-and-Western catalog. Clearly, "Flamingo Road" has been designed to be seductively sultry or, at the very least, steamy. But with dumb scripts and dialog, poor productions and anemic performances, the result is merely damp, generating vague discomfort more than anything else.

* * *

Although the scene has been shifted to Denver, "Dynasty" remains very much in "Dallas" territory. In this case, as concoted by writers Richard and Esther Shapiro, the big oli-rich family in town is headed by Blake Carrington (John Forsythe), whocan be suave or vicious, tender or unscrupulous, as the occasion demands. On the phone to Washington after hearing about a leftist coup at one of his Third World oil sources, he shouts, "What does the State Department expect me to do -- invade the damn place?" Blake's new wife is Krystal (Linda Evans), many years his junior, resented by his scheming daughter Fallon (Pamela Sue Martin) and cowed by the family's haughty butler. Changing the menu from duck to squab becomes an act of unusual courage. Krystal once had an affair with Matthew Blaisdell (Bo Hopkins), who is now giving Blake some competition as a wildcat explorer. Matthew's wife Claudia (Pamela Bellwood), is a bit emotionally disturbed, but Matthew is generally protective, although he sometimes reminds her that "I don't like being married to a mental patient any more than you enjoy being one." Meanwhile, Blake's young and handsome son, Steve (Al Corley), wnats to strike out as his own as an assistant to Matthew. Steve may be a homosexual, but his initial tender and innocent moments with Claudia indicate that as "Tea and Sympathy" resolution may be in the offing.

* * *

Again, the ingredients for endless plot permutations in "Dynasty" have clearly been assembled with painstaking calculation. As with "Flamingo Road," the script may be slight, the production values noticeably cheap (but higher than "Flamingo"'s) and some of the performances little more than two-dimensional sketches. Yet, the same criticisms can be made of "Dallas." For all of its popularity, that CBS series offers decidedly second-rate drama. For reasons best left to the speculation of sociologists, the single character of J.R. captured the public imagination and "Dallas" reeps the rewards of blockbuster ratings. So, be prepared for even more sex-and-power exploitations. Indeed, the standard ploys can be fascinating. When in "Dynasty," for instance, Matthew and Claudia have an ordinary end-of-the-day conversation, it takes place in the bedroom with him wearing only a bath towel several inches below the navel. Or when Krystal worries about adapting to her new husband's posh life style, she is solemnly told that "the rich are different." A dav of nitty-gritty, a touch of fajntasy-- the formula is demonstratably enduring.

HAHAH I shoulda checked the first page of this thread

Pamela K. Long & Addie Walsh (July 1986 – December 1986)

Have you guys read Scruples? My mom had it and I read bits and pieces back in high school after I saw some program about it. I mostly laughed at the graphic accounts of sexuality.

It's pretty awful,though the miniseries is a guilty pleasure (kim Catrall and Connie Stevens!) It also was piloted as a prime time soap in the early 80s.

Emerald Point N.A.S. boasted two bitches with Sela and Jill St. John. Have you ever seen the *groundbreaking* telefilm An Early Frost? It was the first fictional TV show about AIDS, ever. We Netflixed it a while back and while listening to the creators (along with Aiden Quinn) do the commentary did I realize that they (Cowen and Lipman) were also responsible for Sisters (my mom watched it EVERY Saturday night, it replaced Hunter) and QAF.

And thelame Showtime flop(post QAF) Leap Years I thinkti was.

I have seen An Early Frost--for a network tv movie I found it very brave--my main probs with Cowen and Lipman is their cliched and facile take on major issues (plus I just think QAF destroyed nearly everything I found so brilliant in the UK original. Of course I think I still saw nearly every episode And maybe it's not all C and L's fault--the stroy editor on the later seasons was Gay Canadian playwright Brad Fraser whoseplaysI think are sometimes even brilliant--yet the quality of the show didn't really improve).

April 3, 1989

A New Ingredient, Race, Spices a Formula

By John J. O'Connor

Now in college, Stephanie, Monique and Adam are still as close to one another as they were as children when they were known as the three musketeers. Nothing very startling about that. But there is something new in this particular television mode: Stephanie and Monique are white; Adam is black. And they are part of a daytime soap opera, the television genre that has been noticeably, sometimes notoriously, reluctant to integrate its generally very white and very middle-class suburbs.

Now NBC is offering ''Generations'' - at 12:30 P.M. weekdays on Channel 4 - a soap that portrays blacks not as peripheral characters but as main participants, most of them members of the core families. The network, of course, has its practical reasons. Proportionally, blacks as a group watch soap operas far more than whites, the A. C. Nielsen Company has said. In fact, one Nielsen survey found that in 1988, black viewers for daytime dramas increased while viewers from other groups declined. That means the time has come for a very profitable segment of commercial television to go beyond tokenism.

The results? It can be argued, certainly, that blacks now have the right to appear as unbelievable and silly as whites in plots that are often shameless in their contrivances. But that is beside the point. Good or bad, soaps are a television institution, an indigenous television form. For a long time, blacks were simply invisible; then they got supporting roles. Now they are at stage center: indisputably visible. The social ramifications - not to mention the new job opportunities for an underused pool of talented actors - cannot be overestimated.

Created by Sally Sussman (''The Young and the Restless''), who is also the executive producer and head writer, ''Generations'' got off to a perky start last Monday. The opening sequence, drenched in soap-opera cliches, turned out to be scenes from a soap-within-the-soap, providing still another cliche of the post-modern wink.

Getting down to business in its Chicago suburb, ''Generations'' began shifting between the white Whitmore family and the black Marshall family. Vivian Potter (Lynn Hamilton), the mother of Ruth Marshall (Joan Pringle), was the housekeeper for the once wealthy Whitmores. Rebecca Whitmore (Pat Crowley), who is still fond of Vivian, her former nanny, cosigned a bank loan 20 years before so Ruth's husband, Henry Marshall (Taurean Blacque), could establish a successful ice-cream business.

Now the real complications. Rebecca's daughter Laura (Gail Ramsey) is a snob and a bigot. She is balanced by Ruth, who is still bitter about growing up in the Whitmore house and being the only black in an all-white school.

Stephanie (Kelly Rutherford), who is called Sam, is Rebecca's younger daughter. She is beautiful and dumb and has already seduced her biology teacher with an eye to passing the course. Monique (Nancy Sorel) is Laura's daughter, therefore Sam's niece. She is beautiful and smart and has already been mugged getting off a train. Adam (Kristoff St. John) Marshall careers about in a fancy sports car and sweet-talks every woman in his vicinity, when not being a protective friend to Monique and Sam. Adam's dad, Henry, is beginning to suspect that his son really isn't too keen about going on for an M.B.A.

Take away the racial divisions, and ''Generations'' is standard soap business as usual. There's the bare-chested fellow trying to wake up the young woman sharing his bed and murmuring proudly: ''I guess it was as good for you as it was for me.'' There are the passing dollops of philosophy: ''How quickly fortunes can dwindle,'' observes Rebecca. ''How much living we have to do now. Before it's too late!'' And there are the inevitable crises: again Rebecca, this time in a flashback - ''How do you tell a 9-year-old that the father she adored brought us to financial ruin.''

Pity the poor writers. They have to compete with the surrounding commercials. Consider the panting script for a new perfume: ''What the mind has never thought, and the senses have never touched, the heart remembers. Anything is possible if you dare.'' If she watches network daytime television, little wonder young Sam is already making such a mess of her life.

Addie Walsh was a HW at the end right?

HAHA I know it's beyond ridiculous, but I'm still kinda snobby about books--more than TV. I've read Peyton Place of course and even Valley of the Dolls (as a snobby, irony loving teenager ) but I don't know if I could ever pick up a book with Jackie Collins on the cover. I did see her last week, by chance, on The Wendy Williams Show forher new bookand was amusedby the interview, although Jackie's claim was she basically wasn't even an author, she just wrote down what sheoverheard at parties...

Aww I'd love seeing a young Sela Ward in Emerald Point Big fan--she was always too good for Sisters (a show I did NOT like--ironic that the creators went on to make my much hated American adaptation of Queer as Folk), so it was great wehn Herskovitz/Zwick finally used her talent in Once and Again.

From the regular NY Times TV/soapcritic at least in the 70s and 80s (who initially seems to hate thegenre but his later reviews seems to be slowly coming around, lol) found this--ironic that it was written just a few months before the last episode aired:

September 3, 1986

At 35, Soap Opera 'Search' Tries To Adjust To Changes

By JOHN J. O'CONNOR

THIRTY-FIVE years ago today, in a 15-minute live broadcast from New York's Liederkranz Hall, ''Search for Tomorrow'' set out to make soap-opera history. It is now television's longest-running daytime drama, hardly missing a beat when it switched from CBS to NBC in 1982. The show's pivotal character is Joanne Tourneur, played by Mary Stuart since that very first day. Her neighbor and best friend is Stu Bergman, still portrayed by Larry Haines, who joined the cast two months after the premiere. In today's half-hour episode, on NBC at 12:30 P.M., Jo and Stu will browse nostalgically through an old photo album, offering viewers a well-intentioned but skimpy retrospective of ''landmark'' moments.

Arriving at Jo's place, already decorated for a party, Stu announces that his new girlfriend Wilma (Anita Gillette) seems to have fallen for another man. ''We've been through a lot together,'' says Jo sympathetically. They sure have. Stu's last wife, for instance, ran off with a flaky cook. Worse, early on in the serial, a son named Jimmy excused himself to take a nap and was never heard from again. Meanwhile, Jo has gone through several marriages and the progression of her husbands' last names - Barron, Tate, Vincente, Tourneur - is seen by some as a reflection of ethnic awareness in soap-opera's land of nondescripts. Her last mate was disposed of through a divorce, something that would have been unthinkable back in 1951.

''Search for Tomorrow'' began life as, in the words of a press release, ''the story of an American family dominated by the 'old-fashioned' elders, successful and secure.'' Like all of its successors and imitators, the show offered viewers, predominantly women, an enduring image of a tightly knit community at a time when such communities were fast disappearing. The serial, produced by Procter & Gamble, focuses on personal relationships while studiously avoiding more of the unpleasant sociological and political realities of the ''real'' world.

While basic soap-opera formulas have remained remarkably steady -aberrant behavior is still punished, amnesia is still rampant as a device for getting out of dead-end plot situations - the surfaces have been changing dramatically. The younger characters have been taking over, and are regularly seen in various stages of undress that evidently help the ratings. The traditional soaps were jolted out of their endemic propriety in the early 1970's by ''The Young and the Restless,'' which offered the kind of plots and characters that ad executives now like to call ''juicy.''

Trying to adjust to the new ways, ''Search for Tomorrow'' has been floundering in the ratings and has undergone a succession of changes in the hands of several executive producers. The latest, David Lawrence, is clearly embarked on a make-or-break policy. Last February, the show's fictional town of Henderson was hit by a flood that served as an excuse to order up completely new sets, the main one being a high-rise building with a nightclub and a roof-garden exercise area where the camera can catch the actors toning up their assorted muscles. New clothes and hair arrangements were ordered to make the women softer and the men more stylish. Mr. Lawrence wants glamour, and today on television that means a designer wardrobe with plenty of jewelry.

More significantly, the serial's focus will now be dominated by the McCleary brothers, Hogan (David Forsyth), Quinn (Jeff Meek) and Cagney (Matthew Ashford). All three are what the trade calls ''TV hunks,'' capable of triggering endless romantic complications. Somehow, they also manage to represent different social classes. Hogan is a sophisticated and well-off bachelor. Cagney, the youngest, is a working-class policeman with a family to support. Later this month, the show will be filmed in Ireland to discover some unsettling secrets about the McCleary family. Taking a cue from other soaps going on location, Mr. Lawrence believes it is important to give his audience an ''exotic change of scenery.''

Meanwhile, this morning, Jo and Stu will chuckle warmly about the past even as their own futures on the program seem undecided. But no matter how many shenanigans are devised for the younger folk, Jo and Stu will be needed to put everything in a perspective that is unfailingly comforting. Today, Stu puts his arm around his old friend and says, ''Love is not like it is in the movies, is it?'' No, says Jo, sadly but gamely, ''not when it's happening to you.'' That is precisely the kind of sweet babble that could keep ''Search for Tomorrow'' going for another 35 years.

Thanks for typing up those articles, that type of thing probably takes forever.

It sucks--but I love sharing and discussing all this, so it's worth it. There's a great 10 or so page article on soaps (and specifically ATWT) from 1968 that I really wanna post on here, but I'm just not sure I can handle typing out something so ambitious (There's another great 1975 one about the "Schism dividing the traditional soap and the new relevant soap" that is almost as long and is pretty interesting how it compares and contrasts the P&G soaps--quite harshly--with the newer breed, specifically AMC, OLTL and How to Survive a Marriage). I keep tinkering around trying to find a way to print them directly to here... I'll prob find it after writing it all out.

Yeah, all I've managed to see from those three are opening credits that seem to appear and disappear on YouTube. I'm most interested in Emerald and Bare Essence. I've seen the TV movie of BA and I'm really interested in how it was handled as a series. That show was crazy recast too. And Emerald, I could be totally off base, but for some reason I get the impression that the writing was a little more sophisticated and down to earth OR watered down and vapid in comparison to the Shapiros' hit, Dynasty. Esther wanted Rock Hudson to star in Emerald but I guess the shorter stint on Dynasty was more his speed. Dennis Weaver was cast instead.

Purely from Schemering's book, I get the feeling that the Shapiros tried to make Emerald a bit more "realistic". Of course, in many ways it could be argued that's what they were trying to do with their first early episodes of Dynasty too, particularly before the Pollocks came in.