Khan

FYI: I borrowed my pen name, Michael, from Dr. Shea. Although I haven't seen one bit of footage of him, there is something about that man's history that has long fascinated me.

I don't think Paul Raven was questioning that fact. I think he was just making note of it here for anyone using these posts for research and/or statistical purposes.

I think the conventional wisdom is that TEXAS improved slightly when it moved to an earlier timeslot, but that that, along with a massive write-in campaign, was not enough for NBC to save the show.

To think, there was a time on OLTL when Victor Lord was written with a bit more respectability.

Perhaps I am just a candleholder (those who frequented the "GL Buzz" board know what I mean), but that is the kind of soap opera that, in my eyes, stands the test of time. You could run that today and it still would hold an audience.

Meredith Brown: "Is it linen?"

Chip Lucia (grins): "I'm not sure. Touch it."

Why do I feel like that was a come-on?

Unfortunately, I think it had way more to do with a terrible timeslot than anything to do with story.

That is just trifling. NBC could have pressured affiliates to switch THE DOCTORS to a late-afternoon timeslot. If it had aired at 3:30 or 4:00 PM EST, it would have been a hit with younger audiences. Guaranteed.

That...? Seems appropriate, oddly enough.

Knowing BM, too, she'd let him prattle, wait a beat, then smile and say, "Well, thank you, Mr. Jerome, I'll certainly keep what you said in mind," all while giving him that look that was known to cut people dead.

My personal knowledge of THE DOCTORS is limited. In fact, I have no memories of any soap before 1981/1982. So, as far as THE DOCTORS are concerned, that amounts to bits and pieces of Alec Baldwin, Lydia Bruce, Elizabeth Hubbard, Meg Mundy, David O'Brien, Jada Rowland, and Kim Zimmer. Based on what I do know from before that time period, though, from reading various story synopses and what-not, I think NBC gave up on this one too soon. Granted, it wasn't in the best of shape when it ended, but I feel like enough was there at the core - with Matt, Maggie, Mike and Kit; with Althea and Penny (it wouldn't be the first time a character came back from the dead); with Steve and Carolee and a sprinkling of new and returning Dancys and Aldriches (would Billy, Mona and Nola have even been written off for good if not for the quick ratings?); and maybe a new family headed by an African-American patriarch who comes to work at the hospital - to keep trying. A hospital can be a great community setting for a soap, I think, allowing characters from various walks of life to interact on all levels.

"So You Want to Be a Soap Star!"...

Looks like SoapNet weren't the first to think of the concept.

I'm sorry, Carl, I thought it was SOD's mistake, not yours.

"As for the few who remained, Amy married Belle - perpetuating the Amy vs. Belle conflict."

Yeah, I could see how that would keep the conflict going. (Oh, SOD, how your typos do amuse me.)

I fight so hard for these shows to my friends who scoff at the idea of soap operas having redeeming qualities. Then, I hear a name like "Mignon Sentell," and even I can't keep a straight face at that point.

Thanks, saynotoursoap, for the information.

I think Sunny's rape came much later, Carl. IIRC, Gary Tomlin wrote the actual episode.

"Steve" and "Betsy" were less than 30 feet away, and neither the audience nor the contestants could have cared less.

I wish Rod Arrants hadn't gotten the perm/afro. I hope that wasn't any Luke homage.

Actually, I think it was, although I can't remember who came first, Travis or Luke.

I don't recall how John Wyatt died. Was it a heart attack?

Also, I think the Corringtons went the wrong way in getting Maree Cheatham booted from the show. To SEARCH fans, Jo was "their girl," and Stu "their guy." Stephanie should have gone after either one of them, hurting them either physically or psychologically. That would have turned the tide against her for sure.

MG was right about the lack of focus on the subject of homosexuality -- especially where GL was concerned. I'm trying to think a gay-themed storyline besides Otalia and...I can't.

I wonder with these shows why they just didn't make more effort to revamp the shows in a way which would get them more money, as ABC's heavy renovation efforts with GH ended up doing.

Didn't ABC own all their soaps at that point? If so, then that's probably why the P&G- and Bell-produced shows on CBS were more resistant to change, because they weren't network-owned.

Also, in my opinion, Doug Marland would not have been a good fit for Search. Search was a small, quiet show. It was old-fashioned, but in a good way.

Couldn't you say the same about AS THE WORLD TURNS?

Nope. Brian Frons - yes, Brian Frons - canceled SEARCH because he felt the show was too old-fashioned and would never capture the sort of young, upwardly mobile crowd that its replacement, CAPITOL, would.

By the way, Frons would go on to cancel SEARCH again when he became president of NBC Daytime.

I want to say there were some Nielsen charts that actually showed Somerset's ratings rising to the point where it was at the middle of the daytime pack and showing signs of becoming a hit. Then Slesar was reassigned solely to Edge (in defense of P&G, Edge's ratings were really dropping around this time) and the parade of writers began.

But in Slesar's defense, I don't think it was a reflection of any dip in EDGE's quality. As with SEARCH FOR TOMORROW, EDGE's big problem was CBS' monumental(ly unsound) decision to move its time-slot, not taking it into account that especially where EDGE was concerned, time-slots made all the difference.

Conventional wisdom? Well, you could argue that de-emphasizing Jo as the show's central heroine hurt it. Yet, judging from ratings alone, SEARCH managed to hold onto its audience throughout all that. You could say, also, that certain HW's preference for crime-oriented storylines played as a factor as well. Yet, SEARCH seemed to be the kind of show that could support both crime and "domestic" stories.

On the other hand, when CBS moved its' time-slot and then refused to move it back...it wasn't so much the change that hurt it irrevocably as it was P&G's reaction to it. My belief is that if P&G had just waited a bit longer, SEARCH would have rebounded. It would've taken time, of course, but all that was really needed, IMO, was the audience getting accustomed to seeing their show at a new time. That's it.

If one watches RH for about three-quarters of 1984, all of the conventional criticism about how RH strayed from its roots in 1982 seems completely moot. RH became even more elegant and opulent under [Pat Falken] Smith's pen. Ironically, Ilene Kristen (Delia) was backburnered for most of 1983 (apparently due to health reasons), as was John Gabriel (Seneca). Two promising storylines--the romance of Jack and Leigh, and Bill and Siobhan--were deep-sixed by the fall of 1983. Siobhan found herself wanting a back-from-oblivion Joe Novak while leaving dependable Bill Hyde in the dark. Felicity LaFortune, who was so superlative as feisty and witty Leigh Kirkland, was reduced to bickering against the diva-ish histrionics of Jack and then was more or less a recurring character until 1985. As much as I loved RH under Smith's regime, this was one horrible move on the show's part.

I loved RYAN'S HOPE during that period as well. Granted, thanks to SoapNet, I've had multiple opportunities to watch the show's first 5-6 years and then compare it to the years I remember (1982 onward); and, having done so, I can understand why most would look upon the last 9-or-so years of its life unfavorably. Those who dismiss RH in the '80's, however, do so at their own peril. Some of it was atrocious, but some of it was good, too. And I think the one constant in all that, aside from the core actors, was EP Joe Hardy, a fine director who, IMO, gets a somewhat harsh rep for working with HW's who weren't as brilliant as Claire Labine and Paul Avila Mayer had been.