Sapounopera

3 minutes ago, Tonksadora said:

i don't think they would have tried to create SB in Bay City. Although I do know that they did repeat themselves at times. They did marital rape on GL and then again on ATWT, as one example. I don't think they would have done a lot of character creation. I guess I just think the show could've used some really inspired writing at the time & it didn't get it from Malone, who did try to write another show onto the Bay City landscape. Passanante certainly wrote the show very different. If the Dobsons don't appeal to you as a "what if" who does? I'm just curious. 

Marland is my answer to almost any soap question. He was ready to move on from ATWT, wasn't he? An answer with many "what if's".

1 hour ago, DramatistDreamer said:

I had always hoped that the show would bring Kim Ulrich, if not as Diana McColl for sporadic appearances the way Brian McColl and Beatrice and Penny Hughes sometimes did, then as a recast for Betsy Stewart Andropolous, especially when they brought back her daughter Dani in the late 1990s.
It could have been fun and if nothing else, might have made those IIC think twice about a creating storyline where Dani hooks up with the man who had loved her as if she were his own daughter (if anything, there should have been a passionate relationship between Dani and Bryant, with each family either supportive or against the relationship).

Lots of missed opportunities.

I always thought that Diana looked like the perfect Betsy recast.

I can't imagine what the Dobson's writing would have been in 1993. Would they try to turn Another World into Santa Barbara 2.0? This poor show was in desperate need for stability for more than ten years by that time and the Dobsons could not provide it to their own show.

I have to admit that I liked Brenda more than Eileen. Without the sourness Ashley was open to more story potential. 

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

I like Joey; Kit, considering her backstory, seems so dull to me. Of the family I thought her sister was the most interesting (much moreso than the dull role she'd played on ATWT before this), but beyond sleeping with Jerry she didn't seem to do anything.

Kit was the resident Rauch blonde of that era. I found it weird that there was another girl who looked exactly like her and was part of the Arena crowd . But with a more interesting actress, the couple would have much more potential.

But I also liked Amy more. She was part of the Cory Publishing crowd, friends with Cecile and more sophisticated. 

1 minute ago, DRW50 said:

I do think that's an issue for why the show was so lifeless, but story choices like Kit/Joey, Tracy singing every few episodes and all the angsting over Mitch and Mitch's "death" and so on just didn't do much for me either. It was mostly Cecile, Pat and Blaine who kept me interested.

 

I don't mind Kit and Joey. I find Russ and Tracy so boring, same for brooding Mitch, John McBain's long lost father. 

Margo Crove was meant to be some Opal Gardener type, but she felt more like a Rachel substitute. I like Kevin Conroy but Jerry added nothing to the show. Blaine's Arena drama would be more interesting if she was still married to Jamie or involved with a legacy character like Mike Randolph. 

Watching these episodes I keep wondering if Cecile was meant to be Mac or Iris's daughter. 

Also, way too much Racheĺ reminding us that she is the star of the show. 

11 hours ago, DRW50 said:

My main memory of those episodes is just finding the show incredibly dull. I do think that Miranda could have worked with better writing, rather than trying to make her a new Iris.

I think the writing was fine. The real problem was the directing, way too old-school for 1980 fans. (I don't mind it at all now that I am watching again. The first time a few years ago, I thought it was shockingly dull.)

Another problem was that there was no big new character in the younger crowd. They didn't really invest in a new charismatic character or couple. 

10 hours ago, j swift said:

While I agree that the writing in 1980 did not match the prior regime, but I would argue that the conception of new citizens of Bay City was intriguing.  Having a character based on the story of Patty Hearst was unique.  The idea of a character hiding from her past is a soap staple, but a nurse who is actually an heiress that had experienced a kidnapping attempt is unique.  Of course, it is ridiculous that after trying to change her name, the entire family would follow her to town, but I particularly liked Rick and his romance with Marianne.

I also enjoyed the Cecile/Pat feud at Brava. It was one of the only times that Cecile was written as smart and conniving. And, I think it was good writing to use their feud as the introduction of the Harry Must Die book which became the clue in Janice's plot to poison Mac. 

Given that Iris was being spun off to Texas, I think Miranda was good substitute.  She was well placed to be a rival for Mac's affection as well as a plaything for the nefarious Philip Lyons.  Also, Jason's relationship with Tracy was interesting and it is the only role that I enjoyed as played by smarmy-guy-specialist Warren Burton

It is one of those times in soap history when it is hard to pinpoint the cause of the issue because with the change in tone from Lemay, the loss of Willis and Iris, and the increased competition from OLTL it became a big ship to readjust.  It was still an adult oriented soap, which I appreciate, even though there were heightened story elements that were uncharacteristic.  It may be that I am a Tom King apologist (as well as a Lemay fan), but I think there is a lot of blame to spread all around at the time, and it wasn't just King's fault.

I agree eith everything you said. No crazy stories, quirky characters etc. The Cory Publishing crowd was charming and sophisticated, not oil barons and cowboys.

I really liked Willis. He seemed like a sleazy guy from a primetime soap. Ron Harper was not very interesting as Taylor, but his family was not a bad addition. They were not loud or sleazy like most of the new 80s families on soaps. At the same time the show had all these normal people and families with lovely older people.

Losing the iconic intro and music and replacing it with something cheap looking and generic was another foul. Cecile lost her charm with the recast, all these big and loud characters took over and then those "action stories"... All the show needed was some tightening, and a boost of excitement and it would be just fine. 

(In another world, Douglas Marland would so have paired Joey Perrini and Sally Frame.)

I have been watching some 1980 episodes and it is not as bad as I remembered from watching a few years back. (I can't watch 1981 because of the new intro, which I hate)

All that poor show needed was some stability. I adore the Cory Publishing crowd and love the scenes at Miranda Bishop's home. Young Sally could be their Laura. Ada's kitchen and Jim with Aunt Liz, give the show such a warm feeling. There was no need for a revamp in 1981, 1982, 1983 and so on. 

8 hours ago, Tonksadora said:

The reason that I thought I was looking in a good place was because Reva had just found her long-lost sister, Cassie, and they had just gotten custody of Tammy back from Annie & Alan, so it seemed like a good spot for animosity. And, I made a typo in the date. It was Thanksgiving time period 1997 not 1977. 

We all understood it was a typo Tonks. No worries. 

I want the ambulance opening back and Y&R to get rid of actors names in the intro.

2 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

 

Melanie Smith as Brenda Barrett 

I always thought that Melanie Smith would make a great Macy on B&B.

4 hours ago, Forever8 said:

She or Melinda Clarke were my choices for Phyllis before Gina was hired for the role. And I'm Jamie or Melinda wouldn't showcase how bored they're in scenes like a certain actress presently on screen. 

When Kassie DePaiva was playing Eve on DAYS, I thought in my opinion she would've been better suited as a recast Melissa Horton or even a recast Kristen Forrester-Dominguez on Bold and Beautiful. 

KDP would make a great Karen Spencer on B&B.

Why did they do these things to her? Out of the blue? I am so sorry for her bad experiences, but these incidents sound so random. Has she ever given a backstory?

On 2/2/2023 at 6:54 AM, SteelCity said:

I'm in love with the idea of Jamie Luner as Phyllis on YR. She's got that sexiness that Phyllis is supposed to have and plays the bitch well. 

 

This sounds great. The 90s primetime soap fan in me  also wanted Jamie Luner as GH Carly and GL Blake in the 00s.

2 hours ago, David_Vickers said:

But Nadia Bjorlin(Chloe) has been on the show for awhile now, why would she be returning? 

Because she has returned to the show about fifty times?

Are the ATWT McCalls considered successful or unsuccessful? Nobody hated them (except perhaps the father), but they were gone within a few years.

Y&R really tried it with the new families in the early 80s, but only the Abbotts sticked around. Was the Williams family a success? Steve left really soon, Patty stayed for a few years, Todd never showed up and Carl vanished. 

B&B also tried it with the Marrones, but I wouldn't call them a success. Then there was a time where Lorenzo Lamas and Sydney Penny showed up as a new family unit. Linda Gray was part of the mix.

I always expect to read that Chloe is returning, whenever I am opening such a DAYS thread. Happy for Louise Sorel.

Any idea why Brad never brought Amber back? He was fascinated with her for years. By the end of her tenure he had no idea what to do with her, but when has this stopped him before? 

I think it is sad that he didn't manage to keep Rick and Bridget as core characters. They were probably ruined by lots of crazy story and endless marriages, but who hasn't on the show?

13 hours ago, j swift said:

It is amusing to me that in 1973 Juliana McCarthy was 44, Jeanne Cooper was 45, and Dorothy Green was 53.  Each played the mother of adult children, and they were considered the "older" generation of the show.  Today Amelia Heinle is 49, Sharon Case is 51, and Michelle Stafford is 55 are they are written as perpetual 30-40 somethings who still get annual weddings in sexy white wedding gowns.  It just seems like nobody is allowed to age in soaps anymore until they hit their 70s

/cdn-cgi/mirage/73565c11c9d391dba00339780bba344eb08301b9a492cd30b86b462ff7cb7c22/1280/https://i.pinimg.com/originals/53/5c/09/535c099b69e6e19fdf915960fb8b2146.jpg

And whoever ages before they hit 70, is no longer needed on the show.

The show gives new characters and younger people no room to breath when a group of 50-60 year olds gets to play stories meant for people in their 20s and 30s.

18 minutes ago, NothinButAttitude said:

I think the reason why they weren't so chaotic on the P&G shows b/c during those times, it was apparent that P&G didn't play that mess and were heavily involved in their shows. Also, I the genre pre-Ice Princess (on GH) was rooted deeply in reality. From what I've seen of SB, it was like the Dobson were trying to take elements of what made GH and DAYS pop culture darlings and place them into their shows (i.e., supercouples being thrown into these grand, over-the-top adventures). 

You are so right. GH meets DAYS with a touch of DYNASTY.

I loved the 70s epic intro.

I will always have a soft spot for the 80s opening, because that's the ATWT I got to know and love.

The 90s intro was just fine. It was old school and I can understand why they felt the need to move on from the dynamic 80s one.

I hated all the 00s intros with people looking at the camera. So generic. Every soap did it at the time.

2007 seemed so fresh, dramatic and different. And with a great music theme.

The last one was sad, but I didn't hate it.

On 1/25/2023 at 9:02 PM, chrisml said:

I never got the feeling that the Dobsons cared about practicalities like consistency, history, common sense, etc. They just wrote whatever came into their minds in a given day.

Ain't that the truth. I can't believe they are the same people who wrote Guiding Light.

BTW, I can't remember Robin Strand at all.

I loved the 1975-1981 opening. Haunting and sophisticated.

The disco theme was weird, I couldn't stand the 80s opening. 1983 was better looking and the music was dramatic, but watching it meant that the good old days were gone. Later 80s intros looked cheap and uninspired.

Hold on to Love: I could never make sense of the graphics, but the music was fine.

Shockingly, I liked the 1997 intro. It was short, it didn't need to be renewed and the music was dramatic. I could see a more modern and sophisticated version of this lasting years and years.

2002: @vetsoapfan is so right; these were definitely boob implants.

 2003 was kind of sad.

Actually this was just fine. It was vibrant, the images were soapy and it would have looked much better if everyone was less blue.

The hands-opening: another crazy Wheeler idea. And after that... things got really weird and sad. 

7 hours ago, sheilaforever said:

 

If he appeared in 1986 it must have been on first or second day of January because he is not seen in any of the German Y&R episodes which started with Jan 10, 1986 or sotmething.

 

The Greek episodes also started with early January 1986. 

8 hours ago, sheilaforever said:

Jim Storm had zero scenes in 1986… don’t know his exit date, though.

He appeared at least once in 1986. I knew the actor from B&B -which started first in Greece- and I was happy to see another familiar face. I  definitely remember him on the phone with Lauren. Telling her that he is leaving for a business trip or something.