James E. Reilly: Freak or Visionary?

[RuAsRuAnAu]

A lot has been said and written about one of TV's most divisive writers (his most vehement critics pray for his death; his most ardent supporters praise him like an idol), James E. Reilly. Some think he is a freakish, buzz-grabbing writer, while others describe him as a persistent visionary. Also adding to his mystique are reports that he is a recluse. Just who exactly is JER? How has his contributions affected the daytime TV field-directly or indirectly? In what ways can he be described? What will be his legacy?

Love him or loathe him, JER will always be remembered as the writer who captured the attention of a new and heavily sought-after generation- the children of the powerful baby-boomers. To put it simply: JER is a very interesting man. Let the discussion begin about JER and his work.

James E. Reilly's Work

Capitol

Breakdown Writer (1984)

Days of Our Lives

Head Writer (1993-1997; August 2003 to summer 2006)

Consulting Producer (September 2003 to summer 2006)

Co-Head Writer (1992-1993; August 11, 2003 to August 18, 2003)

Executive Storyline Consultant (1997-1998)

General Hospital

Breakdown Writer (1985-1988)

Guiding Light

Co-Head Writer (1990-1992)

Passions

Head Writer (1999 - Present)

Consulting Producer (1999 - Present)

Sunset Beach

Head Writer (1998)

Ryan’s Hope

Breakdown Writer (1984-1985)

The Young And The Restless

Breakdown Writer (1988-1990)

[Sylph]

It would be disgusting to define him as a freak. And he's certainly not a visionary. Basically, he has his own share in the destruction of daytime.

[Ponz]

The man is not without talent and there was a time when he had the midas touch ratings-wise. However, I think he's generally been a destructive force in daytime. His success in the 90's fueled the perception that viewers need their "fix" of shock value and contributed to an over-reliance on stunts and gimmicks. I have less of an issue with his sci-fi content than with his general writing style. He bases plots on misunderstandings, writes stereotypes instead of real people and assumes that viewers have the mental age of 12 year olds.

I definitely wouldn't classify him as a "visionary" (at least not in any creative sense). His first notorious story (Buried Alice) was a Y&R rip-off and his second (Possession) was hardly original. At best, he identified a gap in the market and shamelessly exploited it. He's the soap writing equivalent of a second-hand car salesman. He had a limited bag of tricks and once this was exhausted, his career tanked.

[bellcurve]

Why is Jimmy Reilly listed as BEACH's HW? Meg Bennett, Chris Whitesell, and Margaret DePriest were the HW in 1998. Jimmy Reilly was credited as Executive Story Consultant. Granted, his influence on BEACH was heavy, but lets at least give the credit where the credit is due.

As far as Reilly as a Head-Writer, there's no denying the man has talent. The only reason why his work was so great on DAYS the first time around was because he had a staff of people around him telling him what would work and what wouldn't. The second time around, Reilly had free reign(or at least tried to). I think things would have been a lot different for DAYS had Reilly been allowed to revamp the show the way he saw fit.

I think he is a freak, but aren't most writers? Somedays, I wonder what happened in the Bell Household when Brad drafts up these really incestuous stories.

[dm.]

Exactly, JER was never HW for SuBe. I'm glad he wasn't.

[Sylph]

How can you say he has talent, Bellcurve? I don't see anything that special and genial in things he wrote... All gimmicks and cheap tricks.

[bellcurve]

I wouldn't say everything was gimmicks and cheap tricks. At least the first time around on DAYS, alot of his stories made sense and kind of had a purpose to them. Even Marlena being possessed...was the result of her affair with John coming out, Roman leaving her, and her being alone. Along with Stefano brainwashing her, leaving her vulnerable to Satan. Back then, it just seemed like everything had a purpose. Granted, character motivations and plots were relatively simple, but nonetheless, the guy used what you call a "gimmick" to lure in viewers.

I don't see what Reilly does being any different from Brad Bell's latest flavor of the week story or even stuff that Bill Bell and Claire Labine did on their shows. The only difference is that Reilly had an interesting approach to the soap opera. Was no different than Dan Curtis/DARK SHADOWS, but Reilly saw that the genre had room for a show that was off the beaten path that didn't necessarily have to be grounded in reality.

Would we call Robin's HIV or Monica's Breast Cancer a "gimmick or cheap trick"? It got viewers tuning in...and after the story was over, kept them. Reilly did the same thing with DAYS, except he used old ideas and reinvented them for a new generation of viewers...those who had never been exposed to daytime TV, all the while keeping a lot of the traditional elements we enjoy from soaps.

I'm not gonna say Reilly is the greatest Head Writer to ever walk the face of the earth(in fact, I really HATE his writing style on PASSIONS and DAYS Cycle II), but I don't think his accomplishments in the genre should be shrugged off either. It's not Reilly's fault that other soaps couldn't maintain a sense of identity post-OJ/Cable.

I'm not even saying I really enjoy that style of writing anymore(but I do admit I can't help BUT to look at 93-97 DAYS clips on the net), but I do credit JER as the guy that started the soap fix for me. And his DAYS during that period was REALLY GOOD for what it was.

It would be a stretch to say that Reilly is one of the best...but I do think he has talent. He just needs heavy supervision.

[stenbeck212]

While that ratings surge might have held true in the 90s, the novelty has worn off and people realize that they don't want their shows changing from a basis in reality to cartoons. "Vulnerable" to Satan? How vulnerable do you have to be for THAT to happen? You can get long term story for years to come out of an HIV diagnosis, not devil possession. Otherwise your show should be pure horror or sci-fi. It's completely insulting to have that craziness propped while more realistic stories are told simultaneously. TPTB need to stop trying to have it both ways. I firmly believe he gave the soap industry its justification in doing anything and everything to grab viewers' attention, even if the efforts look more like parody than anything else. Decades ago Dark Shadows was unconventional too, but I wouldn't think of it as a parody. The show was about something otherworldly from day one. Without Reilly and the devil possession on DAYS, we never would have seen:

Reva cloned on GL

The evil spa on ATWT

Passions

Vampires on PC

[Southofnowhere]

Both!

[ChangedBYSon]

Honestly--as someone who never enjoyed ANY of Reilly's work.

The only reason I didn't like his work is because of the "drawn out" dragging

of his storytelling, the repetition (same scenes over and over and over again),

the constant "fake reveals" (it was all a dream that she caught them in bed),

the annoying flashbacks, the plodding mercilous teenage-level dialogue.

I actually could have enjoyed his storylines, because I thought they

were interesting and bold, and could have been really entertaining, but his

execution and pace always killed it for me.

After Carly Manning got buried alive, every character on the show began to

talk like a 14 year old (dialogue-wise) and I felt insulted by that, though I

faithfully watched always.

I thought CBS and ABC's soaps were always superior to "DAYS" during the

Reilly years, but I watched NBC out of loyalty.

[Ryan]

There's no doubt that JER has talent, but I wouldn't call him a visionary or a freak. He's good when he has a team guiding him.

[billyjill]

The problem with relying on "shock value" or that "Never been done on soaps before EVER!" thing is that that means the stakes always escalate. It's inherently non-sustainable in the long run IMO.

But I agree that the pacing, dull dialog, and lack of general intelligence and emotional logic was what killed it for me. As for visionary ... no, I think he did some things well and was in the right place at the right time, but he's too attached to his handful of themes and stock archetypes to be able to grow with the times.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

I've always hated the lack of character progression in JER's writing as well. It seemed as if characters never moved on and were always stagnant. Case and point - Sami Brady, no doubt she matured *a bit* after JER's first run, but once he came back for his second stint, the character reverted back to being a bratty and insecure teenager. Characters could progress in the middle or climax of a story, but once the story was over, they went back to being one-dimensional.

[bellcurve]

That is certainly your opinion...we're seeing on soaps right now where social issues don't wield long-term story potential or the characters rarely, if ever, get used following. B&B is the perfect example of this. Everyone called it when Brooke got brutally raped. She went back to being the clingy, beggy whore she is and using the violent attack to get her ex back.

And, at the time, there was long-term story potential following Marlena's possession. Stefano had gotten pushed off a balcony and lost his memory. The possession drew Kristen closer to John, even though he had feelings for Marlena.

I think ANY story can give you longterm story potential or be the springboard for future story potential. Just depends on if the writer is willing to try it.

I don't think DAYS's efforts from 92-97(specifically beginning Christmas '94) were parody. I think DAYS, at the time, was going for something that was paranormal, but at the same time, have it be something that people are compelled to watch. To a lot of people, the issue of God, Satan, and possession are still topics for them.

Also, let's not forget that outrageous stuff was happening on soaps LONG before Reilly came to DAYS. Eterna? Time Travel? Casey The Alien? I don't think Reilly paved the way for anyone to do anything that people weren't tempted to do already. And some soaps still kept their identity well AFTER that period(Y&R and B&.

Paul Rauch did outrageous stuff during his time at OLTL. It's not like he was really grabbing those ideas from Jimmy Reilly. PASSIONS was just a huge disappointment from day one(I think several people were expecting the show to be a step up from Reilly's time at DAYS in terms of darker themes). And the people at ABC Daytime during that period(especially Shapiro and Behr) were dead-set on making PC as distant from GH as possible.

I mean, yeah, Reilly started a trend, but why does Reilly get blamed for everything wrong with daytime today? Soaps, in general, have gotten themselves into this mess because they believe it appropriate to copy each other. Reilly has his own style, which worked for awhile on DAYS and even for awhile on PASSIONS.

Blaming Reilly for the destruction of daytime TV is like placing the blame on OJ and Cable. Excuses, excuses.

[stenbeck212]

I cited specific examples of wildly uncharacteristic plots that soaps had in direct relation to his success on DAYS. If everyone else copied him, that's their problem. But if I know for sure that he was a catalyst for the tone of writing we see today, I'll call him out. Soaps have peddled romance for years, and past stories such as time travel were new ways of expanding the romantic element to the genre. What sense of the medium's history is propelled by devils, pray tell? Or the history of DAYS in particular? That's like a new designer chucking Calvin Klein's minimalism and changing the company by putting ruffles and sequins on every garment.