I liked AMC from 92-95, but maybe that's just me. Oh, the show went through changes, no doubt about it, but I thought it was enjoyable enough. I liked the outrageous and downright campy stuff - Harold ruining Janet and Trevor's wedding, Opal and Palmer running the Chicken Shack, Janet's return, etc. I was just re-watching Janet's "Twilight Zone" dream she had post-surgery and I thought to myself, this is the kind of stuff that's missing from soaps these days. During that era, the character balance was great & there was plenty of romance, to boot.

Agnes was headwriter for Loving for a lot less than 14 months. I think maybe 4? Actually, I don't know specifically when Agnes left Loving, but she became the HW in November '93, and I think she exited later that Spring. Alls I know is that Laura McCarthy & Addie Walsh had taken over as HWs by late Spring of '94.

But that's neither here nor there, because more to the point: Agnes did not have to sacrifice time spent with AMC when she was writing Loving -- Bill Bell wrote two soaps for how many years? JER wrote two *hour long* soaps a few years back, as well all know.

Agreed 100% about her 91-95 stint.

I thougth Agnes wrote Loving for a little over 6 months actually (I was completely off by the 14 months...) I have a LOT of Loving eps from the past 91-95 and used ot have it in my head about who wrote when. Either way Addie Walsh's era was pretty good and kept the "old time 80s AMC feel" Agnes Nixon helped bring back to the show (even with campy elements like Dante and his "kitten" but Agnes Nixon has always liked some camp--ever since the late 70s on AMC anyway).

I'm inclined to call Megan's ratings success at AMC in 2004 a fluke.

The ratings returned to normal, and they fell drastically during Megan's last two years.

While the ratings have fallen since B&E took over, you can't tell me that they would have stayed steady had Megan not left. The ratings were falling at an alarming rate her last year on the show -- for all we know, she could have stayed and the ratings would be exactly the same as they are now.

Even if we discount the entire year of 2004. Megan was still delivering on occassion very high numbers. During sweeps periods AMC's daily's were usually able to deliver upwards of 2.6. Moreover the lowest we EVER hit was a 2.4 under her tenure. Compare that to the 1.9's and lowers AMC was getting during B&E and they make 2.4's look like a golden standard. The "drastic" fall was probably at worst a 2.4

I think the reason so many people tuned out was because the only thing on AMC to watch was the "Crash" story. Megan as bad as she was atleast was able to string multiple stories at one time. Be it the Satin Slayer, Zoe's Transgender storyline, Babe/JR/Josh triangle, Dixie/Tad, Bianca/Zoey, Zendell, Ryan/Annie, ect. She didn't manage to completely isolate viewers from other characters. Even Joe/Erica/Jack, Krystal's paternity secret were other storylines during her last few months. She atleast was able to give variety as crappy as she was. We didn't get entire episodes of Kendell blubbering around in a hospital or Sabinelee crawling out of a ditch.

I think the reason so many people tuned out was because the only thing on AMC to watch was the "Crash" story. Megan as bad as she was atleast was able to string multiple stories at one time. Be it the Satin Slayer, Zoe's Transgender storyline, Babe/JR/Josh triangle, Dixie/Tad, Bianca/Zoey, Zendell, Ryan/Annie, ect. She didn't manage to completely isolate viewers from other characters. Even Joe/Erica/Jack, Krystal's paternity secret were other storylines during her last few months. She atleast was able to give variety as crappy as she was. We didn't get entire episodes of Kendell blubbering around in a hospital or Sabinelee crawling out of a ditch.

I never really noticed that before, probably because I hated those stories with a passion and I try not to think about them. Looking back, McTavish did keep things related and didn't isolate the cast.

Edited January 24, 200817 yr by AddictedToSoaps

I guess it's differeing opinions and I know it's presumptious of me to say, as someone who watched longer than me, you're wrong but to my eyes, relatively speaking I think AMC had all the things you say it lacked, in spades at this era.

No biggie. I've always known I'm in the minority when it comes to MMT's first AMC stint. In fact, when it comes to discussing the golden era of any soap, I'm always in the minority, lol.

Let me put it this way: in retrospect, Lorraine Broderick's take on AMC was certainly more "AMC-like" than MMT's. (That is, if you don't count Myrtle-as-Mrs. Claus, or all that malarkey that went down in Jamaica w/ Noah, Julia and voodoo priestess Corinne.) I hated Erica's drug addiction storyline, b/c, 1) it was clearly another Emmy grab for La Lucci, and 2) despite the show's best efforts, I never bought for a minute that Miss "I am Erica Kane!" would be strung out on painkillers. (And the less I say about her kidnapping Maddie, the better.)

OTOH, the Michael Delaney/homophobia storyline was some of the best stuff I'd seen on the show since Laura Cudahy's death back in '88. But, overall, was Broderick's AMC compelling? Was it true to the essence of the show? No. The truth is, only two people ever truly "got" AMC: Agnes Nixon, and Wisner Washam.

Two other points:

1) Although Michael's coming-out happened during Broderick's stint, I've read, on several occasions, that the story was actually the work of four people: Jeff Beldner, Hal Corley, Frederick Johnson and Michelle Patrick.

2) In the late '80's, when AMC's ratings began to slip, it was Broderick who, along w/ Victor Miller, was HW'ing the show. And things would get a lot worse (Margaret DePriest) before they got any better (FMB arrives; Nixon and Washam return).

Khan, I echo all your points. Definitely, the only other HW besides Agnes Nixon who understood what All My Children was about was Wisner Washam; it's such a shame he is no longer writing.

I also agree with you about Lorraine Broderick. If someone were to put a gun to my head and make me choose between Broderick and Megan McTavish as HW of AMC, I would absolutely pick Broderick. However, Broderick's reign as HW didn't impress me entirely. The pacing was WAY too slow, and I'm not talking about the type of "Make them laugh, make them cry, make them wait" slow. It was SLOW SLOW. Her storylines were just ok IMO; they just didn't have the intrigue and magic that Nixon or Washam brought to their stories. I think that Kay Alden, had she been hired, would've written the show similar to the way that Nixon and Washam did.

Edited January 24, 200817 yr by Jonathan

I think that Kay Alden, had she been hired, would've written the show similar to the way that Nixon and Washam did.

And we can't have that, can we, Mr. Brian Scott Frons?

Edited January 24, 200817 yr by Khan

And we can't have that, can we, Mr. Brian Scott Frons?

Talk about missed opportunities...

I find it odd how Irna Phillips mentored Bill Bell and Agnes Nixon and Bell and Nixon in turn mentored Kay Alden and Megan McTavish, respectively. Yet, look how VASTLY different Alden and McTavish's writing styles are. It's like heaven and hell.

I never really noticed that before, probably because I hated those stories with a passion and I try not to think about them. Looking back, McTavish did keep things related and didn't isolate the cast.

When I watch classic AMC eps from the 80s one thing you notice (even more so in the rare 70s eps I've seen like that great Tom and Erica's wedding ep from 78 or 77 up on youtube) is how interconnected EVERYTHING and everyone is. Other characters discuss what's going on with other characters (since after all it's meant to be a small community), people bump into other people, storylines intermingle... McTavish at her best was good at this but not always--still compared to Rayfield's writing, it was striking how much mCT brought this missing element and how quickly back to the show. I actually am in the past month seeing it more with B&E--I can't remember who but I heard some characters discussing a storylien not directly related to them a while back which was nice, having the QUAD all be at Adam's "wedding" for Tad and Krystal was great to mix up the stories even as wrong-headed as it was I kinda liked having (I know I'll regret saying this) Hannah sleeping with Sam cuz it just mixed everyone up in true soap opera classic style (and yes coincidence has always been a soap device). I hope this is kept up (not to mention how fond of Joe B&E seem to be).

EVen having Tad mention Maria was great--if maybe an injoke to fans to aknowledge they knwo that bringing back Maria was badly handled and Angie won't be the same (it was funny cuz a firend of mine thought Angie--the recast Angie had met Maria but I knew she left about a year and a half before)

One thing though--those 80s episodes were FILLED with story. you watch a random ep from the early 80s and every little character has their own story going on--many are just minor stories but...

0I REALLY miss that--the only soap that really seems to be attempting it nowadays is Carlivati on One Life to Live (with mixed results so far IMHO but at least he's trying) The last time I saw it on AMC was in the late 90s when Agnes nixon came back (and brought soon after Jean Passanant's reign of terror--my elast fave AMC HW) We had so much going on suddenly--even small, but character filled minor stories like Marian trying to get to go to that Tea with the Queen thing, cuz she still felt she didn't live up to Stuart's class, behind Stuart's back with Scott, etc--hardly a frontburner plot but it adds to the sense of a real community. I do think Megan TRIED that a bit and for whatever reason was told not to do it--even this last tenure of hers you saw characters coming back (even say Livia) and getting hints of story only to have it disappear an the focus return solely on the A listers as decided by Frons. I HOPE that's going away too--I get some feel it is lessining a bit the past few weeks but...

The difference is, Kay Alden respects the genre, while MMT acts as if she doesn't. Usually, the ones who think they have to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, are the ones who come up with the most lame gimmicks.

One thing though--those 80s episodes were FILLED with story. you watch a random ep from the early 80s and every little character has their own story going on--many are just minor stories but...

That's because some writers, like Nixon or Washam, try to flesh out characters, giving them rich outer (and inner) lives, rather than use them merely to prop up their sensationalistic plots.

Of course, you can go too far in that direction; and when you do, you often end up w/ Claire Labine's RYAN'S HOPE at its' most annoying.

Edited January 24, 200817 yr by Khan

No biggie. I've always known I'm in the minority when it comes to MMT's first AMC stint. In fact, when it comes to discussing the golden era of any soap, I'm always in the minority, lol.

Oh you're the one who disliked Malone's first era on OLTL aren't you

As for Kay Alden I HANDS DOWN wish she woulda been AMC's current writer and expect good things form her. Still I'm not quite as 100% on board as some here. In the awesome All hEr Children book Agnes talks a bit (this is 1976) when her daughter mentions that a storyline on Y&R seems to be stealing an AMC storyline--how Bill Bell was someone she ahs worked closely with and prob the best writer in the bizz (she says--being humble of course ). ANyway she also says that his style and the style of Y&R are *very* different from what she wants for AMC or her strengths--especially the way he handles (or doesn't) humour and going for a more stylized, less 'real" feel. Kay did all her co headwriting and trianing under Bell (she was listed as his co HW on Y&R as far back as the late 70s) and I wonder if she woulda had a hard time adjusting to AMC's style.

That said AMC has lost so much of its style maybe it doesn't matter

Oh you're the one who disliked Malone's first era on OLTL aren't you (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dry.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

That would be me, yes, lol.

HAHA ok explains a lot

I think part of it for me is that's when I got into soaps--I was 11 in late 91 and got hooked on AMC just as Natalie fell in that well then the next year I ws hooked on OLTL too thanks to Ryan phillipe (sigh) and soon after Loving cuz of the Carter Jones/AMC crossover. Loving and AMC were my soaps though more than OLTL but I did really love it during the Malone era. that said even at a yougn age I tried to find out everything I could about the history of the shows (which, pre internet was WAY WAY WAY harder than it is now--I remember foolishly, naively writing to ABC asking if I could buy tapes of the first episodes of the soaps... Daytime to Remember was like Heaven for me though I just started to go online around that time too) So for me that really is my personal Golden Age of Soaps even if I knwo earlier eras were better.

Well, Eric, you aren't much younger than I am; and yet, I remember being five or six years old and running home everyday after school to catch up on all the soaps my mother taped at that time.

I know it seems incredible to believe but - hand to God - even at that age, I was completely gaga for Quint & Nola and Tony & Annabelle on GL; and Greg & Jenny and Jesse & Angie on AMC.

Edited January 24, 200817 yr by Khan

I believe it--i just wish I had a mother or grandma or someone else in my family who watched soaps. I actually got my mom hooked as a teen when she'd see what I'd watch on my videos after getting home from school lol

See Eric my mom got me hooked into AMC...I just sat down with her one day in March/1991 and watched it...been hooked ever since

She has been watching since December/1972