You seriously believe the show would be better off without veteran characters.... that keep the staple of soap opera, continuity strong? Wow what is your rationale? I am very curious.

I'm not saying AMC (or any show, for that matter) would be "better off" w/o the vets. I'm saying, if cooler and wiser heads had prevailed, established characters like Brooke English could've been phased out gradually; and while fans would've been nervous about the change(s) at first, in time, they would've adjusted. They always do. (Provided, of course, that what remains on the canvas is just as entertaining to watch...which, of course, it isn't entertaining...so, of course, my argument's pretty much moot.)

For example, when most of Y&R's original cast, the Brookses and Fosters, had either quit, been replaced or generally were phased out in the early '80's, there were fears that the show would not survive the transition to the newer (Williams, Abbott and Newman) families...but it did. In fact, Y&R rebounded and thrived, b/c Bill Bell made that transition as seamless as possible for the audience, who came around to embracing what was there.

Or, even better, how about when popular actors such as Debbi Morgan and Peter Bergman left AMC in the early '90's? Many wondered if the show would survive without longtime faves like Dr. Cliff Warner or the "real" Dr. Angie Hubbard...but again, AMC did. AMC survived without Cliff and Angie, without Candace Earley (Donna) and Richard Van Vleet (Chuck), without Kathleen Noone (Ellen) and Mark LaMura (Mark), and even without - going back further - Larry Keith (Nick Davis), William Mooney (Paul Martin), Elizabeth Lawrence (Myra), Gillian Spencer (Daisy), Dorothy Lyman (the original Opal), Kim Delaney (Jenny), Darnell Williams (Jesse), Hugh Franklin (Dr. Charles Tyler), Kay Campbell (Grandma Kate), Taylor Miller (the original Nina), Richard Shoberg (Tom), Marcy Walker (Liza) and Michael E. Knight (Tad). The only reason it can't survive now w/o Brooke, Adam, Stuart, Opal, etc.? Because, what's there to replace them? Is just plain bad.

Look, as I always say, I'm a GL fan, whose GL vanished seemingly overnight during the '85-'86 season. That's when most of the characters I had loved and adored in my early childhood were written out. Yet, I continued watching GL regularly until Megan McTavish. Why? Because, the show was what mattered to me, and the show was just too damn good. Perhaps, post-'85 GL never matched my love for everything before, but do I blame those years, and the absence of all those wonderful characters, for the show's decline? Of course not.

I see Khan's point completely. Nobody's saying we're better off without vets. But shows used to plan for the fact that there were veteran characters that would leave in the next year or two (because of budgetary reasons, or they wouldn't accept recurring, or whatever), and work hard to develop those who would take their place at the top during that time. It wasn't a matter of "one day they're here, next day they're gone".

Nobody WANTED to see Julia Barr off the show, but if you had a choice between the way they actually did write her off (not that you can call it that), or if they really spent a lot of time bringing Laura back, building up her character, building up her and Jamie as the English family, and then send Brooke off in a fabulous exit (i.e. NOT dying in a fiery car crash or anything like that) once Jamie and Laura are played by really strong actors and are front and center and well-liked by the fans... AND with a great Brooke tribute episode as she goes off, and we all cry, knowing her legacy is left on the show in her children, and she could come back one day?

Well, I know which way I would pick.

There was preparation made for firings down the road once upon a time, as opposed to this abrupt "let's pretend they never existed" mentality that exists now.

Edited January 15, 200916 yr by brimike

There was preparation made for firings down the road once upon a time, as opposed to this abrupt "let's pretend they never existed" mentality that exists now.

Or worse, "Let's kill 'em off - damn, we messed up! - let's bring 'em back as a ghost."

*looks upthread*

Wow. A lot of these comments lead very nicely into my anti-nostalgia "agenda." What a shame it's too late.

I see Khan's point to a degree.

The key thing about AMC with all the other departures he is talking about was that not all the vets were phased out. When Ellen and so many others were phased out you still had the Martins going strong. you still had Phoebe going strong. You had the foundation.

Even with Y&R you didn't lose the whole foundation. Jill was still there as she had been from the beginning. Also Kay was still going front burner. The foundation of the show still was represented. There was still continuity. Nikki who was not a new character - she had been there a few years - stepped up and took the front burner role too. It wasn't just all new.

Nostalgia and foundation still played a key role.

In the last few years, the shows are phasing out the vets and losing any foundation that the show has. Yes you need good stories to keep them but you also have to have that foundation. Older viewers who phase in and out have got to have stability. They need the familiar.

Days tried to move in that direction in 2007-2008 but the key thing that hurt was that even though Sami was not a new character she became overexposed and her foundation was not there.

Lately the writers have tried to move to characters who are not ready to take the lead without some support. Bell phased in the new characters on Y&R. The Brooks and Fosters just didn't disappear overnight.

In this day and age the vets disappear overnight and the new folks like Sami, Kendall, Greenlee and Babe just jump right in there.

The vets offer the stability. And since this was first about AMC, right now without Adam and Opal and a few others there are no other vets around to offer that stability. Ruth is gone. Joe is hardly ever on. Erica still is not and never has been a fully integrated character. Myrtle was more integrated than Erica has ever been.

You got to have that stability and sadly AMC has been hurting in that area big time.