DAYS: Thaao Penghlis attacks the late James E. Reilly

[EricMontreal22]

I haven't been her ein over a week so it's new to me

[All My Shadows]

Honestly, I respect everything Monty did to save the show and to make soaps as visible as they were in that era, but seriously...would it have been so horrible if GH had died? I mean...show had been on for 15 years, the ratings were in the basement. What would have been wrong with gently letting it go and replacing it with the youth-oriented, fast-paced, action-packed soap that Monty wanted? They refocused the show anyway, so it's not like they were concerned with salvaging most of the pre-1977 elements anyway. Keeping it as "General Hospital" made it okay to completely change a show's theme, focus, etc, from what the creators and original TPTB wanted.

[Paul Raven]

For whatever reason,people tend to think that when Monty took over Gh the show went over the top and sci fi.

in fact it was Monty's jazzed up production style and Doug Marland's writing that saved GH.

The focus was very much on the hospital,the vets were featured and the young love story of Scotty/Laura was just one of several.

With Like's intro,the mob story came into being,but a lot of soaps had had the crime element used up till that time.

it wasn't until the Ice Princess story that GH veered into over the top stories.

By this time it was solidly #1.

But the real renaissance was based on much more traditional soap ,

[EricMontreal22]

Paul with all due respect I know the history of what happened--but Marland did straight away turn the focus mor eon youth characters and we did start to see the show edited like a primetime show--less "theatrical" long scenes etc. I'm well aware that it wasn't really till Pat Falken Smith and later that it went sci fi-- But it did do very well for a while in that style--and it did seem to be a style Monty pushed on her writers.

All My Shadows I hear you but a) it's far cheaper for a network to revamp a flagging soap than do a new one--and at the time new soaps were relaly not doing well (For Richer For Poorer, etc etc) it was smarter to keep the small amount of viewers they had and build

[David V]

I think the major criticism of Monty's legacy was that shows became increasingly oriented towards particular couples and characters, and that fans tuned in purely for them rather than the show.

I'd argue that Reilly's legacy has been more negative/destructive than Monty's, but this can also be blamed on network higher-ups who had a misguided idea of what youth wanted.

[David V]

Well few shows created after Y&R in 1973 have been long-running successes apart from B&B. Ryan's Hope, Loving and Santa Barbara all lasted a fair while, as did Passions, but only Ryan's Hope ever got decent numbers out of those and B&B would never have been so successful were it not for the fortunate circumstances it was born into.

[SteveFrame]

Since this has turned to General Hospital and Monty here now - what I have always found so funny about ABC's edict to GH is that the ratings for GH were not that bad. I think some of you are under the impression that GH was doing really bad. It wasn't that at all - in fact they were not even ABC's lowest rated program - they just were not beating their competition at the time. THat was something that ABC wanted.

GH finished the 1975-1976 season with a 7.1 rating and ranked at #10 - in front of OLTL, EON, Somerset and RH

They finished the 1976-1977 season with a 7.0 rating and ranked at #10 - in front of The Doctors, LOL, EON, Someset, and Lovers & Friends.

Then the 1977-1978 season with a 7.0 at #8 in front of Days, The Doctors, LOL, EON, and For Richer, For Poorer.

I just never understood why ABC issued that edict when 2 soaps on ABC were in worst shape than it was.

As far as Monty, I never said that everything she did was bad. The worse things that she did early on was the absolute neglect of the history of the show. Steve, Audrey, and Jessie had been the heart of that show since 1963. Emily MacLaughlin was coming off big stories that had made her the only actress in the history of daytime to ever garner a Golden Globe nomination for her role. She was relegated to sitting at the nurse's desk on the 13th floor and that was it. She was hardly even shown.

I for one don't even think that Marland turned it to more youthful stories alone. He had some great stories featuring older characters.

But the things that Monty brought to the show and to the genre that have already been mentioned are what I and many others criticize. They were elements that set up the full principal of what is wrong with GH today. Just as Days has never been the same since Reilly wrote for it, GH has never been the same since Monty came to it. They both took the shows away from their center and sadly they never returned.

[David V]

That certainly was the case, but ABC's lineup overall was mediocre in the ratings with only AMC being a strong performer. That all changed around 1978, with a corresponding decline in NBC's ratings which didn't hit rock bottom for another couple of years.

I think Days suffers from similar problems to GH, in that fanbases have held too much sway. Also remember that Days were one of the most successful in following GH's supercouple formula starting with Bo and Hope.