Why don't soaps go back to 30 minutes?

[quartermainefan]

Good storytelling isn't enough. If you assume some soaps are better than others then logic would say if good quality was the key the better soaps would not mirror the worse soaps in declining ratings trends. The bad soaps would drop and the good soaps would rise. Yet we see that if you take the best soap (pick any one you want) and the worst soap (again you pick it) they have the exact same trend. So quality is not what people seem to want or reward. I think what they want is a show not on at 2 in the afternoon or noon. Or if they do want that they want to watch it in their DVR, online, or somehow else.

[DavidEvanSmith]

The flaw in the logic is that all these soaps THINK they are producing good storytelling. No one is sitting down to deliberately hammer us with bad writing. The problem is that too many people have too many conflicting ideas about what "good storytelling" actually is, or what the identity of the show is and should be, or who the "stars" are or should be, and the process is so watered down with executives who don't let writers write, that no writer can actually do everything they want to do because of all the cooks in the kitchen.

The varying agendas and egos are killing soaps, honestly.

But, as for the topic at hand, I have thought that shortening some of the soaps to a half hour would free up time for the affiliates and might allow for more focused casts and POSSIBLY writing... but I don't really think the executives would stop micromanaging a half hour show any more than they do the hour-long soaps.

[jcar03]

I thought that exact same thing when I read the thread title. 30 minutes won't do anything if they are still telling craptastic storylines.

[alphanguy74]

I think EricMontreal said that... but I don't buy it. Firstly, you can cut the cast down from over 30 to something like 14 or 15... or here's a novel idea!! "shuffle" the cast! Use a CORE of 5 or 6 contract players, and let all others be on recurring. They would get story, but the recurring cast would be in "arcs" where they would be front burner for 3 months or so, and then put out of rotation and others would come in. And I think people who think that a 30 minute show costs as much as a 60 minute show are going by today's "shoot and snip" production model. If you rewound the production model to go BACK to shooting live to tape, THEN a 30 minute show would be considerably cheaper to produce. And the production people ahve gotten USED to teh fat budgets from the 80's, they seem to be spoiled and don't know how to tighten their belts. I still fail to realize why a show that was 30 minutes in 1974 was written by TWO people now needs to be written by NINE? The first cost cutting measure I'd employ is to fire ALL the hair and makeup people, make the actors do their own. (they could come in for their call later, too.)

[Scotty]

I agree...15, 30, 45, 60 minutes....it doesn't matter when the writing and acting sucks.

[Marc]

It's not absurd. I don't care for half hour drama. It's too short. And after decades of these shows running for sixty minutes, and being accustomed to them being an hour long, them suddenly being bounced back down to thirty would feel like a serious downgrading. If 30 minute dramas cost as much to produce as 60 minutes, there's no reason for them to go back to being a half hour.

[Paul Raven]

I think one (of the many)factors in the decline of soap was the expansion to 60 min.

Not that 1hr soaps are a bad thing,but too many shows expanded and blanketed the schedule.Previously,you could follow maybe 3 shows from say, 12.30 to 2,and not feel like a slave to the TV-even less time when taping.

Shows started going head to head.Back in the 70's very few soaps competed directly.

I'm sure along the way a lot of viewers gave up on shows due to time commitments.

Also,the shows began to lose focus and identity in the longer format.It allowed for more vcharacters but slowly the stories moved away from the core as a popular new character might begin to interact with other newbies and suddenlt,there were no core characters involved.

I think things might be better today had only 1 or 2 shows expanded and left room for other soaps,gameshows and talkshows.

[alphanguy74]

Your comments are right on the money. I saw exactly what you describe in my own family. All through the 70's, my mother watched Y&R, Search For Tomorrow, and The Doctors. AS soon as Y&R went to 60 minutes in February of 1980, she dropped the Doctors, she kept on with SFT for another year, but eventually dropped it as well. Too much time commitment. My grandmother was the only one who kept on with ATWT, AW, and GL after all the expansion.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

I think 30 minute shows would be easier to follow, I know they'd work better into my schedule. But alas, it won't happen...