Why you never got into the Bell soaps

[MarkH]

It seems to me a lot of you are responding to a Y&R of yore. I'd argue that you haven't sampled the contemporary show unless you've sat through 3-5 full episodes.

And if you do, you'll see that some of your allegations (posing, pregnant pauses, lack of humor) no longer well describe the show for the most part.

But, among soap fans, I often don't find an openness to challenging long-held perceptions.

[applcin]

I grew up on the ABC soaps (and my mother had watched NBC, then some ABC) so I never got into any CBS soaps, until later when Edge of Night ended and I followed Larkin Malloy to Guiding Light. Were it not for him, I may never have bothered with CBS daytime at all. I've seen snippets of some of the shows here and there but I was never compelled to get into them. I think, at this point, it would be very difficult to lure me to one I've never watched unless the same thing happened and a favorite performer began appearing...and my faves are few and far between. It'd be easier for me to watch a newly created soap than try to get into one that's been around for decades that I never watched before.

[Sylph]

You are a par excellance example of that. A very un-experimenting viewer.

[rangethatrover]

[quote name='Kubla Khan' date='Apr 20 2009, 11:22 AM' post='709038'

The show seems a little too impressed with itself.

I have said the exact same thing. And most interviews i read with various writers at Y&R confirm that. At least for me.

[rangethatrover]

MarkH, that works both ways.

MARKH is that Deborah Adair as Jill in your avatar? I am stumped by it!

[Y&RWorldTurner]

I've enjoyed watching other soaps during their peak eras more (GL, ATWT, and GH come to mind). I think the thing what made Y&R so special was its consistency and identity. The show always knew what it was, and never departed too much from what made it successful. A lot of this show's traits are polarizing, let's face it, but unlike other soaps, Y&R didn't have too many different identities (like DAYS and the ABC soaps), so it remained consistent for a very long time. Bill Bell always said he didn't care what people thought, he was going to write the show he wanted to write, no matter what was fashionable at the time.

B&B always thrived on its ridiculousness, and in many ways, it's also changed very little over the years.

I don't think the storytelling made the Bell shows successes, it was their consistent identities.

[MichaelGL]

While others relied on car crashes, tornadoes, and etc, to further plot, Y&R seemed not to use such plots, in doing so it seemed boring to me as a child. I didn't like the lighting or audio for that matter.

I didn't really become a fan of the show until Jack Smith and Co.

[Cashton]

Very good question to ask, Sylph. I think the answer lies within how people view soaps. Y&R watchers - TO ME - do take their soaps seriously. They ask questions, they want threads to be sewn in. Y&R tells stories that really aren't overtly romantic escapades. They're not couple-centric either. DOOL is doing great in the ratings right now, but it's more of the same to me.

The only time I ever watched DOOL was during the 'Slasher' s/l, which caught me up big time till I found out that they were all alive on an island and that Stefano had implanted memories into Marlena's brain to make her think she killed everybody. I can't take this show seriously. i can take Y&R seriously though.

B&B is more in the vein of DOOl, but it has an identity - most of the core actors have been there since the beginning and they rely heavily on history. It did get into the Y&R umbrella during the sheila s/l's and those were my favorite.

Bell soaps, for the most part, are familiar, the characters always seem to have a through line and the actors (at least the older ones) seem to be better. I hate lumping Y&R with B&B though cause B&B has suffered some serious quality erosion in the past few years, but when it re-bounds it rebounds perfectly.

[quartermainefan]

There is a reason these perceptions are long held, and if the show changes how is anyone supposed to know that? Y&R fans have been insisting for eons their show was the best soap on the air, and I have to be honest, JER's Passions entertained me more. Maybe it changed, but I tuned in to see that building collapse thing, and I turned it off after 10 minutes. The only time I can honestly say Y&R got me to watch a week's worth of episodes was when Eddie Cibrian was a rapist and this girl was having flashbacks. That seemed interesting and then it was over and back to the staring.

[R Sinclair]

Hate to disappoint, but my answer really isn't going to be all that complex. I simply dislike the tone of both shows. Especially Y&R. As I've said in the other thread, I find it pretentious. From the writing to the production to the performances... it seems as if the show takes itself too seriously. The reason AMC always appealed to me was that AMC has this theatrical quality to it. For the most part, there's energy, it's alive, it's vibrant. The minute B&E took over, and the show went to the sloooooow, boring pace, that's when I tuned out for nearly a year. Y&R has that stuffy "epic cinema" quality. Swelling background funeral music. Slow moving camera shots from lamps and vases, angled up as if I'm crouching from below rather than being in on the action with these characters. It's like, "okay, I get it! You people think you're the classiest soap on the air. Can we move it along, please?!" The dark, somber lighting as well... ugh!

Even the Clear Springs collapse had to be the SLOWEST collapse of a building I had ever scene. That damn pebble that ever so slowly fell from the sky, hit Victoria in the head, and then watching her just as ever so slowly fall and tumble... Double ugh! I was like this show is slow enough... did they really need to run it in slow motion? It's redundant... like turning out the lights so a blind man can't see.

[Darlotto99]

their is a reason Y&R has maintained #1 for all these years and thats consistancy and familarity unlike ABC soaps where actors /character's change more times then changeing underwear that to me is my biggest pet peve with soaps they don't stay with those who brought them to the dance. just look Y&R has Jeanne Cooper as a front burner character and she's 80 to me that make's Y&R speacial.

[bellcurve]

Not to start a fight, but are you saying fans of other soaps can't take their show seriously or want their show to "have threads sewn in"?

I think anyone can ask questions about any soap and even find/study what they so choose. This board proves that some stories, no matter how over the top or ridiculous they are, harbor some sort of message about life from the head writer or from the theme of the show.

So, getting back to this thread...I remembered telling Sylph a year or two ago about how Y&R seemed like this fine dining, five course meal. One could always order takeout or eat the leftovers when the spouse brings them home. But it's the not the same as being in the restaurant, going through glasses of wine, consuming every course, having wonderful conversation with someone, etc. I think that describes my relationship with Y&R. I don't have the time or the energy to really sit through every course of dinner, but I want to eat at the restaurant every now and again(for special occasions) or have a taste of it.

I honestly only tune into Y&R when something interesting or buzzworthy happens(like Paris, the Kay/Jill caking, Phyllis tearing something apart) or when there's a B&B crossover(either from a character or from the production end). I respect Y&R for what it is and how good it is, but I can't really call myself a die-hard fan.

B&B, back when I first started watching, was far more accessible in terms of it's half-hour length and it's faster paced stories.

But once I began watching the show and understanding all of these characters, it allowed me to see what their motivations were for doing the things they did. And I enjoyed how Brad Bell screwed every fan base over and plotted with this relentless, renegade-like disregard for their feelings. But, at the same time, the heart of these characters was still there, the motivations for the actions were always clearly there, and we didn't vehemently hate every single character on the show.

B&B isn't supposed to be Y&R, nor was it ever supposed to be. It was supposed to be this healthy balance between flashy fun and character study. When I watched a B&B cliffhanger, I never thought "Oh, is Ridge going to die?" It was more like, "What will Brooke do without him? Sleep around? Mourn the loss? Both?" I never watched B&B for the unpredictable(even though the show has pulled that card out from time to time). I watched to see how other characters reacted to the big events and reveals that we all expected.

And now, almost a decade into being a B&B fan, I've ultimately realized why those fans spoke out against everything Brad Bell did to Brooke/Ridge/Taylor/Nick/etc. It's because the only stories he's interested in telling is "Who's the Daddy/Mommy," "The Love Quad," "The We Should Be Together, But Our Families Will Be At War," and "The I Want to Have Sex With My Mother/Father/Brother/Sister/Cousin."

Anyway, I've digressed. But as someone who likes B&B, but could take or leave Y&R(depending on what's going on that day), I can simply say I prefer(ed) B&B because of it's accessibility and because of my own personal taste in soaps and in television. It's not that I don't enjoy Y&R, I just simply prefer faster stories with a heart.

[Darlotto99]

GH, OLTL and AMC can have all the self made Disney hype, Awards, Magazine cover's, stunts, talent raids and HD crap and everything else that they try and throw at the Y&R and B&B ABCsoaps will never be better and im sure it eats up ABC soap fans on this board that they can never be #1 or #2

[Y&RWorldTurner]

We get it Darlotto99, you like the Bells and will defend them no matter what, we get it...

[alphanguy74]

Wow, youv'e just described everything Y&R fans hold dear. I like a show and actors that take themselves seriously, if they didn't... we'd have survivor or Big Brother. The Epic cinema quality is what makes any other shotcomings palatable. It's like the difference between a beautiful model having a bad hair day, and an ugly model having a bad hair day. I just think that different soaps can have different feels... like sometimes you want lobster, sometimes you want pizza. But to me, the camera work and lighting of the other soaps don't appear to be trendy, or theatrical to me... I look at those techniques and see something that looks cheap. something that's not well thought out, something that is being produced by bottom of the barrel talent.