Y&R: Week of June 15-19, 2009

[MarkH]

I'm not going to disagree, actually.

If we're throwing sh!t off the sinking ship, I'd throw Chapman before MTS.

But I'd throw many, many others off before Chapman.

I'd like to see Gloria/Chapman be given something with gravitas. Something really altering. It is cliche, but I'm thinking like a cancer that causes her to lose her hair.

But yes, the cast must be trimmed...so I'm totally on board with losing Gloria if it improves the flow of this show.

[Juliajms]

Well, I hope that doesn't happen. I like most of these people and Y&R does need a next generation. Without that you are very vulnerable when someone higher up the food chains leaves. Just look at the current situation with MTS. They don't have anyone in the 30/40 set groomed to step into her place as far as I can see.

Billy and Chloe have the potential to be the stars of the next generation if TPTB give them that chance. Colleen should be a major heroine too, but she and Adam both are in limbo right now. Who knows what will happen?

[JackPeyton]

well, i didnt mean the entire bunch of them... just some of them.

[MarkH]

I just realized something. In looking at the long-term Y&R ratings yesterday (in response to the Dickson/Rowell claims), I see that 1979 apparently wasn't very good for Y&R's ratings. In the chart at the link (I'm not posting it here again, 'cause people make fun of me), 1979 seems to have been a huge dip.

I still liked that year .

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Colleen, like Victoria, NEEDS to be recast ASAP.

However, unlike Victoria, I would be fine with Colleen leaving town for a few years until a competent recast is found. Colleen isn't really needed right now, but in a few years, with a better actress, she needs to be apart of the next generation of the show.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

HAHAHAHAHA

1979 sucked, the audience agrees.

[MarkH]

I can't be accused of unrelentingly, stubbornly defending my points.

But I better look at real numbers, because I'm actually wrong. 1979 was a banner year

8.6, 1975-76

8.7, 1976-77

7.8, 1977-78

8.6, 1978-79

8.8, 1979-80

7.8, 1980-81

7.4, 1981-82

8, 1982-83

8.8, 1983-84

So the huge drops were in 1977-1978. That was the Joanne-Kay lesbian year.

The next big drops were in 1980-81 and 1981-82. Some of that may have been residual stuff from the crazy 1979 year...but the ratings actually got high in 1979.

It was also the time when the Fosters/Brooks were being phased out, the show was moving to an hour.

Of note...by the time the Newman/Abbotts/Williams were in full control (82-83, 83-84) the show had rebounded.

[alphanguy74]

Mark, it was definately the change to 60 minutes. Once Y&R went to 60 mintues, my mother and several of her friends stopped watching the Doctors, and she stopped watching Search For Tomorrow the year after. Unless your'e a BORED housewife with no responsibilities or children, the shift to 60 mintues was too much of a time committment for most women. Most women would watch soaps for 90 minutes to 2 hours per day, and when a show went to 60 minutes, that really pares down the amount of shows you watch. Only my GRANDMOTHER kept watching all of her shows, AW, ATWT and GL. The dip in 1977-78 is what Bill Bell is referring to when he said the Kay/Joanne SL cost him a million viewers. Kay/Joanne was the biggest mistake he ever made and NOT because of the gay content, because of the timing, the characters involved, and the execution. If it had been done another way, it might have flown, but still risky for 1977. However... that same year you had John Ritter "pretending" to be gay for cominc relief to huge ratings.

[Scryber96]

Here's what I don't get. Ted Shackleford is a good actor, bordering on great. The network wants him there. He's willing to be there. So why isn't he given a decent storyline instead of these pieces of filler they keep throwing at him.

The week and a half that he and Gloria owned a major amount of Jabot stock (and what happened to all that stock that was in his name, anyway?) and were going to have to work with the Abbotts could have been a game changer and set years worth of story into motion, turning Jeff into an unscrupulous business man in the Blake Carrington mode and have an Abbot/Bardwell feud on a more level playing field.

That's what I find frustrating about this writing regime...they keep setting up situations that you can see the dramatic potential in, and then pulling them away with their sudden swerves into a totally different direction. For a week every Abbott wanted control of Jabot, even Tracy, and now a couple of months later none of them want to be bothered with it.

[alphanguy74]

Shackelford HAS given alot to CBS for 30 years, so I do understand why they want him there. I just think his character is mismanaged or something. OF course, Luckinbill can go before Shackelford, his time has passed.

[Soapsuds]

Shackelford is a great actor but his role sucks on Y&R. He is one big bore on that show. I just don't see him as a fit for Y&R. Is he on recurring or on contract??

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Recurring.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

That's a big problem, but it was MUCH WORSE during the Latham era, hell, they would even drop things after setting them up during that era of the show.

[Soapsuds]

N I N A...Gawd I've missed her!

[dm.]

They shouldn't let Tricia Cast go when the storyline concludes. Find a way to keep her there permanently!