June 22-26, 2009

[LeslieBauer]

Agree. Been there, done that. Jill Lorie Hurst should be hired pronto for AMC.

[DRW50]

Lorraine Broderick did well in 1995 but AMC 1996 and 1997 were increasingly poor, especially 1997 (Erica the kidnapper, Dimitri ruined for Maria/Edmund, the pregnancy Maria didn't know about for 5 months, all the Brooke stories, especially the sick decision to make Jim Thomasen into Laura's child pornographer, Skye ruined, the boring teen scene, Hayley raped by Tanner, the Martinication of Liza). Her work at OLTL also wasn't great. But AMC has changed so much in the past decade, it is so hollowed out now, Broderick may do a far better job with what is currently oncanvas.

I have always felt like McTavish just needs a strong producer to help her. She has not had that on her return stints. I know she can do a far better job with Kendall than what we have had under B&E or Pratt. She may also be the only one who can salvage Zach.

I really liked Richard Culliton's stint as headwriter.

AMC needs to make tough decisions, the way DAYS did last year. It's time to get rid of marquee names who no longer deliver. Time to go Tad, time to go Ryan, among others. Will Frons let anyone do that?

[SteveFrame]

I think Ryan, Kendall and Zach all 3 need to go. They are draining this show. All 3 need a good long rest and maybe come back later - esp. Kendall completely free of the two. If I never heard of Ryan or Zach again I would be happy.

I do not want to see Zach saved at all. For all the preaching about Ryan by so many Zach is just as bad and done just as much to damage the show.

I think several need to be given a rest for awhile or just written out:

Tad, JR, Brot, Taylor, Frank, Randi, and if they aren't going to do anything with Angie & Jesse other than being the town doctor and town cop then it's time to cut them loose or put them on recurring. Why pay them what they do to not really use them. I love them but it is obvious that there is nothing they want to do or are allowed to do with them.

Fans hated the exploration of Jesse's time away. Then even when a spoiler hinted that something might be up with him and Randi fans were angry. Them forever happy is not allowing much for them to do. And just watching them hover over Frank. Jesse has basically filled the role that Derek did for years. So we traded one ethnic character for another.

And what did they do to poor Dr. Joe. Did they cut his minimums taht much or do they just not want to use him at all.

I just don't understand why all that the last writers they have had can come up with is putting Zach, Ryan and Kendall on the front burner and leaving them there. I am so tired of those 3 characters, and none of them have one likable character trait anymore.

[Ann_SS]

Zach, Kendall, Ryan = Sonny, Carly, Jason = John, Blair, Todd. In many respects, the ABC soaps are clones of each other. When I watch these soaps, I do not understand how the writers could think that these stories are interesting or entertaining. The stories are repetitious, tedious, and illogical. There are too many WTF moments. I honestly do not think that anything can be done to save any of these soaps.

[DRW50]

Blair doesn't get half the airtime or attention of Kendall or Carly. I think that's more Marty.

SteveFrame, I think fans would accept conflict for Angie and Jesse, but not Jesse sleeping with his daughter-in-law. Didn't Debbi and Darnell even ask Agnes Nixon to try to stop that story?

I wouldn't mind seeing Ryan, Zach, and Kendall written out (although I do think Kendall is a very important character), but I can't imagine Frons letting this happen. That's why if they are staying, then the main writer I believe would be able to fix them would be McTavish. Not Ryan, but Ryan sucks no matter who is writing.

[SteveFrame]

WEll McT loved Ryan and the Laverys so I would not expect her to do anything but continue with Ryan on the front burner.

I didn't want to see Jesse sleeping with his daughter in law either. My point was it is just clear that if the story involves any conflict most fans are not going to accept it.

I mean so many were mad to find out about Rebecca. I don't know maybe I am just not a sentimental romantic or something, but to honestly think that Jesse could be away from his family for that many years and think he will never get back to them. It's just logical to think he drifted a time or two.

It was the same with Steve/Patch on Days. People couldn't deal with the fact that he didn't put on a chastity belt all those years away from Kayla. And then it didn't help that the writers played Kayla up as doing just that. She waited.

It's the same with the Luke/Laura thing. I hate that Luke cheated too, but come on folks I have seen the best of men fall by the wayside and give in to temptation. It happens.

As one of the sex therapists said one time:

Women need a reason to have sex, men just need a place.

I'm not saying that it is right for men to stray from their marriage vows because it's not, but it is just easier for men to do it. And Luke never was the most faithful person in the first place. Laura wasn't presumed dead long before he slept with Holly and got her pregnant. Then he was presumed dead and she married Robert. He came back and couldn't believe the new love of his life had deserted him.

With Jesse, Angie and Rebecca, I would have just loved to seen the story play out. It is just obvious to me that they ended it early due to fan backlash. Spoilers and previews just made it seem to be so much more than it was, and then it was over. And now we are just stuck with them doing nothing.

[DRW50]

I wasn't sure if they ended the story due to fan backlash, or some contract issue with Laura Koffman (it seemed like she didn't even appear that often), or just because Pratt doesn't know how to keep stories going. Plotlines seem to be changed or stop at the drop of a hat.

[SteveFrame]

Oh that whole month something was up. Several of us talked about it. I don't remember which month it was. I think Feb. But I do remember things to be going right along at a regular pace - followed the previews and all - and then bang it just all went haywire for awhile. It was all right about the time Kendall woke up. The balance went totally haywire and all. Up until then it was all great and then boom.

I can't see it being a contract thing, because as far as I ever saw she was just recurring and said to be for a few months. For what we ended up getting they could have gotten anyone. They were even previews that indicated more of the story and then it was just over.

I mean I don't even see the purpose of creating a daughter for Jesse at this point. What purpose has she ever served.

I can't remember what other things were happening then but several things went off about that time.

As far as Pratt and stories, I don't see that as a Pratt thing anymore. It is just symptomatic of the problems with soaps these days. It is all about plot and it seems so many of the stories just happen and are not even planned. I mean look at even some of Y&R's stories. Several of them have turned into big jumbled messes or serve no purpose. I still have yet to see the purpose of making Kay and Jill not mother and daughter. Was it just so that Jill could be dumbed down and made look a fool filing nails again. My feeling it was just to make Billy and Mac a viable couple again and look how well that is working out.

I love the saying by the new writer at Marlena De Lacroix:

"It’s so hard to be a cheerleader for a team that doesn’t even want to win any more."

And that is the way I feel. I have defended and cheered on soaps for years. It gets harder and harder to do so. Used to soaps gave me ammo to argue with but it is so hard to defend some of these lamebrain stories and characters lately.

[CSF]

IMO, I always felt it was way too gross to make Kay and Jill mother and daughter. Their pasts together were way too screwed up. It always would make more sense IMO to have Jill thrown to Kay's side as an ironic twist since Jill was initially hired as Kay's companion.

I think Billy and Mac would have worked out well if the original Billy and Mac returned. However, that clearly was not an option so the writer's need to move on.

However, I do see your points about many of their stories flopping. The undoing of Kay and Jill could have been much better if there was a follow up saying she was really a Foster still and maybe add some more to it and build up the momentum of their rivalry. I think the Phillip back from the dead is going to flop too. I would have rather them find out Cane was not Phillp and Phillip was really dead and in his grave and then Phillip IV returns from Iraq, gay!

[SteveFrame]

I don't necessarily think Kay and Jill should have stayed mother and daughter. I didn't like it when they did it. But why undo a big story like that if you aren't doing it for some good reason - at least other than just trying to appease fans. And so far I think that is all it has been for - other than Billy and Chloe.

It has not done anything good for Jill and Kay so far. I mean it is almost as if the writers don't want to give it up when you have Kay say things like she did to Murphy the other day leading you to believe she wishes they were still mother and daughter. I mean neither one of them have even bothered to find out what happened to Jill's mother or Kay's real daughter.

There just doesn't seem to be a lot of purpose to anything. Even Brad's death.

It's not just Y&R - so I'm not picking on them. All the shows have big problems. Ron Carlivati has proven to me over and over again that his stories turn into messes with no real payoffs at all.

I had such high hopes for Ron and MAB and that is the reason I am more disappointed in them. They let all that promise go and just fell right in line with the rest of the hacks.

[DRW50]

I think what they did with Katherine/Jill and with Phillip were about trying to "fix" what many fans saw as problems. I never had a big problem with Katherine/Jill being related because I feared Jill would be further isolated if they were unrelated, and unfortunately, that seems to be happening. I think the big problem is they don't think about what they will do with a story once it happens. There should have been more effort to show the complicated relationship between Katherine and Jill. There should not have been silly stories where Jill lost her money and had to go back to filing nails.

It's tempting for me to believe today's budget problems mean soaps no longer know how to tell stories, but I still don't think that is an excuse for Y&R. Paul Rauch should know how to tell stories. The problem is they have three headwriters who don't know how to tell them. Sheffer never has. Hamner didn't know how at PC. Remember when we found out right before or right after that awful DV Bordisso left the show that he was Scott's father?

[Ann_SS]

I don't know much about the fan reaction to the Hubbard stories, but your wider point seems to be that fans influence story direction, something which never happens on GH and certainly has not happened with the Luke/Teethan story. Guza and Phelps do exactly what they want, they always have. The Teethan/Luke story has not been abandoned or dropped due to the complaints of the Luke and Laura fans. Maybe online or vocal soap fan attitudes has some impact the direction on other soaps, but it does not on GH. Besides Geary was happy for the attention that he has not gotten in years. Guza and Phelps stayed the course and were probably pleased with the publicity.

Anyway, Teethan as Luke's son is a minor sin compared to the other huge sins destroying GH. The show is a mess. It has become "All Sonny's Children." The break from the mob is over and it back full force with Sonny and Jason leading the way. Spinelli as "romantic lead" is starting to suck up airtime again. The tortuous Nikolas/NotEmily/Teethan story winds on. I was enjoying the hospital mystery, but then Spinelli got involved. Now I ff and mute most of the show.

I am not a fan of vocal soap fans online and offline banging the drum, but I refuse to place any blame for the state of these soaps on them. The blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the poor storytelling and lack of vision of the headwriters and EPs.

[SteveFrame]

The lack of vision and direction is write and part of it is that they do listen to fans in many cases.

That is just like MAB letting her desire to please fans dictate stories that she wasn't ready to tell. And so fast at that. I mean even in telling one of them she has to go and rewrite stuff she wrote herself. It is so stupid. It is so convoluted you have to keep a notepad nearby to keep up with all the loopholes and stuff to understand it all.

When a writer has to work hard to sell a story by having this one or that one explain it to the audience. And the audience has to suspend reasoning then it's a bad story.

I think it was William J. Bell once who said he hardly ever read fan mail. Douglas Marland had listening to the fans in his rules, but he has also said that he didn't let that dictate what he wrote.

I would a whole lot rather have writers who are committed to the stories they want to tell rather than writers who waiver back and forth with things - never making any committment at all. Perfect examples are HOgan with the Lumi/Ejami stuff on Days and now Sheffer/Bell/Hamner with the Phick/Shick stuff. And so many others.

If a writer is not committed to doing a story and waivers, why in the world does he think fans are going to commit to it?

I know some on her accuse of being too nostalgic about soaps. I don't want soaps to be just like the old. I want them to have good stories using the history of the show and combine it with what is modern and the new approaches.

I also want writers who are committed to their stories, and writers who care about what they are telling. Irna Phillips had her problems but she was so committed to not putting false info out there that she kept a doctor and a lawyer on retainer at all times. Agnes Nixon did the same thing I am told. And Agnes Nixon epsecially worked to propel daytime forward, to give it credibility - today's writers are destroying any credibility the genre ever had.

I used to say that out of all the shows that Y&R held on to it's integrity. I guess I should be thankful they held on to it as long as they did, but I'm not. To me the show esp. with this Phillip story lost any integrity it ever had. It kept it's integrity and remained different than the other shows and when all the other shows blended into one mess and became just alike Y&R rose to the top.

I think the Phillip story is definitely a jump the shark moment for Y&R, and I think they will pay for it eventually.

[remos]

I have been thinking this recently too. I was at the check-out yesterday and looked at a recent SOD (I believe) and it was still talking about Days' cancellation - even when they are one of the only shows truly building right now. CBS looks like it's got no real love for ATWT and are just going to try stealing GH's alumni for a bit to see if that does anything (it won't 'cause they aren't the first to play that game), and it's hard to tell what their attitude is to the Bell shows. But ABC doesn't seem interested in replacing with reality shows or games, and they are the ones who took the initiative with Soap Net. I think all the ABC shows are the safest of the lot if for no other reason than ABCD won't say Uncle.

[Carolyn1980]

I don't think DAYS has to worry right now. I agree that ABC wants to be the last net standing with their soaps, and I think when they do cancel their soaps, all three will go together...UNLESS...and this is where it gets interesting. I could really see a scenario now where ABC tries to steal DAYS from NBC (which is doing much better than the ABC soaps right now), and dumps AMC (or even attempts to move AMC permanently to Soapnet in a "parred down" way, sort of an experiment).

DAYS (and Y&R) are both distributed by SONY, and SONY already has a relationship with ABC through their rebroadcast deals for the shows on Soapnet. ABC could easily make an attractive offer for DAYS (or even Y&R for that matter) that would enable the show to move to ABC Daytime. Heck, ABC could even offer SONY a financial stake in the growing Soapnet cable network. That's actually a common thing for cable networks; Lifetime is quite succesful, and ABC just entered into a deal with NBC/Universal where NBC now has a stake in Lifetime (and other nets, like the History Channel).