Jump to content

Y&R: Potpourri Thread 2


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Love of Life and Secret Storm had sustained big ratings losses, partially due to network interference and partially due to changing times. The Secret Storm had killed off or written out almost their entire core family. We keep hearing the soap press and others tell us that Y&R is going to be just fine as long as Eric Braeden stays around, so Y&R doesn't have that problem at the moment.

If anything, this just proves that regime change is needed. Love of Life DID improve when they brought fresh blood in (Jean Arley, Claire Labine, Paul Avila Mayer).

I just can't excuse the hackery of this team by saying "No one cares, daytime is dead." The writers strike was the perfect opportunity for CBS to can Y&R once and for all if they were as sick of daytime as you say. LML would have gotten the blame. The strike would have gotten the blame.

Instead, Sony dumped LML and brought in Griffith and MAB. Then they did make an effort to bring in, after a ratings loss, bring in people who were seen as good hires (why I don't know), like Sheffer and Rauch. So clearly someone at Sony or CBS does care. I know they have lost some of their franchise fee since then, but clearly they still want the show around, otherwise we would be hearing cancellation rumors.

I can't imagine that in the space of a year and a half, daytime's climate has suddenly become so devastating that they can no longer afford to bring in a new headwriter or producer for Y&R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

If it were that easy, the soaps would be long dead. NBC has spent years and years now with a miniscule amount of soaps, now down to one, yet they are still uncomfortable enough with their youth demo in daytime that they aren't canceling DAYS yet. I'm not sure if the young demo is always the main goal in the end -- I think Passions had a good young demo, but was still taken off the air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I should clarify: most of them are just propping 4-5 central stars, and that's why it bugs me. They haven't changed character so much drastically, but they are all used as little puppets that have a job of propping the few "greater ones."

Plus, PLOT is taking each character hostage and they're forced to change tunes and opinions as time passes.

There was no logic. I guess CBS wanted to turn themselves into an ABC copy, and they have successfully done so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I mean really. We all saw Hogan nearly destroy DAYS and came VERY close to getting canceled. Who in their right mind would hire him to work on daytime's no. one show? Where's the logic in this? Could it be because SONY owns both shows and Hogan had time left on his contract at Days and and they bumped him to Y&R? How long are writers contacts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I really think you have half the story.

I think this was above staving off a lawsuit (or having to do a Jim Reilly and pay Hogan for years without working on Days). I also think he's thought to be good at plot-plot, and that IS precisely what MAB desperately needed after the first six months of 2008. So, they figured it was win-win...stave off lawsuits, and give Maria a plot machine that she could "control".

Unfortunately, what seems to have happened is that the plot machine got more uncontrolled power than it should have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Nobody knows, but here is a good guess:

His episodes started appearing in late summer 2008.

So, assuming he signed on in summer 2008, we can assume he probably has something like a typical 36-month contract with 12 month cycles. Or, maybe, in exchange for not suing Sony for the Days dismissal, maybe they agreed to do away with cycles?

If he has cycles, then they decided to retain him after summer 2009. So, this means they liked his work.

If he doesn't have cycles, then we would reasonable have him till Summer 2010 (if he got a 2-year contract) or Summer 2011 (if he got a 3-year contract).

Of course, if they hated him, they could buy him out. But I don't think they hate him, and I don't think they want to waste $$ on buyouts.

We have a lot of writerly folks here though who know this stuff better than my conjecture. I hope one of them answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Here's one of my main beefs with the networks. Their market shares have been dispersed. In the 70's, all you had were the big three... PBS, and a couple or three independent stations in each market (And many times, those independent stations had agreements to air network shows that were pre-empted by sporting events) The advent of cable has really killed them. Granted, some cable channels are owned by the networks, but many are also owned by the likes of Viacom. Instead of using the cable TV and satellite companies for sponsors and advertizing revenue, they need to ENCOURAGE, through public service annnouncements during prime time and daytime, OVER THE AIR viewership. Especially with an economy in free fall, and the addition of digital sub-channels... a FREE alternative to what people have now would certainly help them hold onto their market share. And it would make the affiliates happy as clams. They need to pump up the advantages:

1: TOTALLY FREE

2: About twice as many channels as before, most markets have over 20 channels

3: Superior HD picture quality due to lack of digital compression

4: Homeowner's associations CAN NOT prohibit a homeowner from installing a rooftop antenna.

If they did this, this economic downturn could have EASILY turned into a big homecoming for the big three. So many of the younger set don't even KNOW you can get TV with an antenna. The people who really MUST have cable will still pay for it, but this was opporotunity to get back millions of viewers wasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Thank you very much for the information!!! All the episodes that person sells are the ones which appear or have appeared in youtube, and some have wrong dates.  Due to that, I guess some people, who have rare and inedite episodes, refuse to upload them in internet, because then, others make money. I hope ABC create a place in the net where we can see all the available episodes they must have, as Retro tv did with the Doctors!!!! Retro tv did an awesome job!!!! Have a look :  

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Dina was Jack, Ashley and Tracy's mom on Y&R.  Joanna was Lauren Fenmore's mother, played by Susan Seaworth-Hayes.
    • The funeral was not onscreen - only the Brooks returning home after the service. Not aware of any available clips.
    • Very very well said!!! 

      Please register in order to view this content

      I would only add that Sam Ratcliff is frequently named in regards to certain AW comedic turns.  And, we know from Carolyn Culliton (tweet 2024) that Sam & Gary put their heads together & came up with that gorilla.  
    • I knew you would be so excited seeing your girl Brookey as #1!!!! She also WINS as to Frequently Married!!!  
    • Yes, Stacy does this both for early DAYS & early GH. I have written some for her, for DAYS. But just one tiny point & that is that she only deals with DVDs. I realize that is not the point of your posting but it seemed the right thing to clarify. I know that you know that video tapes is past, not present.
    • Hahahha I think sleeping with almost all of your daughters's boyfriends and husbands and getting pregnant... definitely gives Brooke the right to top 1 place. Long live the whore of Beverly hills.

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • CurlyQGrl has DVDs of some episodes, that they can sell, but that doesn't matter. What is helpful: they describe the scenes on the tapes, so you can read that as recaps without ordering anything. Doesn't really give storylines, though, which is what you asked for.  Here's the links anyhow. full menu https://www.angelfire.com/tv/curlyqgrl/menu.html GH page https://www.angelfire.com/tv/curlyqgrl/gh/menu.html GH 1960s https://www.angelfire.com/tv/curlyqgrl/gh/eps/gheps1960s.htm
    • I would argue that Another World never played "everything" for laughs. Even when there were comedic scenes in some storylines there were other storylines that were not intended as comedy.  You give 1988 as the end point, and Mary was on the canvas from August 1986 to February 1989, so she must have overlapped with the despised laughs you are referring to at least half of the time she was there. I honestly can't recall any real comedy that Mary would have been part of. I don't think she was lighthearted about choosing between two husbands, MJ's prostitution, Kathleen's death, or even her son Scott dating her daughter Cheryl.  I would have said that the amount of comedy depended on the head writer and there was more comedy under Richard Culliton and Gary Tomlin in 1984 than subsequent headwriters. I guess there was an outbreak of more comedy when Cecile kidnapped Cass from his wedding in 1986, but in general the Sin Stalker wasn't presented as funny, Mitch's return wasn't funny, John's arrival wasn't funny, Reginald wasn't funny. The tone was serious even if the plots verged on the ludicrous. And maybe that's what you mean -- but I would make a distinction between intentional comedy and storylines I can't take seriously for other reasons. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy