OLTL not going to HD next year

[marceline]

As far as the public goes, all soaps are exactly the same. There's no difference between OLTL and Y&R and DAYS and Search for Tomorrow (because they don't even know SFT isn't on the air anymore.) Actually, to the average person there's no difference between soaps, judge shows, talk shows, game shows and Sesame Street. They're all that stuff you watch for five minutes when you're home sick before you turn to Law & Order on USA.

[chyti]

Thank you, soaps being an art form or even an enjoyable viewing experience only rings true to those actually invested in the genre to the average person soaps are those corny shows that their grandma or older aunties watched/are watching. The average person with no soap experience is not going to sit down on day turn on a soap and become hooked (which by the way is how I got hooked on OLTL through John and Evangeline) they are going to either turn the channel or pop in a dvd. Actually the average person rarely watching broadcast stations during the day.

My sister who was a soap junkie and introduced me to the genre now watches no soaps and instead is hooked on netflix now that you cam get instant movies/tv shows on you television through a device or even her sons xbox.

[MarkH]

Wow. That is one of the best summaries I have ever read. When embellished with:

That's it, in a nutshell.

And this is why, truly, the current genre needs to be sunsetted.

The shows, their titles, the genre and format are too identified with another generation and time. They are only compelling if you have built up the habit of many years.

[NorrthCafe]

ROTF, friendships 'will destroy' daytime? You mean they haven't ALREADY!?!?

[DRW50]

If that were true then I don't think soaps ever would have made it past the first generation. Instead they had their zenith of popularity in the 70s and early 80s. There were many, many people who watched soaps at that time who never really had before.

If anything I think that the networks' efforts to gut their soaps and try to move to some new genre, not even knowing what that genre is, ended up doing even more harm than if they'd tried to respect some of the daytime tradition while building a future. Even the networks that have sunsetted their soaps, like NBC, have zero popular programming in daytime. Every attempt they make at a show outside of soaps is lucky to run for more than a season.

It's the same as when the networks started deciding to cut down more and more scripted fare in favor of Jay Leno, or reality programs. They have gained few new hit shows in non-scripted format, and often end up clinging to their old hit scripted shows long after they outlived their usefulness.

[MarkH]

But remember that the genre introduced "next generation" soaps. Many did not take, but AMC, Y&R, OLTL, etc. all debuted in the late 60s/early 70s, and they helped create new highs in the genre.

The failure to reinvent the form with success in the 80s (no, B&B doesn't count), 90s (no, Passions doesn't count), or 00s (nobody even tried) was tantamount to ending the whole thing anyway.

[DRW50]

That's what I mean about not making the effort. They gutted many long-term soaps, taking away what many viewers old and new loved, what drew people to daytime, all while doing very little to sustain any new soaps that they put on the air. I think daytime drama is and was sustainable, and could still draw a respectable audience, but I think they really screwed it up, they have a lot of contempt for soaps, for soap viewers, and they have no real idea what made the format so popular, what made it survive by becoming as much of a mainstay on college campuses as it had been in the housewife's living room.

[Faulkner]

Exactly.

I get blank stares from non-soap fans only when I mention B&B, probably because it hasn't had the time or (American) public profile that the other soaps have had.

[Faulkner]

You've pretty much summed my feeling about OLTL. I don't watch soaps regularly anymore, but I've tried with OLTL because of the great reviews. Just like the other morally coarsened ABC soaps, the show has been seriously harmed in the past 10-12 years, and I still see a lot of the damage onscreen.

They are never gonna get rid of Todd because of TSJ's charm and popularity, but he really should have died during Malone's first run. OLTL has run itself ragged trying to redeem this utterly irredeemable character, so much so that they've become totally *glib* about his crimes. Sure, every soap character has a rap sheet. He's not some cheeky bad boy with a sly smile. He's not a ladies' man. He's not an antihero. Dude's a seriously demented serial rapist, and he's never been rehabilitated or treated. And every character in his circle, including Viki, has been damaged by the show's determination to prop him. Unfortunately, his "circle" has included most of Llanview.

[R Sinclair]

You're saying two things at once.

[DRW50]

I don't see how. I believe the old soap format, which was still around in one form or another probably until the 80s, managed to keep most of the longtime viewers and also manage to bring in new viewers.

Since then, they have a format which generally seems to treat soap viewers like they're easily disposed of and easily replaced by newer, younger models, and which treats the soaps like incubators for every generic and phony copy of primetime or whatever other gimmicks they can think of.

They've taken a lot of the life and the identity out of most of the soaps. They're just hollowed out now because of this idea that being non-soaplike is a way to get viewers.

[R Sinclair]

I hear you, but like I said, I'm hearing two things that contradict each other. It's simply not possible these days to pull in a significant amount of new viewers in by staying true to the old way... back when soaps were 30 minutes long on one of the only three networks available.

Also, the soaps that reached this "zenith" you mentioned in the 1970s/1980s did so by doing new things that weren't traditional soap opera. Glitz and glam, high fashion, location shoots, action/adventure, racy love scenes... Totally not true to the form of 1950s/1960s ironing board housewife soaps.

Risks as well as some creative license were taken.

[SFK]

All of that OTT '80s stuff was fun, but the shows still managed to stay grounded. I think the writers of today take for granted how special, and important really, something as simple as two characters having lunch can be. I miss watching my favorite characters just having a cup of coffee and talking. It's like recharging your battery. You get back in touch with who these people really are, and that's how characters become endearing and make us want to get involved in their lives instead of just keeping up with the crazy events and capers they get caught up in.

[EricMontreal22]

I disagree--i wasn't grounded by the time Peggy O'SHea was inexplicably out as HW and her hack associate Michael Schnessel took over.

Yes but the risks can't drop what people liked about the soaps. GH at some fo its most ridiculous aside, one thing people have always prefered about soaps to primetime serials is the everyday elements--something they seem to forget more and more.

[DRW50]

Some of the soaps which reached a "zenith" took risks, but many were also rooted in tradition. AMC, which was hugely popular with college students in the 70s and 80s, behind the location shoots and the campy characters, was a very traditional show. You had the older characters, the pillars of strength, like Mona, Kate, you had the stolid good guys like Chuck and the Martin brothers, or later Cliff and Tom, you had the traditional heroines like Ruth and Tara, or later Brooke and Ellen, you had the vixen, Erica, the powerful rich moguls like Palmer and Adam. You had the young love stories, which were by that time a defacto part of daytime.

There was a very strong core at AMC. For all the fashion shoots or the craziness you could always count on family and friendship and warmth, and that's something which could appeal to both young and old.