Jump to content

ATWT Canceled


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 533
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I guess I am too biased because I have sat there with some of my relatives, who don't have the Internet, didn't have cable until a few years ago, only have a VCR, which collects dust, and they have stopped watching all their soaps. They just stopped, after decades, like the shows never existed, because nothing on the shows spoke to them anymore.

I know it's just anecdotal, but I always wonder how many others out there have done the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it's more of a prevailing industry philosophy than one organic to the television audience, but it seeped down to the audience over time. Still, primetime soaps exist, soaps-that-aren't-called-soaps are everywhere in a variety of forms, scripted and non-scripted. The point is I'm confident those writers, were they vital today, could still deliver in the medium, even if the format was different or the delivery system altered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

LOL! You just want me to deflect some of the crazy off you.

Granted I used to be the first person to jump into a "why soaps are dying" discussion but honestly I no longer care why. There are a bunch of reasons both internal and external that we've a cited a million times over: mismanagement, competition, out of date storytelling, economic pressures of 5-day a week production and of course my battle cry: nostalgia. Whatever the reason, we're here now.

I'm not interested in why they're dying, now I'm only interested in how. Who will go with dignity? Who'll limp along until they get shot in the head? Who'll climb the clocktower and take innocent bystanders with them? For me the business of soap IS the soap.

But I love reading the discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

On the other hand, though, I have relatives who do have other viewing options (like the Encore Westerns channel, which my great-aunts watch like teen girls watch The Hills) and they still talk, with excitement, about the crap that's going on on Y&R or B&B or whatever. It can always go either way, so then you can also have the people with the other choices who stop watching and also people with no other choices who keep watching. The question is, what are the exceptions and what is the rule?

I'm not denying this at all. But primetime soaps are just that - primetime soaps, which, even though they have those fundamental themes going on, are still worlds different from daytime soaps. Primetime soaps get syndication deals, cable deals, DVD releases, etc. Daytime soaps do not. They're still stuck in daytime depending on an audience of retirees, housewives, househusbands, college kids between classes, people who work the night shift, and the randoms who happen to be home on a particular day.

If Nielsen could find a way to count how many people watch traditional daytime soaps in a non-traditional way (VCRs, DVRs, online, etc), things might be a whole lot different, and then the one and only focus of keeping ratings up would be in the quality of the shows. Until then, you're juggling the quality issue as well as the access-to-audience issue, none of which are probably that easy to work with. Like I said upthread, I'd never want to be the one having to do it.

I lose sight of this so easily sometimes, yeah. I need to reminded every now and then to just shut up and do whatever. No matter what, us debating on SON won't save daytime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There is still an audience for soaps, sure it's dwindled, but it's still there. Not everyone who watches has a Neilsen box either, might not have a DVR, and their ratings don't count.

That audience that is still around, people in charge of the soaps are driving them way in droves with bad decision making, bad writing and so on and so forth.

I agree JP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I will admit to not having the knowledge or insight many here do but maybe the question should be how have soaps managed to last as long as they have versus why they are allegedly becoming irrelevent.

As someone mentioned, TV shows go through cycles. For a long time westerns were popular on Television and they died out. medical dramas were then the thing and they died out. Detective shows were popular and they died out. Sitcoms were very popular for a long time and while still around, not nearly what they were.

But many of these shows got resurrected to an extent years later. Medical shows got resurrected with the popularity of ER. Why? What was so different about it. Westerns never did. Detective shows - well crime drama became popular again with the advent of shows like L&O and CSI and how they are kind of petering out. Why are sitcoms not what they once were?

Reality shows have gained popularity and are cheap but at some point I suspect interest in those shows will peter out also. It already is with the oversaturation of them IMO.

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

    • I think they’re desperately trying to cover his awful tattoos. But anyway them being unable to style short kings properly has been a major pet peeve of mine for a while now.  I honestly don’t understand what some people expect from actors to even begin considering them for recognition. Let’s be real—awards mostly mean that an actor is respected by their peers and has some level of cultural relevance. Actual judgment on the acting itself? That’s often secondary—highly subjective and shaped by the times. I completely agree on both points. If you’re an actor or a dancer you shouldn’t get any tattoos (sorry not sorry). Tomas’ tattoos are ugly too. And regarding the couples- you’re completely right. These writers are unable to write romance.   Further comments: - Kat cannot be this dumb to keep tampering with evidence over and over again. And I’m officially not a fan of the actress—every time she’s in a scene with Leslie, she doesn’t seem intimidated at all. She plays it like comic relief, which is just too much, especially when paired with Leslie’s histrionics and over-the-top antics. Leslie is older, dangerous, and has literally been portrayed as homicidal—Kat should be at least a little scared. • I also didn’t like Kat playing damsel in distress with the hotel manager. It gave off the same weird energy as Dani with the cop. I would’ve much preferred the version Paul Raven suggested, with her sneaking in through housekeeping. • And yes, Dani again accused Hayley of faking the pregnancy—this time even specifying she might be using a pillow under her shirt. (No fake miscarriage being mentioned) I stand by my take: this is ridiculous writing. No one in the real world—except us, the chronically online soap watchers—would even think of such a conspiracy theory. Haley is no Beyoncé. • What in the world was Chelsea wearing in her hair the other day? And this whole thing with Madison is beyond cringe. Chelsea’s coming off as needy and toxic—basically like every other Dupree. • I’m glad the casino storyline is moving forward, but it’s still boring as hell. Honestly, I’d be so here for a plot twist where Vanessa and Doug take Joey out. • The direction and editing lately have been rough. Abrupt cuts, weird pacing… something just feels off overall. There’s a strange uneasiness to how it’s all coming together. • And finally: Tomas is too much of a saint. Where are the messy sluts when you need them? (Vanessa doesn’t count.)
    • Andrew sure has hard nips.
    • I was watching some August 1987 episodes and they brought back so many memories. I had some thoughts: Lisa and Jamie were so dull. Lisa was such a nothing character. It boggles my mind that so much story was centered around her in such a short amount of time. Joanna Going is a talented actress, but the material was just not there.  It was so good to see Wallingford and Mitch again. I know there was talk about Felicia a while back, but these episodes reminded me how integral Felicia was for the show.  Sally Spencer was done so dirty. She is turning in superb performances in an icky storyline. I wish she had stuck around longer. She has chemistry with everyone. The McKinnons should have lasted longer. Spencer had some strong stuff with Stephen Schnetzer and Mary Alexander. AW waster such a talented actress by getting rid of her. Justice for Cheryl too. I also missed Ed Fry when he left. Sandra Ferguson was a star from the moment she came on. She was charismatic and just popped. She had immediate chemistry with RKK and blended in well with Wyndham and Watson. I'd forgotten about the teenage Matthew.  I have no memory of Peggy Lazarus. She must not have lasted long. Was the original plan for John that he was going to turn out to be the twins' real father?      
    • If the new and improved copies that @rsclassicfanforever has uploaded can be manually moved into the "by month, by year" folders, that would be awesome. I personally don't think it's necessary to keep the older versions (which either have Dutch subtitles hard coded on them, or are lesser in picture quality). That's a lot of valuable drive space that could be cleared. Just my view but can appreciate others may feel differently. The structure had been by month by year previously, so I think it would be easier to conform to that, where so much prior work to get it to that format has already been done. Hopefully you can "drag and drop" so the new copies are in the right month/year? Re Clips, I never look at them now we pretty much have the episodes in full. Appreciate others may use, however. Thanks for all your hard work here @BoldRestless!
    • Oh yes defintely, Josh Griffith repeats and repeats the same storylines.
    • Isnt’t this storyline similar to the Cameron Kirsten situation though? Sharon thought she killed him. He ended up being alive and Sharon was being tormented with thinking she was seeing his face everywhere and that’s how we got that iconic scene with her and Nikki in the sewers.   I understand in Mariah’s case this is different circumstances but it does seem like a play on that whole thing. Maybe I’m wrong. I just wish if they were going to make any character follow in Sharon’s foot steps it would be Faith. Mariah wasn’t even raised by her, and her personality is different. I would expect her to take a different path. I understand I could be completely jumping ahead because the storyline hasn’t even played out yet but we’ll see. 
    • Thanks again @Paul Raven Monica was completely without redeeming qualities at this point. I always found the whole Monica = Carly narrative regressive, as I don't think shows comparing characters so heavily is ever a great idea, but she's actually worse than Carly was. Was it the Pollocks who had Leslie have a miscarriage?  Giving her a child, especially by rape, was not a good idea, but a part of me wishes they'd committed to it just to see what story it might have had in later years.
    • @janea4old Your detailed explanation and delving into the psychology and motivations is no doubt the opposite of what we will see onscreeen. As @ranger1rg stated we will get a few scenes and some sketchy explanations. Like the adoption of Aria, most of it will take place off screen.
    • I'm suddenly fearful that DAYS is going to pull a Flowers-for-Algernon stunt and Bo's progress will be reversed.  While @te. is stuck on Abe's tiny bedroom, I can't stop thinking of the size of Bo's huge hospital room.
    • Okay, why are Paulina and Abe sleeping like that?!  I'd take a screen grab if I wasn't lazy, but come on.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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