Headwriters who change with their shows

[EricMontreal22]

Didn't Marland copy some elements from his GL to ATWT though? Certainly the Vocheck's on Loving in that episode of his online remind me of the Snyders.

Most of the big writers certainly tended to write similar kinds of stories within their shows even if there were small shifts in tone. Agnes at her shows (though you can see a progression from her GL to AW to OLTL to AMC), Irna's shows seemed ot be written largely the same even if she changed HOW they were written with ATWT. The Dobsons went from GL to ATWT with similar stories and astyle which they went full out on with their own show SB.

What about Dark Shadows--the most obviously different of the major network classic soaps. Art Wallace who was the initial head writer went on to be a head consultant/writer for the early years of AMC. Gordon Russell and Sam Hall of course went on to OLTL--I'm sure you could find STYLISTIC similarities though in how characters were written, etc.

Brown and Esensten did good to great work at Loving and The City--and never really did again but I guess they still wrote from a similar angle (and did yet anothe rmurder mystery on GL?)

Bell's Y&R was basically a continuation of the psychosexual drama he did at DAYS--and B&B essentially was early Y*R again...

That seems to be true of Slesar's stint with Hall and the Corringtons on OLTL--they switched so quickly--but the Corringtons *apparently* took the "intrigue" angle that Slesar injected into the show and turned it into a full on mob infestation.

[EricMontreal22]

How the ego prick that is James Lipton got to destroy soap after soap after soap after soap without ONE successful HW run for THREE decades (and people think this is a new trend) is beyond me

[SFK]

I hope it wasn't Slesar, I believe it was Lipton who turned Sen. Mark Denning into a crook, which was just awful. What a fine, upstanding character he was, adored his daughter (and Clarissa) and put up with his lunchbox of a wife. Poor Ed Nelson probably wanted to quit the show before he had to play that crap.

[Paul Raven]

Slesar wrote SFT for about 6 months in 78 before the Carringtons took over.I wonder if it was more of a caretaker thing while they looked for new writers.

He created the characters of Chance & Kylie Halliday.Chance got involved with Janet-I think he was out to get her fortune.This was the most Edge like story.

[Chris B]

What I've seen of the early B&B years hasn't been too good. It didn't find it's way until the early 90s as Bill Bell was stepping down. i also don't think it was similar to his Y&R, but I do agree that DAYS/Y&R were similar, except Y&R had money.

[EricMontreal22]

The set up of a rich and poor family (the poor family now gone) and many actualplot points with B&B were VERY similar IMHO. I saw the first 2 weeks on wost--I dunno to me it seemed liek he was trying to get back the early 70s Y&R vibe (similar to how Loving in some ways seemed like AGnes wanting back the 70s AMC vibe)

[DeeeDee]

It isn't.

Y&R is Billy Wilder.

B&B is Rob Reiner.

[EricMontreal22]

DeeDee I think that's true of 80s Y&R (when he revamped everything and everyone) but not of 70s... He definitely redid the famous original rape storyline.

[DeeeDee]

Nah.

Even then Y&R & B&B were very different.

[EricMontreal22]

Maybe in tone. as for actual plot lines (stay with me being obnoxious here...)

From Schemering:

Most of the early story concerned the stormy romance between virginal Caroline Spencer and the arrogant (read: ripper of bodices) Ridge Forrester. Many, if not most of the plotlines [this was published in Dec 87] were direct retreads from the early days of The Young and the Restless (the rich family/poor family concept and internal dynamics; the sexual attack of Caroline which was near identical to the Chris Brooks story; brother Ridge fighting brother Thorne over the same woman, a carbon copy of Snapper and Greg battling it out over Chris; the desertion by the father of the poor Logans just like with the Forsters) etc. What was strikingly original from the start was the performance of Susan Flannery (who Bell worked with on Days) as Stephanie Forrester--a fascinating alabaster sphinx of a woman.

[EricMontreal22]

Wagget's Soap Encyclopedia from ten years later says basically the same and that Bell was dismayed when the soap press criticized his first two years fo rtheir similarities to Y&R's first five years--again mentioning the family setup and attack on Chris/Caroline as the main culprits.

Ihave to say I kinda miss, from the early episodes of both I've seen, the poor Logans and Brooks families--particularly the Brooks

[DeeeDee]

That's the point.

B&B didn't work at first BECAUSE of tone.

SOME of the stories were somewhat similar but the Bell soaps TONES defined them & made all the difference.

[Chris B]

Yeah tone is very important. Pretty much all soaps have the poor/rich families and at their core the stories are the same, but the way the stories were told and overall tone of B&B is completely different from Y&R.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Marland's work had some similarities, like the working class families he liked to create (such as the Reardons on GL or the Snyders on ATWT), but his interpretation of all the show's he's written for seem so different and totally fitted for those particular shows, even if Marland did carry many of the same traits for show to show.

His GL and his ATWT seem so different, stylistically and in tone. There was a lot more of a campier appeal to his GL work, from what I've seen, than to anything I've seen in his ATWT. Though, GL's always been a little more "out there" than ATWT ever was.

[EricMontreal22]

Well I admit I'm not a big Bell geek but I foudn the tone of the first week quite similar to those pre 1975 Y&Rs (just more bright in terms of lighting...) Anyway it is interesting to contrast--Bell was reusing the stories but maybe not the tone, unliek Agnes who seemed to be trying for vice versa... (or not trying as might be)