I agree.

I think there's a soap-shaped void in some people's daytime TV appetite, but the soaps aren't filling that void anymore, so it's much easier to work on the general drama-shaped void instead. I realized we have Retro Television Network now, so now that ATWT is gone, instead of feeling an obligation to "give OLTL and/or DAYS a try!" when I'm home at that time, it's usually Kojak. Because, while he's not a soap, he's got drama, action, and excitement, but more importantly, he's got drama, action, and excitement that I enjoy. If the soaps gave me soapy things that I enjoyed, then they'd have a chance. But until then, they don't get watched and my soap-shaped void doesn't get filled.

Unless, of course, I decide to fire up some old school soap. Right now, in my house, AMC is getting its butt handed to it in the ratings by old, grainy, black-and-white, fifteen-minute GL from 1966.

I do the same thing. I watch a Barnby Jones....an old Dallas episode....Falcon Crest...Dynasty...instead of watchin any soap remaining on the air.

In the meantime, can we all just relax a little bit?

Um, no. Not until Frons, Carlivati and Valentini are all gone, and OLTL gets a regime that wants to do more than give pedophiles and "swishy" gay men a daily hard-on with lusty, scantily clad young boys.

As a disclaimer--I wanted ATWT, not pedo-soap! If OLTL is so bad, why does the show get so much soap press hype? Also, it seems to be the most popular show on here with so many fans. Nuke was played, Carjack was lame and the vets were damn old but all I hear makes ATWT sound like a damn solid show when contrasted against OLTL.

As a disclaimer--I wanted ATWT, not pedo-soap! If OLTL is so bad, why does the show get so much soap press hype? Also, it seems to be the most popular show on here with so many fans. Nuke was played, Carjack was lame and the vets were damn old but all I hear makes ATWT sound like a damn solid show when contrasted against OLTL.

Oh dear. This thread is about to take a very ugly turn. But for the record, I don't see the widespread popularity on this board that you do. The OLTL contingent isn't any larger than any other show's. I see it as more myopic. All news eventually becomes about whether the OLTL will live or die. Even if it's AMC casting news or a federal investigation into insider trading around Disney selling ABC, it always becomes about "Will OLTL get canceled?"

LOL! Love this "insider info" from DC- Hilarious:

It's not a "pick-up," since ABC doesn't have to renew their shows, but it is a commitment that will be announced with some fanfare this week. I'm not sure of all the changes planned (although I know they're not planning GL-style filming, thank God), but I do know the show is shortening its title, officially, to "One Life" by the end of the year.

As for All My Children, talk is it may be gone by next fall to make way for a spin-off of The View, a show which will likely end up in GH's timeslot, with GH moving to 1 PM Eastern.

I honestly could see 1 Life living 2 years. Was looking at a copy of Variety Mag and was shocked to see how badly the major networks are doing in primetime. Granted, daytime has lost a bigger percentage;

However, not all that much more. People often seem to forget that relatively speaking primetime's percentage drop hasn't been much less than daytime's--which makes much of the reasoning of what's killing daytime seem moot. That said, daytime has always been something of an embarassment for networks, even when they used daytime to basically pay for their primetime shows. So it makes sense they get all the quick axes, while they try to be more adventurous (well, ok, not reallyt his season...) with primetime.

True, remember reading a story about how Gen X can't write and it would seem the boomers are burnt out. Gen X is sort of a bridge generation which seems to lack a solid style or emotional subtext. Different for the sake of different doesn't cute it. I am X and noticed this a lot in various writing classes.

Dude, I like you but come on--these sweeping statements. There are plenty of great Gen X movie writers, and novelists and playwrights out there I could name (no tv writers are springing to mind I admit, but the Jean Passanante's being hired from show to show isn't a symptom of gen x...) And I'm not being defensive because I just managed to miss Gen X myself

They can't write for it, b/c so-called irony can never compensate for a tight dramatic structure or (in the case of sitcoms) a well-crafted joke setup and punch line. (There's also such a thing as writing from character and not from pop culture reference. In order to accomplish that, however, you have to realize that what works IRL (i.e., sitting on your couch, snarking at characters on TV screens and laptops) doesn't always work as drama. In drama, characters are supposed to live fuller lives.)

It's also a problem with the system as created by the boomer generations. TV writers aren't nurtured the way they used to be, and often don't get to work their way up, the same way. It's way too simplistic to say it's just cuz they don't read (something which actually has been argued against--the NYT recently said Boomers were the least literate--in terms of havign read literature--gen currently) or watched too much tv...

But he hasn't been Executive Producer of OLTL for 25 years(and thank God for that). And what does that have to do with whether or not he's a showkiller?

How good? Y&R is still #1, GH and DAYS are after it and OLTL just fluctuates from last place to next to last place. In households and in demos.

I mean, I like beef just as much as the next carnivorous fag. But not every f*cking day of the week.

And as far as that being "good for the demos," soaps are going after a fickle viewership that they can never hold and keep. That they never will keep. Why encourage that?

Amen. The Valentini comment confuses me--he's only been EP for... 7 years? Something like that--and the show hasn't climbed anytime durign that era signifcantly. It does remind of the shitty AMC EP situation too where JHC has been witht eh show as EP for God knows how long and how many writers, yet they never think to replace her (probably because Frons sees himself as EP anyway).

The demos argument for OLTL befuddles me. YES, I know demos are of utmost importance to soaps. But I remain unconvinced that a .1 higher demo for a soap really makes a HUGE amoutn of impact about what gets canceled, and I've simply never ever read anything *official* to imply that. It's all hearsay based on hearsay accepted as fact (a bit like the always mentioned fact that OLTL is somehow vastly under budget, etc).

I like shirtless guys (though I have to admit I'm a bit sick of Valentini's take on what a hot shirtless guy--ie a hairless, overbuilt ken doll--should look like). I admit it. But if people are tuning in to the internet and cable instead of soaps to get their story fix, surely the horny yyounger demos (and yes I include women here--the most important demo) can and are getting their naked hunk fill thanks to the internet--everything from hardcore porn to beefcake webpages. Some skin and sex IS important for a soap to survive I think, undoubtedly. But I mean, look at what show over the last decade had the most gratuitous male nudity--Passions. Did it help much? (Yes, the show had better younger demos than older but I think that was more just due to it being a new soap with elements like Timmy the Doll).

Amen. The Valentini comment confuses me--he's only been EP for... 7 years? Something like that--and the show hasn't climbed anytime durign that era signifcantly. It does remind of the shitty AMC EP situation too where JHC has been witht eh show as EP for God knows how long and how many writers, yet they never think to replace her (probably because Frons sees himself as EP anyway).

The demos argument for OLTL befuddles me. YES, I know demos are of utmost importance to soaps. But I remain unconvinced that a .1 higher demo for a soap really makes a HUGE amoutn of impact about what gets canceled, and I've simply never ever read anything *official* to imply that. It's all hearsay based on hearsay accepted as fact (a bit like the always mentioned fact that OLTL is somehow vastly under budget, etc).

I like shirtless guys (though I have to admit I'm a bit sick of Valentini's take on what a hot shirtless guy--ie a hairless, overbuilt ken doll--should look like). I admit it. But if people are tuning in to the internet and cable instead of soaps to get their story fix, surely the horny yyounger demos (and yes I include women here--the most important demo) can and are getting their naked hunk fill thanks to the internet--everything from hardcore porn to beefcake webpages. Some skin and sex IS important for a soap to survive I think, undoubtedly. But I mean, look at what show over the last decade had the most gratuitous male nudity--Passions. Did it help much? (Yes, the show had better younger demos than older but I think that was more just due to it being a new soap with elements like Timmy the Doll).

Agreed, naked soap sucks and doesn't make up for poor writing. I remember the start of NUKE, with the boys shirtless, and how TPTB always had Van carry a towel or something in front of his stomach while the cam zoomed in on JS abs. Van's more curvy hairy body actually was far hotter than Jake six pack but not according to focus groups. Van was a typical average kid with a small tummy but TPTB deemed this unsexy and towel-worthy. (I saw Van in NYC and be is very cute.) I'm prasing Frank Valente for keeping OLTL on air and finding a niche for it. Seven years ago, I don't think anyone thought OLTL would outlive ATWT. I've always said a few points in demos doesn't matter and that soaps should focus more on HH ratings and hope that volume creates buzz as is the case with Y&R. I think all of the soaps have driven off older viewers with a Teen Beat focus. This cult of the body kiddy porn focus is probably what has killed the genre. Y&R, until recently, gave the most story to older vets and the ratings have been great when compared with the rest of the industry. I really wonder if ad time for Y&R is all that much more expensive than GH or Days? The production cost of Y&R must be a lot more than that of GH or Days but all three shows rank within a few points of each other in 18-49. House hold numbers must have some value or Sony/Bell/CBS would have trimmed off the vets years ago. The show doesn't need Jill, Nikk, Ashley, Gloria, Jack, Nina or Kay for demos so one would think that these actors would be long gone by now.

Unless, of course, I decide to fire up some old school soap. Right now, in my house, AMC is getting its butt handed to it in the ratings by old, grainy, black-and-white, fifteen-minute GL from 1966.

I admit I'm still largely enjoying AMC, but 1966 GL is at least classic Agnes Nixon

Agreed, naked soap sucks and doesn't make up for poor writing. I remember the start of NUKE, with the boys shirtless, and how TPTB always had Van carry a towel or something in front of his stomach while the cam zoomed in on JS abs. Van's more curvy hairy body actually was far hotter than Jake six pack but not according to focus groups. Van was a typical average kid with a small tummy but TPTB deemed this unsexy and towel-worthy. (I saw Van in NYC and be is very cute.)

HAHA just for the record (and I'm not one to talk for typos) but it's Valent*INI* not Valente. I actually think this plays a tiny part. Soap operas have been focusing on more and more model perfect people (and more often than not one *type* of person at least when it comes to leading men and leading women), increasingly since the 1970s really--and tv, particularly American TV does anyway. But I do think the success of cable shows and even some reality tv shows that many people in younger generations (well maybe in general) are drawn more to seeing people who either look more relatable, or have more "interesting" looks (and of course I don't mean ugly by that ). Soap operas, with a few tiny concessions, really aren't catering to this whatsoever. I can't help thinking that many people flip past cuz frankly the young, model perfect people look the same from show to show and just aren't all that interesting or attention grabing (and back then for the record I found Luke/Van far hoter than Noah/Jake--lack of six pack and all).

I really wonder if ad time for Y&R is all that much more expensive than GH or Days? The production cost of Y&R must be a lot more than that of GH or Days but all three shows rank within a few points of each other in 18-49. House hold numbers must have some value or Sony/Bell/CBS would have trimmed off the vets years ago. The show doesn't need Jill, Nikk, Ashley, Gloria, Jack, Nina or Kay for demos so one would think that these actors would be long gone by now.

HH numbers do hold some relevence, I'm convinced, despite what many on here say (which, like the demos and budget talk I've never seen officially backed up--again it's hearsay based on hearsay spouted as fact). Of course int he case of Y&R they also give the show bragging rights as the top rated soap, still. And yes the cult of youth on soaps has been a problem for eons (some might say on network tv in general, but... It's ironic when you have a relative surprise hit on cable like Hot in Cleveland which, while it could never get network size numbers on the tiny TVLand network, HAS been a bigger hit than predicted and yet it's based on a cast that would be seen as too old for most networks to consider...)

HH numbers do hold some relevence, I'm convinced, despite what many on here say (which, like the demos and budget talk I've never seen officially backed up--again it's hearsay based on hearsay spouted as fact). Of course int he case of Y&R they also give the show bragging rights as the top rated soap, still. And yes the cult of youth on soaps has been a problem for eons (some might say on network tv in general, but... It's ironic when you have a relative surprise hit on cable like Hot in Cleveland which, while it could never get network size numbers on the tiny TVLand network, HAS been a bigger hit than predicted and yet it's based on a cast that would be seen as too old for most networks to consider...)

I don't think Sony cares about the bragging rights of one soap in it's large media empire. I think HH do count for certin products/services and that is why Les Mooves has never tried all that hard at making CBS the Demos King. As an example, the average new car buyer is 49 years old. Many expensive meds are aimed at people over 50. I think most networks want to be first in BOTH demos and HH so to have max ad options.

I've never been a OLTL fan but, for the few times I've sampled, there seems to be a story for every sort of viewers. I've seen kids, older women (Vicky, Dorian, the DA); kids; Todd (not sure where to place him). It was my impression that the show was diverse and not semi-nude kiddy porn as I've heard it talked about in this thread. Like, I don't want a new soap and am sort of glad ATWT was cancelled because it will give me more time in the day; however, OLTL wasn't annoying to watch.

I think OLTL might look to be in a better state right now to a casual viewer than the opposite. If that makes any sense lol. Like sure we've seen Vicki, etc, but overall this year the balance has not been good age wise, or in regards as to how involved a story is.