Jump to content

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Nancy Hughes was always a more cold, dominate matriarch...so I don't think it was as much execs as it was the Dobsons as Bridget would always airly say they "Write what they feel, and what interests us and no one else."  It would have bene interesting to see writers evolve Nancy more.to see her gradually see that she she can let go of her family a bit more and have another interest..I think she also should have been the one more aggressively angry with Joyce then Lisa..(she shot her kid) and show her trying to block Joyce's access to that kid and ride Joyce...all the right reasons (Joyce was neurotic and unreliable) to show her iron fist..and I am sure more fun for Wagner then being a walk on and serving coffee.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • DRW50

    2970

  • DramatistDreamer

    1958

  • Soapsuds

    1716

  • P.J.

    823

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I absolutely agree with what you said here.
For years, I have been somewhat exasperated by soap fans repetition of the same boilerplate reasoning behind the decline in popularity of daytime soaps to a single inciting event like the O.J. Simpson trial, rather than a number of factors that include the production companies behind these daytime soaps’ and their rigid adherence to the same format, plots and unchanging characterizations (pandering to the anachronistic idea of the mythical Midwestern housewife from the 1950s) for years on end. 
For years, I have believed that the idea of the supercouple was one of the best and perhaps the worst thing to happen to the daytime soap opera. It should have been a brief marketing campaign that lasted for about 48 months and dispensed with when it became limiting and tired, which it had obviously become by the very early 90s.

If there was anything that soap production company executives should have doubled down on, it should have been the insistence that their viewers had not truly abandoned these shows but that time shifted viewing (viewers recording their favorite soaps on VCRs preset via timers) had become a bigger factor because of more women working outside the home and those numbers were not being recorded, and figuring out a way for those numbers to be factored into the ratings as DVR viewing is now factored into today’s ratings.

 

I still think the executives and industry set the standards for how archetypes were and are written, especially female ones. There should have been room for all types of matriarchal figures, the way that there was room for patriarchal figures (Bob Hughes was a fatherly type and also a serial cheater, for instance) but there was an industry wide standard of having a warm, very nurturing matriarch. GL never allowed the likes of Vanessa to be a matriarch because, despite her being of age at the time, a matriarch wasn’t supposed to ever be ambitious in her career or even sexy enough to attract younger men. If you had an ambitious figure like an Alexandra Spaulding or a Lucinda Walsh who had any maternal feelings at all, it was usually presented as a weakness, a character flaw or something that the woman, as intelligent as she was, could never quite manage properly and despite repeated stories, the clumsy way these women could never seem to manage their maternal relationships with half the level of competence as they did their businesses. It was a sexist trope that needed to die with the evolution of more women in the workplace but it persists to this day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What? Bert was certainly no slouch in the vinegary-interfering mother department. If Nancy was seen as a bit colder, maybe it was because she didn't have the obstacles (broken marriage, health problems) that Bert did. 

I think the structure of Guiding Light at the time allowed the Dobsons to keep the Bauers "front and center". (Although there were probably viewers who saw the Spauldings and Marlers as interlopers) Mike and Ed were diametric opposites, each who generated story. When the Dobsons took over ATWT, they didn't have that with the Hughes, who at that time consisted of Bob, Tom and teenage Frannie. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Beyond having less interesting Hughes relationships compared to the Bauers on GL, and maybe not understanding Nancy, I wonder how much of the change is down to the Dobsons joining ATWT at a time when P&G was beginning to more actively push to phase out older vets and core families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think sponsor and/or network interference is mostly to blame for the difference between the Dobsons' work on GL and their later work on ATWT.  By the time they had joined ATWT, pretty much all of daytime was chasing after the same demographic that had flocked to GH in the wake of Luke and Laura's success.  The rules of the game, as they say, had definitely changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think you're right. What hurt ATWT was no one in place there seemed to have any idea what this shift needed (was anyone in the viewing audience horny for Brad Hollister?). With a few exceptions, like the casting for Margo and Craig and recasting Tom, they didn't seem to figure it out until around 1984 or 1985.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Since the days of Irna Phillips, P&G was known for being very actively involved in stories and characterizations on their shows. Both the showrunner and the executives were known to have bumped heads numerous times and in the end, P&G mostly got their own way.

Although his reunion videos are not always known for being of the highest quality, several uploads provided insight as a few former ATWT actors talked about the battles between writers and the brass at P&G and/or CBS Daytime for content in scripts that the higher ups considered to be objectionable. Scott Bryce once described it as being akin to being called into the principal’s office. Creativity by committee tends to yield insipid results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Their big fat Greek wedding will always be stunning. They did have chemistry and the actors promoted the hell out of that pairing, regardless of how each actor now looks upon their time on the show. I do think the promotion of the supercouple should have faded with the end of the decade (1980s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Everything said earlier in the thread about how much ATWT and soaps suffered from trying to still cling to old patterns in the OJ era is so true. ATWT was based on complex friendships and family dynamics - they did have one of the first soap supercouples (Penny and Jeff) but that wasn't their calling card. ATWT trying to still cling on while running away from the family units and complicated histories and becoming whatever mutated '80s primetime soap the show was trying to be for so much of the mid/late '90s (aside from some of the stronger moments of 1995) was unfortunate. I remember disliking Mike and Rosanna so much, but assuming they were loved by viewers with how heavily pushed they were. Only years later when I read more soap magazines from that period did I learn they weren't ever very popular. All that for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But IIRC, Don was gone shortly thereafter. It doesn't feel like his character was ever well-defined. Certainly not the same kind of impact Mike Bauer had on GL. If there was ever any kind of rivalry between Bob and Don, it certainly got overshadowed by Bob and John's animosity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Earlier under Irna Phillips, Don was more clearly defined I think. He was more of a contrast to Bob, more ambitious and resentful of Nancy's treatment of Janice.

By the time he came back in the mid 70's a lot of that was forgotten/ignored.

They should have kept Don's stepdaughters by Janice in the picture as they could have become honorary Hughes and the show would have had 2 young women to write for.

Irna drastically aged them (for no real reason) in the mid 60's but they could have played around with that a little and kept them early 20's in the mid 70's.

They could have held off SORASING Dee and Annie. Those 2 characters had only a few years in the spotlight when they should have been leading the next generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Dallas, Dynasty, Knots and Falcon Crest all had good runs but by 85 they had seen better days. I think they were a victim of the format. After several seasons seeing the same characters front and center viewers were bored. What was once fascinating grew predictable. JR, Alexis etc had to be front and center and after a while their schemes and shtick grew repetitive. JR remarrying Sue Ellen, Alexis constantly trying to get he better of Blake etc Unlike daytime, there wasn't the flexibility to bring in other stories and characters and maybe let the likes JR go backburner. That same mentality also invaded daytime with characters like  Sonny and Victor still peddling the same stuff after decades. I guess the same could be said for MSW eg every week Jessica encounters a crime and solves it,but I think viewers come to that format with a different mindset.
    • Daphnee and Trisha did a live stream on Instagram and confirmed they find out if the show gets picked up in May. This pretty much confirms they're on the primetime schedule like the Bell soaps. Fingers crossed we get a multi-year renewal announcement soon!  https://www.instagram.com/reel/DJSsYb7PDv8/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==        
    • I don't think Lois the character was there.  The Lois we knew from the 90s has pretty much died with this  Gio story crap.
    • Have to agree re MM. The goody two shoes character and writing doesn't help but maybe a more dynamic actor would help Brandon lift his game also. I found the song sequence a little OTT. First of all it should have been shorter and maybe the song fades out and just some music to accompany the montage. I think it would have worked better if Anita had have been alone after everyone left and started tinkling leading into the song, with Vernon coming in observing and then joining her for  a close moment. Everyone standing around felt a little too much. And that closing effect with the two blackscreens meeting was unnecessary. Just a fade out would have been enough.
    • HUGE THANK YOU FOR 1998-1999 EPISODES!!!

      Please register in order to view this content

      Please register in order to view this content

         
    • And sadly I think that’s the trivia Both Jeanne Cooper and Eric Braeden went with for years and years. Lol
    • But people were hating so bad on amc and the final year and the ratings sucked. Business wise they made the right call. Oltl who even gained some ratings back and weren’t they higher as GH at one point is a decision and never understood. 
    • Ann Williams was the first Maggie Powers on The Doctors but left to have a baby. Maggie was successfully recast so Ann picked up the role of Eunice (Jo's sister on Search for Tomorrow) and played that role for 10 years before being killed of in 1976. That led to her role of Margo on EON.
    • Looking at those totals it seems most contract actors are on a 1 or 2 week average guarantee. I assume contracts are still operating on 13 week cycles so you would have to know the particular actors contract starting date to work out their guarantee. The question remains as to what actors listed as contract are actually recurring? Bryton ?
    • Yep, that scene was at the conclusion of the Derek Thurston vs George Packard storyline, when Kay decided neither of them should run Chancellor.  By the time she put Victor in charge, Victor had been on the show for months & months with his Rolls Royce, his ranch, and Newman Enterprises.  SONY released some Y&R "trivia cards" in the late 1980s, and one of the questions was "who brought Victor Newman to Genoa City?" The answer on the back of the card is "Kay Thurston, to run Chancellor Industries", and it's a wrong answer lol.    
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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