Jump to content
Announcement: New Memberships Suspended

As The World Turns Discussion Thread


edgeofnik

Recommended Posts

  • Members
1 hour ago, victoria foxton said:

But ATWT killed Reid. 

Yeah,  but Reid was intended to be the "spoiler" from the start. The audience felt differently, but c'mon why would TPTB start to listen to the fans during the final months. They just didn't care and stuck with their plan regardless, like the endless Juicy Janet propping.

 

IMO, they should've wrote out Lilly instead of recasting. The role was already being wasted, without MB there was no point in the character. Would've generated better story if the character was written off, at least for six months, preferably a year or more.

Edited by Spoon
Add
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 12.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • P.J.

    667

  • Soapsuds

    1199

  • DRW50

    2466

  • DramatistDreamer

    1516

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

The Goutman interview wasn't bad.  (Sometimes it's interesting to hear from a person who's universally reviled, lol.)  But the dude asking the questions was horrid.  He didn't seem capable of asking even the most fundamental follow-up questions.   Goutman mentioned that CBS and P&G had "differing views about some issues".   Most interviewers would then ask, "Which issues?  Can you elaborate?", or something to that effect.  Locher said, "Oh, so they didn't play nice in the sandbox.  Wow.  Crazy.  Hmmm", or something, and just let it go.  He did that with 90% of the questions, as though he didn't even listen to Goutman's response. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
20 minutes ago, Broderick said:

The Goutman interview wasn't bad.  (Sometimes it's interesting to hear from a person who's universally reviled, lol.)  But the dude asking the questions was horrid.  He didn't seem capable of asking even the most fundamental follow-up questions.   Goutman mentioned that CBS and P&G had "differing views about some issues".   Most interviewers would then ask, "Which issues?  Can you elaborate?", or something to that effect.  Locher said, "Oh, so they didn't play nice in the sandbox.  Wow.  Crazy.  Hmmm", or something, and just let it go.  He did that with 90% of the questions, as though he didn't even listen to Goutman's response. 

Agreed...this is why people who defend Alan drive me crazy..its just like the shows were...he (they) get to an interesting idea that has potential and will be interesting and then they drop it!  Goutman brought up that they were looking for another venue for AW and failed but that was not followed up on...he also dropped it when CG brought up that they didnt have a problem with the first kiss or the second but then the third....Alan goes into..."Oh yes, people from the midwest and the south have problems with that.." Besides the generalization of the whole thing, let him finish his thought.

13 hours ago, Soapsuds said:

A while back we were talking about Tonio return after 1991...here is one clip of it...

 

 

Soapsuds I got to ask you since I am seeing it a lot...where is that clip from a" twink prison" storyline from????

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
39 minutes ago, Broderick said:

The Goutman interview wasn't bad.  (Sometimes it's interesting to hear from a person who's universally reviled, lol.)  But the dude asking the questions was horrid.  He didn't seem capable of asking even the most fundamental follow-up questions.   Goutman mentioned that CBS and P&G had "differing views about some issues".   Most interviewers would then ask, "Which issues?  Can you elaborate?", or something to that effect.  Locher said, "Oh, so they didn't play nice in the sandbox.  Wow.  Crazy.  Hmmm", or something, and just let it go.  He did that with 90% of the questions, as though he didn't even listen to Goutman's response. 

He's always been that way. That's his style. Apparently nobody in his life has pointed this out to him. It's very frustrating. He's a PR guy, not a trained interviewer. He doesn't seem very bright and just likes to see himself on camera.  He seems very self-absorbed and people who are that way have trouble thinking about other people and what would matter to them. In this case, if it's not interesting to him, he won't pursue the line of questioning even though it would be interesting to most people watching. If it has to do with him, he's very eager to talk about it. For example, an actor could be telling a story about meeting with a producer to talk about the show in a certain restaurant and Alan will get wide-eyed and enthusiastically break into the story, "Oh my God! I used to eat there all the time. That's crazy!". 

Edited by Bill Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

There was a sequence about demographics, and Goutman indicated they'd tried to focus on "younger performers" to get more 18 to 49 year-old viewers (at the expense of screen time for the show's vets).  I would've asked, "Is there is a STUDY showing that younger viewers are only interested in younger performers, or is this merely an industry BELIEF?  Where did this theory originate? Can you elaborate on that?"   That's a question which can be asked without hostility or anger, just a simple conversational question.  But Locher passed on the follow-up. 

Also, Goutman mentioned that vets sometimes weren't utilized for "budgetary reasons".  Why's that?  Did they have guarantees of one episode per month, and anything in excess of that was a budgetary problem?  Were the veterans being paid on a per-episode basis?  I would've asked that. 

Same thing about the complaints after the "third kiss" of the same-sex couple.  "Why the complaints?  Did the third kiss follow too quickly after the second?  Was the third kiss too explicit?  Or was there simply a two-kiss limit established by P&G or by CBS? "  Nothing.  Just, "Wow. Ok.  People in the Midwest and the South might have a problem with that.  That's crazy." 

The follow-ups (or lack thereof) were AWFULLY frustrating and ruined what could've potentially been an enlightening interview.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, Mitch said:

Agreed...this is why people who defend Alan drive me crazy..its just like the shows were...he (they) get to an interesting idea that has potential and will be interesting and then they drop it!  Goutman brought up that they were looking for another venue for AW and failed but that was not followed up on...he also dropped it when CG brought up that they didnt have a problem with the first kiss or the second but then the third....Alan goes into..."Oh yes, people from the midwest and the south have problems with that.." Besides the generalization of the whole thing, let him finish his thought.

Soapsuds I got to ask you since I am seeing it a lot...where is that clip from a" twink prison" storyline from????

 

 

Yeah. I appreciate who Alan gets, but he really isn't an interviewer. It's frustrating and why I really don't watch anymore. I think these get togethers were meant to be 'hangouts' not 'interviews'. But he needs to read the room.

 

You also have to remember he was loooong in PR and still acts like that. Not sure why but he seems to still be trying to play the middle and not cause any waves with 'tough' questions. I get it, but it's frustrating. Especially when he has guests who are willing to talk. Like Goutman, who seemed to want to get more into things.

 

I don't like Goutman but I still ultimately appreciate hearing from him, just like Phelps, and others.

 

I'm not shocked at all CBS and P&G wanted the soaps dead. They no longer served a purpose for P&G/Telenext. That was clear for years and years before they went off the air. We all knew they had no interest. I guess CBS never really wanted to 'buy' GL and ATWT if they wanted them dead so badly? I'd like more info here ...

 

And just featuring 'young people' doesn't generate a better demo. Sorry Goutman.

 

And who called Lisa unimportant? Goutman?

Edited by KMan101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
3 minutes ago, KMan101 said:

You also have to remember he was loooong in PR and still acts like that. Not sure why but he seems to still be trying to play the middle and not cause any waves with 'tough' questions. I get it, but it's frustrating.

Sounds like one of our posters  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
38 minutes ago, KMan101 said:

I'm not shocked at all CBS and P&G wanted the soaps dead. They no longer served a purpose for P&G/Telenext. That was clear for years and years before they went off the air. We all knew they had no interest. I guess CBS never really wanted to 'buy' GL and ATWT if they wanted them dead so badly? I'd like more info here ...

Whenever I read this theory I feel the need to squash this myth based on the excellent reporting by Alecia Swasy in her book Soap Opera:: The Inside Story of Proctor & Gamble.  The P&G soap ratings had not changed significantly in years and most were still profitable at their cancellation. 

However, civil lawsuits based on faulty product science began creating huge losses for the company.  Fans tend to personalize the decision because of our devotion to the shows.  Yet the truth is that toxic shock from faulty tampons were much more of a concern for P&G than the production of television. 

We may think that the company is at fault for ignoring the wishes of fans, but what we should really be mad about is their willingness to foist products on to consumers when scientific testing was either ignored or subverted. 

 

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
13 minutes ago, KMan101 said:

 

 

 

I don't like Goutman but I still ultimately appreciate hearing from him, just like Phelps, and others.

 

I'm not shocked at all CBS and P&G wanted the soaps dead. They no longer served a purpose for P&G/Telenext. That was clear for years and years before they went off the air. We all knew they had no interest. I guess CBS never really wanted to 'buy' GL and ATWT if they wanted them dead so badly? I'd like more info here ...

 

And just featuring 'young people' doesn't generate a better demo. Sorry Goutman.

 

And who called Lisa unimportant? Goutman?

I have no idea why TPTB still pull out the youth card in chasing demos...yes young people are important to both attracting young viewers and keeping the story lines going...(seeing Josh and Reva and Lily and Holden acting like middle aged fools was boring and embarrassing..) but I know in college some of our favorite characters were Bert and H.B.

 

Goutman didn't mention Eileen or Lisa, its that troll above who says she wans't important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
9 minutes ago, Mitch said:

I have no idea why TPTB still pull out the youth card in chasing demos...yes young people are important to both attracting young viewers and keeping the story lines going...(seeing Josh and Reva and Lily and Holden acting like middle aged fools was boring and embarrassing..) but I know in college some of our favorite characters were Bert and H.B.

 

Goutman didn't mention Eileen or Lisa, its that troll above who says she wans't important.

 

Oh, the troll said that? Gotcha. 

 

It's ridiculous they keep pulling out the 'youth' card. That 'theory' has gone back to at least the 80s with the soaps and it NEVER worked. Did it?

 

What works is a multi-generational show with layered characters and writing. When I was younger I didn't watch for the teens. I watched for the adults. So many in the industry just 'don't get it'. They're there to push an agenda, follow the status quo and keep the show on a budget. Some care of course. When care is taken, it shows.

 

I would have loved more follow up questions with Goutman. 

 

EDIT: I've been rewatching some Marland ATWT and as I bemoan how useless characters like Beau and Pam are, I realize Marland was brilliant in having younger people to 'check off the box' while cleverly showcasing the veterans. The younger people really didn't 'matter' because the show was happening around them. 

 

Unless I'm giving him too much credit. Just a thought. Writers/producers should take note.

Edited by KMan101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
23 hours ago, KMan101 said:

It's ridiculous they keep pulling out the 'youth' card. That 'theory' has gone back to at least the 80s with the soaps and it NEVER worked. Did it?

On 9/27/2021 at 11:54 AM, Broderick said:

I would've asked, "Is there is a STUDY showing that younger viewers are only interested in younger performers, or is this merely an industry BELIEF?  Where did this theory originate? Can you elaborate on that?"   That's a question which can be asked without hostility or anger, just a simple conversational question.  But Locher passed on the follow-up. 

 

I agree and disagree on this point.

On the one hand, it would appear the there was a Nielson based research project published in 1974 that suggested that young people should be a target audience because they had less brand loyalty and were therefore more suggestive when it came to advertising.  The immediate result was seen in CBS's historic "rural purge" where they cancelled older skewing shows like Green Acres in favor of the Norman Lear shows like All in the Family.  

However, in the 48 years since that study nobody has ever tried to replicate the finding.  Grocery shopping has changed so much with the advent of big box stores and online shopping, that basing decisions on how people did their marketing in 1974 seems obsolete.  Also, given how few young people today watch linear cable, promotional strategies have shifted to micro-audiences that consume certain types of media.

On the other hand, I think that fans have over exaggerated the misuse of legendary characters.  In fact,  Don Hastings credited Goutman on his achievements in the final episodes in the NY TImes and Kathryn Hays said in EW, "We had been given six months warning, and our executive producer Chris Goutman absolutely insisted that we veterans drive story all the way to the end." So, while I can see that fans of Lisa would be disappointed about her ending, the same was not true of all legendary characters, nor was it the universal belief of the actors. 

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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