Soaps made a mistake of hopping on the trend of killing off main characters. Primetime shows started breaking that rule a few years and it generated lots of buzz when it was done right. (I blame Joss Whedon) The difference is primetime shows have an end date, soaps supposedly didn't.

Killing off a character for short-term plot also kills off YEARS of potential stories. OLTL wiped out an entire generation of characters in the last few years: Drew, Duke, Al, Jen, Keri, Talia if you count her. I'd even throw CJ in there since there's been no indication that he really exists. AMC was a lot more random but just as damaging: Braeden, Erin, (I know we didn't need more Laverys but still), Simone, Dixie, Di, Babe, Noah (offscreen) and the most pointless deaths I can think of, Julia Santos and Stuart Chandler. Those are just off the top of my head. Then the shows bring on new characters to replace the ones they killed. Krystal morphed into Dixie, Marissa replaced Babe and Julia's been replaced by Cara.

I guess it doesn't matter anymore now that the shows are over but future soap writers would probably do well to just let people leave town on their own two feet every now and then.

I would include a few more generational "kills" in the Lord family. They killed Kevin Jr. and made Kevin sterile. They killed his only son Duke and (since Kelly's return) all but erased Kevin's "grandson" Zane. They killed two newborn daughters of Jessica and made her a mostly-absentee mother to her two surviving kids. They killed two of Viki's sons-in-law, Nash and Jared, in their (soap) prime. They "killed" Sarah with bad recasts and terrible plots.

I don;t have a problem killing off characters when there is a lasting impact and story. I know a lot of people to this day still believe killing off Cassie on Y&R was a huge blunder(including the original showrunners) but I think it actually drove lots of story for Nick and Sharon and realistic story and actually changed both Nick and Sharon forever. You could equate Sharon's behavior over the past so many years jumping from bed to bed as some sort of reaction to Cassies death and the aftermath. Long term characters that have run their course in many ways makes sense. While I hated them, I could argue John Abbott's death and Alan Quartermaines deaths made sense based on limited story potential for both characters. What neither show did was actually let their deaths fuel any real lasting impact to the canvas, where tentpole characters like John Abbott and Alan Q should have. Deaths of younger characters like Dixie, Babe, Julia on AMC no sense, same as Emily, AJ, Georgie on GH, Brad, Colleen on Y&R. Not a lick of sense for any of these other than shock value and all those deaths yes even Babe impacted the canvas in negative ways. I thought the deaths of Colleen, Emily, Georgie, and Dixie were particularly hateful and I would add AJ to that

I guess since AMC Is ending it doesn't matter at this point. I doubt most of these characters are coming back alive and we already know people like MEK are not going to online AMC. So bringing back Dixie as dumb as it is I don't mind. Zach I could care less about but its nice for their fans.

Let me just say this about OLTL's new studio space under Prospect Park. The show will remain in NY and the show will film in more than one studio location around New York.

I would include a few more generational "kills" in the Lord family. They killed Kevin Jr. and made Kevin sterile. They killed his only son Duke and (since Kelly's return) all but erased Kevin's "grandson" Zane. They killed two newborn daughters of Jessica and made her a mostly-absentee mother to her two surviving kids. They killed two of Viki's sons-in-law, Nash and Jared, in their (soap) prime. They "killed" Sarah with bad recasts and terrible plots.

Jessica is a good example of the other problem. Killing off viable characters then creating plot point babies that suck up time and money. I consider Jessica the OLTL equivalent of Tad. Both characters were saddled with way too many kids, it's just that half of Jessica's are dead and half of Tad's are the result of pitiful retcons. Then to add insult to injury these kids get sorased beyond all recognition like Colby (AMC) or Duke (OLTL) just to replace characters that got killed off anyway or they get killed off themselves.

Let me just say this about OLTL's new studio space under Prospect Park. The show will remain in NY and the show will film in more than one studio location around New York.

Since this is technically new production, will they get to take advantage of the tax breaks?

Edited August 2, 201114 yr by marceline

Let me just say this about OLTL's new studio space under Prospect Park. The show will remain in NY and the show will film in more than one studio location around New York.

Awesome. I was worried about people like JvD following the show cross-country.

Errol what does that mean exactly?

According to Jill Larson at The AMC Event Prospect Park Plans to shoot 260 episodes a year and make AMC Edgier and by using On Demand Viewing hopes to attract a younger audience. So if these shows are going to pay to view...I aint paying...lol...

Edited August 2, 201114 yr by Soapsuds

I have no problem paying a small nominal fee to view AMC & OLTL. I'm excited at the idea of them being edgier. Bring it on Prospect Park :-)

I'm very pleased OLTL is staying in New York.

Yep won't be paying to watch either show and I think alot of people will be doing the same

If they do plan on shooting that many episodes they need to heavily focus on selling this series in other countries. It's very ambitious. It's easy to expand if something is successful, but it'll look bad if they end up cutting back on episodes. Peyton Place started twice weekly and it got bigger and bigger (same with the UK soaps) depending on ratings.

I hope these soaps are available Pay-Per-View with AT&T U-Verse. I'd definitely pay for it. They also need to get it on Netflix and other services. Shame there isn't a cable network that could also air them, but who knows what the future will bring?

ETA:

Why are people in general so negative at the thought of paying to watch soaps? The same thing happened when WoST decided to charge for the expensive service they provide. And it always comes up negatively when a websoap (like Venice) wants to charge. Why does that bother people? You have to pay to watch True Blood and many other shows on HBO, Starz and Showtime. That isn't met with such negativity, but otherwise it is.

In this case they actually seem to be producing shows on a major scale so I don't see the problem. It's no different that paying for a DVD or HBO or going to the movies. I will definitely pay as long as the shows are good, just like I do for all my favorite shows on cable.

Edited August 2, 201114 yr by Chris B

Ron do you mean the FCW? cause I read people were told not to ask anything about that and I don't see Jill volunteering any info. I think this is someone's speculation

According to Jill Larson at The AMC Event Prospect Park Plans to shoot 260 episodes a year and make AMC Edgier and by using On Demand Viewing hopes to attract a younger audience.

Good luck to them.

I don't know enough, is On Demand a pay service only?

And is 260 about how many they produce now per year?

Edited August 2, 201114 yr by alexisfan07

I'm very pleased OLTL is staying in New York.

Me too. Errol mentions that they'll be shooting in various local studios which sounds interesting, maybe even a little hectic. Is this novella/arc thing still a go? If so, then I'd say that would make studio hopping not such a big deal if we were talking one location per "season". That said, I still have a strong hunch that we will be seeing more and more outdoor shooting. I think that's just an established trend on AMC and OLTL that will carry over in this next incarnation.