Members All My Shadows Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 I think the whole hour expansion was a result of soaps (and daytime as a whole) being so big and successful in the late 70s/early 80s. They probably thought that popularity would last forever, and so they went with it. IMO, once they realized it wasn't gonna last forever, someone should have started to look at what would be the best/most efficient way to start cutting the shows back down to 30 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 I think they shouldn't have given up on developing new soaps. They started expanding soaps when newer soaps were not a success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SOAPSFOREVER Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 When soaps initially expanded to one hour, most rose. The real question remained, however: could soaps sustain story for an hour, 52 weeks a year, for 10, 15, 20 years, and keep an audience engaged. I think the answer has been a resounding: no. There aren't enough new plots under the sun to keep that level of storytelling going. Bill Bell knew it, which is why he was opposed to taking Y&R to an hour. Also, with the shorter attention spans of the audience today, and the large number of competing shows on cable and the internet, the hour format makes even less sense. I'd like to see them all back at 30 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OldGHFan Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 I think one of the biggest blunders in soap opera history is not developing new behind the scenes talent. For the last 3 decades, we witnessed the same dam# people rotating between all the soaps. No wonder they're all stale and old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lovely_m Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 Here's the next set of blunders http://www.welovesoaps.net/2011/09/blunders2015.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 So glad they included that about radio soaps! There was no big reason why radio soaps - or radio drama - had to go. This had been a thriving genre for decades. The UK has managed to keep radio drama and the US just gave up, stopped caring. A few soap radio dramas showed up in the 70's but it was not the same. I don't buy that spoilers did anything to hurt the genre. If stories were good enough, spoilers wouldn't matter. Besides, Bill Bell always knew how to release just enough information - spoilers never hurt his shows. If we didn't have spoilers, I would have tuned out of soaps for good about 15 years ago. What a much-needed comment on the selfish blunders by Goutman in ATWT's final years, and especially the crappy ending for Lisa. I don't think the John/Roman stuff did any huge damage to DAYS. Hogestyn continued to be a very popular actor for years after the Two Romans story. I do think they were wrong to recast Roman with Josh Taylor, but I don't understand why this is on a list for ALL TIME blunders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JaneAusten Posted September 7, 2011 Members Share Posted September 7, 2011 They were so on spot with Goutman and the debacle in the last few years of that show. He couldn't even give the show a dignified ending. And IA on Guiding Light but its such a shame Peapack was such a flop and they didn't have people in the know helping them because with good storytelling GL might have gotten a few more years. The storytelling the last year of the show was good relatively speaking. I think there is a point about spoilers. I do think they give away too much info but the stories are also fairly redundant so even a cliffhanger seems to have the same predictable result. The Todd promo is a perfect example of something leaked that they actually managed to keep quiet for a long time. Maybe it would not have mattered whether they let the info out or not who knows. I think the Days items have validity. TO me it shows an utter disrespect for soap fans to think you can fool people into thinking you can bring the same actor back and play someone new as if Days viewers for example were supposed to forget WN played Roman successfully and then comes back to play someone else totally irrelevant and this business about Corday keeping Josh Taylor as ROman when he also played someone else because he's a buddy. The entire John Black story regardless of his popularity was confusing as heck. Days in particular seems to have some perpensity for bringing back an old actor to play a new role when the role they originated they were extremely popular in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 20. Networks and soaps spoiling their own storylines Amen to that! I hate how everything gets spoiled now. They reveal so much to the soap mags and in their promos. Its rather annoying and ruins the element of surprise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tune_in_tomorrow Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 I also agree about the spoilers. At the very least, they don't help build suspense. It's easy to take a casual approach to viewing if you know what's coming down the pike. I used to love the element of surprise. The Salem Slasher murders on DAYS, the unveiling of Lucy Coe on GH, Didi's death on OLTL...those all jump out at me as out of left field. At the time, any spoilers that I remember were very vague: "A major character will leave Bay City..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 I agree about spoilers too, sorry Carl. I try my best to avoid them, but it's pretty hard if you read any soap press or sites. Yes, stories should have less predictable soapy conclusions, etc--but I think it's backfired on what networks thought they would do, which is lure casual and ex viewers into tuning in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 I actually think it's fairly easy to avoid spoilers if you want to - most of the boards I go to usually clamp down on this. The problem is there are no spoilers I care about avoiding. I guess that's just me, because even if I enjoy a story I don't mind knowing more detail, but beyond that, a lot of soap stories in recent years haven't even had endings, or the endings have been retconned and undone time and time again, so who cares? To me spoilers is just one of those easy targets, like the OJ trial, cable, and women apparently being locked in their homes all day until 1994. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 It is an easy target in a way, I agree, but I also think it plays a part. And some spoilers are very hard to avoid--like which actors are coming back which ABC even posts on their main board if you go to read yesterday's recap or something non spoilery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JackPeyton Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 While i do agree with you about spoilers, i still cant believe you dont think cable had anything to do with ratings going down. It upped the competition from a few to a lot. and yes, cable was around in the 80's... even the late 70's, but it became widespread and common to have in the 90's. its a combo of things, for sure, but cable played more than a minor role in the factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 I agree cable played something of a role, I just don't believe it deserves a huge amount of blame for the rapid ratings losses of the last 10-15 years. Soaps did not give anyone a reason to watch. Viewers didn't want to leave - they were chased away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted September 8, 2011 Members Share Posted September 8, 2011 IA. Its kinda hard to avoid when you have the weeklypromo airing in the middle of the show which reveals the next week or 2 of story, actually spoiling major plot points. Or how about the SID commercials. Whats worse is when ABC has a spoiler which slashes at the bottom of the screen. Sonny shoots Dante today on GH! Now who the hell was able to avoid that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.