Soaps you hate!

[Quent]

I could never get into AMC. It really had nothing to do with the storylines, though. My all-time favorite soap had always been ATWT, so I just assume all soaps were operating on the same level. Even during its worst times, what made ATWT so watchable for me was the acting. Watching powerhouse performers like Liz Hubbard, Larry Bryggmann, Maura West, Martha Byrne, Michael Park, Scott Bryce, etc. kind of spoiled. I started trying to watch AMC, but the difference in acting made it impossible. True, there were some pros (Canary, Barr), but most of the acting was atrocious. It was like watching a bad high school play, with chewing the scenery as the number one feature. I tried to stick with it, but I realized I was watching a show where flouncing hair, slapping faces, shirt removal and yelling "bitch" were more important than character development.

[Pine Charles]

Which time period did you start to watch AMC? The "shirt removal" seemed to completely stop the last few years.

Although, the others (like slapping faces) seemed to be staples. hehe! I'll always love my AMC.

That said, I never could personally get into GH or DOOL. I didn't find the characters very relatable and I loath sci-fi & mobster plots.

[frequentsoapfan]

AMC had some great actors throughout the years alot of who went on to do great things in primetime and movies unlike the overhyped current GH actors who get all the acting shine in soap press.

[Graham]

AMC was the least sexual soap for its last few years on the air. Completely devoid of romance and skin.

[juppiter]

I feel like Passions is so misunderstood... and I never even watched it regularly. Soaps are dying because they failed to adapt to the 21st century. Well, this is the one soap that pretty much did.

[DRW50]

I thought it sold itself that way but the reality of the stories was often very regressive, especially the treatment of rape.

[darraholic]

General Hospital

Passions

All My Children (2000 and on)

[frequentsoapfan]

Passions sure was able to grasp the younger folks better than alot of the other soaps. The storytelling needed major work though. Although GH's violence was proven by the soap mags to be higher than Passions. The last rape story they did(Fancy's rape) was well done until it folded into the story of her blackmailer she male brother( they never addressed the fact that her sibling raped her and her bf)

[DRW50]

I always kind of wondered if they gave up on a lot of their younger characters (Simone, Miguel, Charity, Jessica).

[frequentsoapfan]

They gave up on Miguel #3. He was nothing but an annoying self righteous ass. And he didn't fit into the family. I don't remember them ever putting enough effort into Simone. Jessica's story would've been interesting when it first started if a better actress had been in the role. But instea dbecause of the acting started out bad and got progressively worse as Jess became more and more of a dummy easily allowing Spike to set her up as a John killer.

[Ryan Chamberlain]

I only remember Jake and Amanda getting it on for the last couple of years. It was always them boinking. And, no one else.

[frequentsoapfan]

JR got it on a few times too. But yeah there wasn't much action on AMC.

[EricMontreal22]

I think this whole thread is surprisinly fascinating because it does seem to boil down to personal taste. See I think taken as a whole, AMC has had terrific acting and actually as an ensemble in its best eras it kinda reminds me of ATWT in terms of quality. Great theatre vets, usually better than average newbies playing the more pretty/hunky younger roles, etc. However, AMC has always been known to mix sincere characters and scenes and 'realism" with extreme ctheatrical camp characters and elements--something that really rubs some soap viewers the wrong way (and seemed to confuse the soap press in the 70s who genuinely resented the show for being so different, if the articles Carl has posted bear any witness). As I said, it's all personal taste, but even with Erica front and center, when I think of my much missed AMC I don't think of any of the elements you mention (and even when it was more sexually frank in the 90s it never had the parade of shirtless hunks that Days or the Bell shows in particular are always known for for me--ie shirtless at any excuse--but Pine Charles certainly is correct that oddly the past few years they seemed even afraid to have shirtless scenes, even for actors who seemed hired for that purpose alone--very odd).

For me the one that has always been the hardest to get into is Days (and by extension Passion which took everything I disliked about Days and multiplied it). I think I would have liked it in the Bell era and the early 80s, but for me it has always felt like it has the worst acting, the most *people hired cuz they're models but can't act*, the slowest and least real feeling stories and production "look". But I can't quite place why I feel this way (besides obvious reasons like the supernatural stuff etc--though supernatural elements on their own don't bother me exactly).

I did like GH during the Labine era, but it's never been a favorite of mine and I don't care for the 80s stuff I've seen or the past decade3 much--but the action/adventure style of soap never did much for me.

And I go back and forth on the Bell soaps--I like 70s Y&R from what I've seen, but his shows do seem to overemphasize some elements of soaps I dislike--a bit too overly serious even when playing camp (I appreciate the way humour traditionally was used on AMC), the slowness, the dramatic pauses, etc. But there have been periods I was hooked on.

So I guess for me it's the Nixon style of soap I love best, followed by the PGP format. But like I said I think much of this is personal taste--and also perhaps what we grow up with (AMC was my first soap).

[EricMontreal22]

And there still wasn't all that much skin. Of course it probably seemed all that much more so being up against DAYS in many markets (where they used to have any excuse for shirtlessness--I mean guys don't all rip off their shirts when they decide to play basketball) and then was followed by Valentini's One Life To Live which of course had about three shirtless guys an episode (unfortunately often the same three). It did seem odd though that with falling ratings they never really tried to sex it up more--Imean I thought they hired Jordi Vilasuso for his pecs based on those short webisodes they had of his character before he came to the show basically in his underwear, but I think he was shirtless twice during his entire run).

[EricMontreal22]

My problem with Passions is I think Reilly wrote it as shock, yet he still wrote it oddly old fashioned. I mean I would have loved a fun, campy, soap that even was a bit of a parody--like Santa Barabara and even Sunset Beach were at their peak. So, I tried to get into Passions a number of time but it was killed by several things--it was WAY too slow moving, even worse was the dialogue was poor and scenes were so repetitive (it really seemed like many characters would have the same worded conversation for MONTHS until a new story beat would be added), and the acting, aside from some vets, really didn't stack up. Add to that, that I did find the handling of issues like rape increasingly offensive (and far from fun) and it just failed IMHO.