AMC & OLTL Get Summer Run On OWN

[Chris B]

I do agree that Bo and Nora didn't do enough, but this is 2 months worth of story on a soap, 40 episodes out of over 100 intended episodes. Had the show continued airing 4 days a week, with the improved writing with the new HWs, I'm sure Bo and Nora would've been fine, as would the show as a whole.

I don't think you can look at any soap on air, past or present and say that any given 2 month period will feature the entire cast in meaningful storylines. It's just not possible with a large cast.

[~bl~]

The last episode of AMC aired on 9/19, so that can stay on the chart. On 9/18 the last episode of OLTL aired, so people would have tuned in to see the cliffhanger and then not watch on Thursday. The OLTL shows on 9/19 were a best moments recap and another that was a storyline recap.

[DramatistDreamer]

I understand that, and I really wasn't expecting for OLTL to be able to fully integrate every one of their cast member in a completely meaningful way in the short time frame that they had but I still believe that AMC better utilized their characters in basically the same span of time.

AMC's umbrella storyline, which in a way was the human trafficking story, for better or for worse, impressed me in how many characters it managed to involve-- characters that I didn't even anticipate being involved and they seemed to utilize all the inherent relationship threads among these characters. I was surprised that they even briefly involved Pete and that they didn't forget that he and Cassandra actually knew each other (which most soaps frequently forget as many characters spin off into their own little worlds).

My main point with OLTL is that had they perhaps focused the threads of their umbrella storyline with the criminal and legal aspect instead of the cat and mouse game of the two Todd's, they may have built a slightly more cohesive story thread.

I do understand though that the chase aspect of the two Todd's is a more exciting aspect right off the bat but with the schedules of the two actors being an issue, the result seemed a bit patchwork at times.

Again, there were many good aspects of the show but the umbrella storyline could've been stronger. Really JMO.

[Vee]

Bo and Nora functioned as tentpole characters in the first season of OLTL, and I was fine with that. Frankly, after the last couple of years of the network show they needed the break.

While I think OLTL had its issues, I do think the primary reason for the new AMC doing better is the brand. It was an excellent show, but word of mouth on that sort of thing only spreads online and it does it slow. Its brand is more known and with a fresh start in a new medium, it's naturally going to get more eyes IMO. I think some drop in OLTL can be attributed to the new tone, the loss of certain characters and yes, some writing drift, but I don't think that's enough to break off too many viewers when the shows were very explicitly promoted as a package deal.

[allmc2008]

I also think AMC's success was based on Brand Name. Most people I know who watch AMC watched GH and they only started because of the brand name with Luke/Laura and Erica Kane Martin Brent Cuddahy Chandler Roy Montgomery Chandler Marrick Marrick Montgomery.

[SFK]

I don't entirely buy it. I think soap viewing is almost always situational and/or generational. People don't seek out soap operas, they fall into them. Most people are working or are in school during soap viewing hours so it takes an at home elder to introduce younger fans to them in the first place, or a high school/college schedule and limited television channels for young adults to become exposed and potentially hooked. I could see college kids in the early '80s jumping on the Luke and Laura bandwagon as there are plenty of sheep out there who will pounce on whatever's "in" (see lines for croughnuts), but a soap is a soap is a soap to the uninitiated,

[SFK]

they don't know their Nadia's theme from their hourglass, and I don't believe they'd choose AMC over OLTL because of brand. What "brand"? "Soap opera" is the only brand they see. People may know who Susan Lucci is but not necessarily which soap she was on, nor do they care, nor does it matter since she's not even on it anymore. I don't believe people who weren't already watching the show on ABC were following it on OWN anyway, and if AMC did better than OLTL, I think the viewers we can thank for that are largely the same viewers who were watching these shows on ABC.

[SFK]

There's also the nostalgia factor for fans who watched once upon a time. They may be drawn to old faces like Jesse and Angie, maybe, but there's no Greg, Jenny, Tad, let alone Erica, so that's a lot of responsibility for the Hubbards (with a dose of Brooke and Joe). Susan, Tony, and Genie may have drawn national attention, but that doesn't take away from the fact that OLTL ALWAYS had its fans. AMC conveniently aired around lunch, and GH after school, but whether watching live or taping, there have always been plenty of fans of the full lineup. Folks have the warm and fuzzies for OLTL as much as they do for the others. For an old school fan, a Viki and a Dorian can be just as attractive as an Angie and a Jesse. But these are not the same shows they were thirty years ago, unrecognizble, so I don't put much weight on the nostalgia factor to begin with.

[allmc2008]

That, for the most part, convinced me.

You have no idea how many people I run into that say "Do you watch As the world Turns?? Mama used to watch it. All I remember is the hourglass in the opening".

People know about Nadia's theme and the Hour Glass but they don't know what soap. A little off topic but I hate it when people combine soap names or jack them up like. One person I know told me he owned a pizza place and he use to say to his soap-watching employees "As the Pizza Turn so do the Days of our Lives".

Back to the topic. You are definitely right that people don't seek soaps. Most people I know either don't know about them or prejudge them. Most people I know tell me they don't want to because they don't know how to learn about 40+ years of history. In reality, you really don't need to know a whole lot because soaps, unlike popular belief, move forward with storyline. All kidding aside most writers these days would like to get fans with no prior history because they would be able to write what they want to write. Most of what you need to know about the past is within dialogue and flashbacks are used for memories the characters have.

This is what they need to focus on when it comes to restructuring daytime because when the soaps stopped being multi-generational parents/grandparents stopped being interested thus there kids are unaware. Daytime screwed themselves by focusing on individual age demos because now there is a "Lost" generation. The issue with fixing this, even if the networks wanted a reassurance, is getting the soaps in the public eye. It will be nearly impossible with people like Variety and Huff Post constantly talking smack about them. When they recap within the dialogue it often looks cheesy and you can use flashbacks so often until it takes up too much storytime and becomes to repetitive.

[Soaplovers]

What I love is that two or three of my friends lecture me on the silliness and stupidty of soap operas.. so I asked them what they watch that transcends soaps. They have said the following: Grey's Anatomy, Real housewives, Dance Moms, The Hills. And i start laughing and they look confused.

[allmc2008]

There have been many of times were someone would laugh at me for watching soaps and If the person is older I would tell them that I watch classic Dallas and Dynasty. They usually have a look of confusion over there face and argue with me on how those shows are not soaps......

That said, I have rigid requirments for what a "True" soap is but those classic Dynasty and Dallas storylines along with, and to a much grater extent, Knots Landing, are more like daytime soaps than any of the current ones on TV.