February 20-24, 2006

[Adam]

If I ever bash a show, its because I watch it consistently LOL lately if people have noticed I've been pretty much bashing Y&R left right and centre, because it has let me down, a viewer of over 10 years.

[SteveFrame]

For the same reason that Bree Williamson did not get a nomination this year

And that is all I will say.

[OneLife Fan]

They overlooked her..which was completely rude!! She can act circles around most of the Days and Passions cast.

[SteveFrame]

I like you a lot Claude and for that reason I won't even dignify that last remark with a comment - out of respect for our friendship.

I would never make a comment about a show you watch like the one you just made. They are all overlooked in the same way.

[OneLife Fan]

It is all fine with me Steve. Anyways....i was hoping AMC or OLTL would have passed GH this past week in the ratings.

[PJA]

First of all I have watched more than a handful of episodes. Second of all, it's not my fault that the show sucked when I watched it. Occasionally I do glance at other soaps that I don't regularly watched. I found AMC and OLTL and even Passions to be watchable and the acting good. But I guess those opinions aren't valuable either. I guess I shouldn't say those shows are decent without watching more than a few episodes.

When I first started watching Y&R and GL (the first two soaps I watched regularly), I didn't have to watch more than one episode to know that I liked the show and was going to be tuning in the next day to see what happened next. Days is totally the opposite. And I'm sorry if you don't like my opinion, but to get angry over it is childish and absurd. I could care less if someone is angry because of my opinion. If I had came here and bashed other posters then I could see why someone would be mad.

Here's a little question..if I had watched Days for the first time today and said I thought it was a good show with good actors, would I be getting bashed for making such a quick opinion after one episode??

I agree with you, especially the last line. I just find the acting to be too cartoonish for my tastes and maybe the Emmy people agree, who knows. But if anyone else likes it, good for them. Diff'rent strokes for Diff'rent folks.

[OneLife Fan]

Rise OLTL...rise!! Where are all the fans?

[Ryan]

They are watching GH and AMC, that's where the OLTL fans are

[OneLife Fan]

Say's you....but not all true!!

[Miss Trudy]

The next time one of you soap opera 'experts' do a critique of a show you only catch during commercial breaks from another soap, remember the old pot-kettle-black phrase. There are plenty of soapaholics here who do not watch all nine soap operas but pretend they possess the knowledge of someone who does.

[Ryan]

Well said Miss Trudy Where ya been? I've been missing reading your posts

[Miss Trudy]

You sweetheart! Flattery will get you everywhere! I have been raising a little hell in other parts of the world but I have now returned home. What a nice surprise to see my little Guiding Light jumping up to a 2.5 for a couple days. I bet we will be seeing more Lewises soon if this trend continues!

[Adam]

GL is really the only soap over the past year-two years which has neither lost much audience or gained any, talk about consistent!

[SteveFrame]

I hope that is true Miss Trudy. I have always loved the Lewis family. I really loved Mindy - loved just about all the actresses who played her.

[jpoliver78]

To comment on "Guiding Light"...the Monday episode aired on a federal holiday - Presidents Day, and most (if not all) soaps benefit from a government holiday. As far as last week goes, only "One Life to Live" scored lower (a 2.8 vs. a 2.9 the week prior); "All My Children" stayed the same (3.1), while all the others increased (except for NBC's soaps, which were pre-empted for Olympic coverage).

The Wednesday episodes, "Inside the Light" have had decidedly mixed results. Over the past 6 weeks, those episodes have fallen between a 2.1 and a 2.5 rating. Two weeks the Wednesday episode tied for the lowest daily rating for the soap. This past week when it scored a 2.5 was the higest individual rating for a Wednesday episode and tied for the highet daily rating for the soap.

As far as whether Nielsen will count Monday's ratings: yes. Regardless of being a federal holiday, Monday was still a regular day ratings-wise. Allowing the Monday ratings to be counted may seem unfair to fans of the two pre-empted soaps, but not calculating them would be unfair to the other seven soaps.

Now for my rant...

Concerning the issue of sweeps stunts. I don't see anything wrong with sweeps "stunts", but they shouldn't come at the expense of other storylines. I am only a regular viewer of "As the World Turns" and "The Young and the Restless", but I try to know enough about the other seven to carry on a discussion about them. It seems to me that the producers/writers at the ABC soaps (perhaps on orders from ABC Daytime honcho Brian Frons) forsake existing storylines for the previously mentioned storylines. At "General Hospital" for instance, the epidemic storyline virtually froze the action in place. One developing storyline - Lucas' coming out to his family - was mentioned only in passing and was only advanced by his quick revelation to his (now deceased) father. If a soap sidelines the regular action in favor of "showstopper stunts", it cheats the casual viewer by not giving them a reason to stick around after the stunt is over. A hallmark of a good writer is to allow the big stunt to occur while existing storylines continue to playout (and possibly start some new ones). Failure to do so results in the yo-yo ratings of big increases during sweeps and an equally big crash once sweeps conclude.

Another writing compaint is the time given to a single storyline. I'll use the Lucas/GH storyline as an example again. Seemingly over the course of a week to 10 days, Lucas chose to include his group of friends in on his sexual orientation. By doing so, he raised the attention of a homophobic bar patron who attacked him in the park. After returning to seek revenge, he angrily comes out to everyone else in the middle of a police station. Compare that to a similar storyline on CBS's "As the World Turns". Fellow teen Luke is also struggling with his sexual identity and the idea of telling his parents whom he fears won't understand. Only this week (March 3) did Luke actually utter the word "gay", one day after his father expressed concern over his son's orientation. The audience was allowed to invest in the storyline over a period of several weeks and see Luke's interest in a male friend evolve from friendship to attraction and the concern that it caused Luke. The writers at ATWT didn't feel the need to rush the storyline but allow it to play out in a timely manner - even scheduling the big reveal after February sweeps (even though viewers had long since guessed the character's orientation on their own). One similar storyline, two difference networks and soaps, and two different ways of telling the story. Personally I prefer ATWT's method - it allows viewers to become more invested in the story and characters, which in turn, will likely cause the viewer to tune in more frequently.

The real problem soaps have now in writing is the lack of an iconic figure in the writers room. Once upon a time there was Irna Phillips, then Agnes Nixon, followed by William J. Bell, Sr., and later by Doug Marland, among other notables like Harding LeMay and Henry Slesar. The only person who comes close to filling the gap today (love him or hate him) is James E. Reilly. Of these I mentioned, only Nixon is still alive, and although she retains consulting credits on her ABC soaps, "All My Children" and "One Life to Live", her involvement is more of a figurehead nature. (LeMay is still living, but retired.) In today's industry, executives are quick to fire a writer or producer at the first hint of a ratings decline. It is increasingly likely that the 20+ year stints like Slesar had at "Edge of Night" (which was cancelled one year after his firing) and Bell at Y&R are never to be repeated.

I will always take the position that writing is the corner stone of soaps. When the genre first appeared, it was the stories (and the writing) that lured viewers in. Attractive actors never hurt, but that model-turned-actor wouldn't have anything to say if it weren't for writers. If, as some have suggested, the problem is in dialogue, head writers usually do not actually write dialogue - instead they create the widerange, long term plot lines and leave associate writers to actually pen the daily scripts.

Ultimately, if the quality of the writing improves, coupled with improved quality in acting, then soaps can begin a long journey in gaining back the viewers who have left the genre.