45 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

 

McPherson was the classic example of the perils of overhype. Her DAYS was one of the worst-paced and most tin-eared HW stints I can remember. I will always remember it for Chandler Massey shouting 500 times in a row that Sami was a whore, Carrie and Rafe falling in love in about 3 episodes, and Jennifer shaming her husband for being held prisoner and tortured. 

Thanks. I was struggling to think of someone acceptable who might pass muster with TPTB.

 

Therein lies the problem. If not Sally, who would be better for the show? I haven't been that impressed with Sally, but I just don't know of a better option so I'm trying to remain patient. 

44 minutes ago, UK LAW said:

I'd preciously (deliberately) ignored this thread as I didn't want to give credence to the notion that people wanted a head writer change so soon after her stories hit the air. At least 'so soon' at the point it was created.

 

And just for the sake of clarification, I definitely don't want her gone. The show more resembles the Y&R I loved and adored as a youngster than it has done in over a decade. And the examination of character and motivations (i.e the scenes in themselves) is fascinating. I feel the pieces are nearly in place in order to drive (actual) story going forward. My opinion, of course and I only speak for myself. 

 

However, I must admit to being slightly concerned about how long Sally Sussman will be given with the loss of viewers, pre-emptions or otherwise.

 

If the networks listen as much as they appear to at times, and given what happened when they gave Maria Arena Bell, Hogan Sheffer, Scott Hamner, Jill Farren Phelps and Charles Pratt Jr more time than other soaps do, they may decide to take a more 'modern' approach and exercise their option to dismiss sooner than before. 

 

What it also may do is raise the question of what type of soap/storytelling do viewers in 2017 want to see? It has said before that it may just be the fact that (any resemblance or attempt at) the Bill Bell style doesn't accord with with the tastes and attention span of the 'younger viewer'.

 

Sadly, for me, it would appear to be true.

It's tough, you know. You look at those 18-34 ratings, and they are just horrid across the board. There's no future with those ratings. All of TV, broadcast and cable, daytime and primetime, is dealing with serious audience erosion due to changing viewing habits. Everyone is living on borrowed time, and I think the networks are just biding their time until they go the way of the dinosaur. Everyone's rushing to adapt by starting OTT services, and it doesn't look like soaps will be part of the equation. I suppose the networks are just trying to sustain these shows with as little fuss as possible, stemming the audience loss as best they can, until they can find suitable, cheaper replacements, so there's no real desire to innovate or change course in anything but a superficial way. They just aren't invested, as we all know. Will anyone, with all of the competing media, really devote five hours a week to a show in an antiquated, conservative genre with 40-50 years of history when you can just binge your way through the various Netflix shows? There's less barrier to entry. And most of us acquired the soap habit from family members when we were very young, and that just doesn't happen as much anymore in any medium.

 

 

Edited February 25, 20178 yr by Faulkner

I'm not that fond of SSM (I think she has an ego that outweighs her talent considerably) but I'd get a co-HW rather than ditch her entirely. Someone new to the genre. Not Pratt, not Sheffer, not Guza, and so on.

 

I think that the effect of Netflix has become a bit of a crutch for most TV shows. Netflix is desperately overhyped by masturbatory critics who need to feel special. I don't think most of the audience that soaps are losing are flocking to Netflix. No one has dropped Y&R to see Kevin Spacey mutter and shout his way through yet another role. The problem is that the networks and the showrunners were ashamed of that audience, and now most of them have lost interest entirely, or just watch Hallmark, or Faux News, or a talk show. 

Edited February 25, 20178 yr by DRW50

I'd rather take a boring Y&R than anything I've seen for the last 10 years. 

 

Sussman's storylines all need a serious shot in the arm. And that's a co-HW who is better at structuring stories. 

 

I just want them to give Sussman at least a year. Y&R was destroyed for the last decade. It was disemboweled live on air. She hasn't done anything except write safe, boring storylines, with some really well done individual episodes thrown in. 

 

Sally has made YR horribly dull, boring and a cure for insomnia. Her ratings are sinking. Rehire JFP she will goose the ratings back up. All is forgiven Jill.

Nobody is going to find a new head writer to give them instant gratification.  I'm enjoying the show and love that it seems like Y&R was many years ago.

 

K Ponds enjoy the show my prediction it dips under 4 million. Ready to hit record lows under salug 

47 minutes ago, Ponds said:

Nobody is going to find a new head writer to give them instant gratification.  I'm enjoying the show and love that it seems like Y&R was many years ago.

I'm liking it as well. it does need so serious tweaking, but I am WAY past stunt SLs, no characterization and just downright stupid stories...like when JFP and CP were there. nowhere near perfect but better than what it has been IMPO. 

12 hours ago, YRfan23 said:

sigh.....if something did happen I would at least hope Alden would takeover....I know that won't happen, but I would want to see how it would go anyways....

 

Alden executed a fictional takeover once. Come on, boo, take over in real life too!

 

11 hours ago, DaytimeFan said:

I'd rather take a boring Y&R than anything I've seen for the last 10 years. 

 

Sussman's storylines all need a serious shot in the arm. And that's a co-HW who is better at structuring stories. 

 

I just want them to give Sussman at least a year. Y&R was destroyed for the last decade. It was disemboweled live on air. She hasn't done anything except write safe, boring storylines, with some really well done individual episodes thrown in. 

 

Exactly. And the answer to a co-HW is so obvious, it's painful! 

Slight tangent, but apparently there may be another writers' strike on the horizon.

http://deadline.com/2017/02/writers-guild-america-contract-talks-approach-wga-members-ready-for-strike-1201989113/

2 minutes ago, Faulkner said:

Slight tangent, but apparently there may be another writers' strike on the horizon.

http://deadline.com/2017/02/writers-guild-america-contract-talks-approach-wga-members-ready-for-strike-1201989113/

So who is not a WGA writer? Imagine someone at Y&R replacing Sally and her/his work being better...LOL  Ratings across the board are bad. Writers aren't worth the money....sorry....

2 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

So who is not a WGA writer? Imagine someone at Y&R replacing Sally and her/his work being better...LOL  Ratings across the board are bad. Writers aren't worth the money....sorry....

 

Any writer who is willing to go fi-core will have to be willing to pretty much never be in the WGA again and never get any major writing work again.

Kay Alden went fi-core during the strike back in 2007-2008 so I suppose it's conceivable she could step in should a new strike happen?

 

depends on how fast the ratings slide.  I can see CBS trying to repurpose the team by convincing Kay to take the co-headwriter role (dump Thomson which I half expect them do do anyway) and elevate Bibel or Esser to co-head writers along with Alden/Sally.  But the current structure aint working so far.

Maybe Mal Young can bring in some of his writers from the British Soaps.  

48 minutes ago, Cruising Soaps said:

Maybe Mal Young can bring in some of his writers from the British Soaps.  

I think Mal may be part of the problem; he seems ineffectual (creatively speaking).  Any long term fan would have known to make the changes he made when he came in i.e. remodel some of the sets etc.  So while many fans were enthused at his early style changes, it wasn't rocket science.  The lighting he implemented is absolutely dreadful though and he doesn't seem to be guiding Sally and Kay on a creative vision that's interesting or watchable.  That's why he's been hired; so I think he needs to change course as well or he needs to go.  If CBS wouldn't unduly interfere, Sally MacDonald should be EP and Slater/Esser should be head writers.  Why is that the production company has failed to look within to promote as Sony has done time and again at Days? Days has a history of promoting producers, dialogue and break down writers to the writing staff (not just Higley) i.e. Anderson, Quan, Milstein, Schoettle, Laiman, Allen, Depreist, Smith.  I'm sure I'm missing a few.  AMC did it with McTavish and Broderick.  Sally did work under Bell but she hadn't contributed to story in over ten years and it shows. She boasted about not watching the show after she was fired, but that's not something to be proud of, or smart if you want to head write the show later on. If you want a job in daytime you watch daytime. She wanted the salary but so far doesn't deserve it. 

Edited February 26, 20178 yr by RavenWhitney