Jump to content

Realism on Soap Operas


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

They were probably assuming or hoping that no daytime drama fans would be reading that article.

What those comments told me though, was that, whether pursue that particular model, they are clearly looking for a way in to using "television"/streaming or whatever the latest model will be to sell their product via entertainment on some screen. All while leaving their history behind, hopefully forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Those are good questions Faulkner.

I am one that likes soaps being an hour long and would prefer they stay that way.. (Though half hour soaps are better than no soaps at all). I particularly like the longer soaps, for when there are big casts and lots of storylines going on. I like to see more of the characters/storylines in each episodes. I feel this way about primetime dramas, and most of them are usually an hour as well. 

Regarding half hour shows, back in the day Y&R did a good job with the half hour episodes. Their shows were nice and meaty, like that episode someone posted in the classic Y&R thread that showed the Brooks sister and their father coming together at the hospital for their mother. That was a very well done, filling 30 minutes. B&B on the other hand handles their half hour shows very poorly. They focus on the same few people over and over again, and the show feels like empty calories.

Edited by xtr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

In a better world, I generally prefer hour-long shows too, as I love the big-canvas soaps (like Curlee’s GL) that networks can no longer afford. (GH is managing their larger cast relatively decently right now, but they’ve leaned down a bit.) 

I do wonder if Y&R would be better served creatively as a half-hour nowadays, as certainly the current content—which they’ve shown no interest in adjusting, despite wide dissatisfaction from viewers—doesn’t justify a full hour. But it could end up like its sister soap B&B, which hasn’t made good use of its trim runtime in years, as you say. (A 30-minute slot these days also has many more ads than the soaps we had years ago.)

I’m genuinely curious whether or not scaling down could ever be a viable option. Is it just easier to cancel something outright? At least in this country, aside from AW going back from 90 to 60 minutes in 1980 or a show completely rebooting years later (like the online AMC), you just don’t hear of it happening much. 

I know some set-in-their-ways fans would balk, but if offered the choice of a shorter, 30-minute show vs. no show at all, I feel like people would grudgingly come around. I know some posters have envisioned, instead of launching potentially expensive new programming, padding out the gaps with classic soap episodes, but that could be problematic for several reasons (one being that it’ll make it clear to viewers how inferior the current, shallow, low-budget shows are compared to soaps of yore). Plus, I’m not sure how ad sales-friendly it is.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Webmaster

Reducing the amount of content from one hour to half hour (really 36 minutes to 18/19 minutes after commercials) would drastically reduce the budget and the amount of cast the show has on contract. The long-term benefit, however, would be the ability to sell internationally and allows the show to become more bingeable on a streaming service. 

Without giving back a time slot, the network(s) could program whatever they want during the hours they own. Marketing wise, yes there would be a cost to launch a new daytime program, but no where near the outrageous prices Disney for instance spent  to launch "Katie" a few years back (roughly $80 million). I'd imagine the overall cost to produce more than programs in the five hours for CBS, three for ABC and essentially one hour for NBC would be equal to what they are spending now, but with any one hour getting two shows rather than one individual program it'll give the daytime lineups more diverse programming. At least that would be the hope.

I don't understand why networks think all daytime programming should consist of is soap operas, game shows and talk shows and primetime can be comedies, dramas, reality TV, and other genres. No one is watching TV on a schedule these days and reruns of primetime shows flourish on cable during the daytime hours. No reason they can't play around and take chances. Another tangent post. Sorry.

(This is no way means I want the networks to cancel the soaps or air reality shows in their place)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • The bit with the scarf reminds me of the fabled stuffed animal scene with Rick and Phillip. (That wasn't debunked, was it?)
    • Ohh, interesting. I instantly gravitated towards her in that episode. Of course I'm already hooked and want to know why she was trying to poison that older lady, but then how did the older lady know to switch the mugs so Susan drank her own poison...  but I have too many timelines I'm watching right now haha.  Oh, Bolger is definitely hot. I didn't realize he was on GL haha. I knew him from OLTL and other primetime stuff.
    • This is a effin shame. Eff Trump and eff the bastards that enable him.
    • I 100% agree but I think this is due to how the show is structured. It's a one family show which means there are no people in her age range that could be used as friends or contemporaries of her. The show definitely needs a second main family. I am glad someone finally said this. Especially now that the cast is gelling in their roles, he stands out like a sore thumb. No energy, no chemistry with anybody. He is just there.  I thought that was odd as well! The previous scene would've worked better as a tag for the credits.
    • That's the one and only Carrie Nye (Mrs. Dick Cavett) as Susan Piper, a deadly realtor. I don't want to spoil a lot if you ever want to see those episodes. She returns as another character in 2003. I think Grant has aged well and he always did a good job at being ripped without going too far, but he was never entirely my cup of tea either. I did think John Bolger was hot.
    • Totally agree. KKL looks great! It makes the Widge groveling so bizarre. Brooke needs to leave FC and with $B's/Liam's funding launch a rival fashion house with Hope, Rick, Katie and a secret designer. The best scenario is that Rick has been absent because he's been with very much alive C2, who is revealed on the runway as the secret designer. It'll never happen because B&B is comfortable just focusing on FC and the Forresters Marones v. Logans. But it'd been so much more interesting if the Spencers/Logans united.
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Haha that scarf thing did go on a bit too long, very odd. And what a young Rick!  I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I just never got the physical appeal of Grant Aleksander, but he's definitely a great actor. Who is the older lady around the 8:30 mark, and also ends the episode, alone and in pain? She seems like a really interesting character. I love the smoky voice and sultry, snaky vibe she seems to have.
    • I can't remember exactly but I think she lives in or is part of the cottage story with Carrie. Carrie poisons her in this episode.  I forgot Teresa was on the show. (I see that AI is insisting she wasn't - well they're wrong) Poor Maeve. I can how even she had her limits. 
    • It pisses me off that the other Duprees are making this incident all about them as well. They are playing a family of victims, acting as if Ted cheated on all of them. They should be supportive, but not like this. I have a family that makes anything that happens to me personally all about them, and seeing the same thing on TV is rage-inducing.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy