6 minutes ago, Maxim said:

Oh my god! I'm not gonna lie. I expected this level of dedication, passion and love for the genre from you... and I got it! Thank you, darling! You just are becoming the 3rd person to pick AMC as the least-destroyed soap overall. And that... as a new AMC fan... makes me so excited that... I have decades of episodes waiting for me to watch. I am literally blushing from excitement (I always blush when I'm excited!)! 

 

I blush when people are very effusive with compliments. I have been accused of not being able to take one. The strong intimation was that it is most ungracious of me. 

1 hour ago, Maxim said:

I think this cute little topic is the perfect place for a cute little question I have.

Which soap do you guys think (from the cancelled ones) in it's entirety - from start to finish... managed MOST to preserve it's quality? That would mean - the least RUINED... when the time for final curtain came. I've heard of some shows being completely destroyed before going off...  

So, repeating the question with another nuance - Which show stood the test of time, change of head-writers, regimes and etc MOST... ? 

And why not answer the contrary question - Which one was THE MOST ruined, went through most destructive changes and in the end was just a shadow of it's former self?

 

Back for more soap emotional punishment. The Most Ruined. This pains me to make this reply especially because of the reinventing factor & the brilliance in the ideas but because of the failure when we come to implementation, I have to admit that this must go to my beloved GL. 

24 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Back for more soap emotional punishment. The Most Ruined. This pains me to make this reply especially because of the reinventing factor & the brilliance in the ideas but because of the failure when we come to implementation, I have to admit that this must go to my beloved GL. 

I don't know what the quality of the writing was in these final years of GL, but the production... value... was... not my cup of tea. The show at times looks like someone picked up a phone from 2007 and just taped some people in a yard talking to each-other. Some of the actors were shot in such horrible light that their faces looked 20-30 years older than their original age. I hope I don't offend anyone that likes this style of shooting. 

4 minutes ago, Maxim said:

I don't know what the quality of the writing was in these final years of GL, but the production... value... was... not my cup of tea. The show at times looks like someone picked up a phone from 2007 and just taped some people in a yard talking to each-other. Some of the actors were shot in such horrible light that their faces looked 20-30 years older than their original age. I hope I don't offend anyone that likes this style of shooting. 

In their defense,  no one could have done what was needed with the budget they were forced to work with. And, they had some OTJ adjustments to make in the writing but once they got a grip on that I found the writing to be excellent. Shout outs to Jill Lorie Hurst & to Donna Swajeski.

What I mean... so that my words are not sitting here naked without proof and example (because not all readers have watched everything). Just... not my cup of tea.   

In essence I have to agree, Guiding Light is the show that suffered the most. But, then again, it had the longest history to lose. I mean, how could you possibly compare Capitol, Sunset Beach or Passions with their blink-and-you'd miss runs?

I'm also the most disappointed with Guiding Light's final episodes. Other than giving me a Billy and Vanessa wedding (which got crashed by Buzz and Lillian of all people), the focus is drivel surrounding 75 percent of the cast and meaningless surprises. Jeffrey and Edmund, Jonathan, Cyrus, Natalia's juvenile deliquent son, I didn't need them sucking up dwindling time in Springfield.

23 minutes ago, P.J. said:

In essence I have to agree, Guiding Light is the show that suffered the most. But, then again, it had the longest history to lose. I mean, how could you possibly compare Capitol, Sunset Beach or Passions with their blink-and-you'd miss runs?

 

I thought about this but I didn't say it. I'm glad that you did!

10 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

I thought about this but I didn't say it. I'm glad that you did!

I think that's a very important aspect actually. And I think these short-soaps are in the league of their own in a way, because we just can't compare them with the big beasts in the context of my question. They didn't last as long to have the chance to hit that many icebergs along the way.  

My general impression is that a lot of people consider AMC to be the least damaged before sinking... and GL - a complete wreck. 

 

Edited February 3Feb 3 by Maxim

4 minutes ago, Maxim said:

My general impression is that a lot of people consider AMC to be the least damaged before sinking... and GL - a complete wreck. 

 

Way too simplistic for me. Also you're overlooking how bad ATWT got to be. I mean when Chris Goutman said he did NOT want to hear from fans because he knew what the show needed. it was like all arrogance, hubris, Just awful attitude. 

1 minute ago, Contessa Donatella said:

Way too simplistic for me. Also you're overlooking how bad ATWT got to be. I mean when Chris Goutman said he did NOT want to hear from fans because he knew what the show needed. it was like all arrogance, hubris, Just awful attitude. 

As I've said it's an impression I have, not a fact and... All of this is very subjective. I'm sure some people believe GL was not the worst one. I'm just saying what I'm getting from all of you guys' answers. We could get into a discussion that can be 100 pages long, without picking our answers... and it won't be simplistic at all. LOL.

1 hour ago, Maxim said:

I don't know what the quality of the writing was in these final years of GL, but the production... value... was... not my cup of tea. The show at times looks like someone picked up a phone from 2007 and just taped some people in a yard talking to each-other. Some of the actors were shot in such horrible light that their faces looked 20-30 years older than their original age. I hope I don't offend anyone that likes this style of shooting. 

ATWT did a much better job with their outdoor stuff. I have no clue why Wheeler thought shooting through weeds or branches was necessary or attractive. And I don't buy that it was all about the new technology or the budget. They never truly learned to adapt. Wheeler got stuck in the "this is our reality" mindset and sacrificed creativity.

Just now, P.J. said:

ATWT did a much better job with their outdoor stuff. I have no clue why Wheeler thought shooting through weeds or branches was necessary or attractive. And I don't buy that it was all about the new technology or the budget. They never truly learned to adapt. Wheeler got stuck in the "this is our reality" mindset and sacrificed creativity.

I also don't buy that it's all about budget. I've studied at Theatre and Film Academy and I've seen what people can do with nothing basically. If I show these clips to some of my colleagues they would laugh and ask me if this is something that got rejected to ENTER the Academy not even talking about finishing with this. 

There comes a point where you have to ask yourself... that if you need to lower the quality TO THAT level... of caricature... then you must accept it's OVER. 

This can be applied to so many things in life. Call me a perfectionist, but if I can't do something correctly or to a certain standard... I don't do it. That's just me. Again, I have no way of knowing the dynamics of how and why this happened and I don't want to trigger emotional fans's reaction. But I have to be honest... I see GL in it's final days and I get a gag-reflex at times. It's so ugly... it could work better at just turning it off and imagining it's a radio play.

 

7 minutes ago, P.J. said:

ATWT did a much better job with their outdoor stuff. I have no clue why Wheeler thought shooting through weeds or branches was necessary or attractive. And I don't buy that it was all about the new technology or the budget. They never truly learned to adapt. Wheeler got stuck in the "this is our reality" mindset and sacrificed creativity.

I so totally disagree. Wheeler trying to do what was mandated with nowhere near the fiscal support, what do you imagine had to be done, creativity was all over everything they tried to implement without being anywhere near sufficiently budgeted. There was a good reason why so many people from so many shows visited GL to see what they were doing & how they were doing it.

7 minutes ago, Maxim said:

I also don't buy that it's all about budget. I've studied at Theatre and Film Academy and I've seen what people can do with nothing basically. If I show these clips to some of my colleagues they would laugh and ask me if this is something that got rejected to ENTER the Academy not even talking about finishing with this. 

There comes a point where you have to ask yourself... that if you need to lower the quality TO THAT level... of caricature... then you must accept it's OVER. 

This can be applied to so many things in life. Call me a perfectionist, but if I can't do something correctly or to a certain standard... I don't do it. That's just me. Again, I have no way of knowing the dynamics of how and why this happened and I don't want to trigger emotional fans's reaction. But I have to be honest... I see GL in it's final days and I get a gag-reflex at times. It's so ugly... it could work better at just turning it off and imagining it's a radio play.

 

Yep. It's a basic failure if you can't scout a better location for characters to talk than a random open field. And you can't tell me there's not one pretty place in that entire town. 

I'm sure that GL's crew did the best they could, but a lot of those sets were visual junk.

17 minutes ago, Contessa Donatella said:

I so totally disagree. Wheeler trying to do what was mandated with nowhere near the fiscal support, what do you imagine had to be done, creativity was all over everything they tried to implement without being anywhere near sufficiently budgeted. There was a good reason why so many people from so many shows visited GL to see what they were doing & how they were doing it.

Well, those shows certainly learned what not to do. 

1 minute ago, P.J. said:

Yep. It's a basic failure if you can't scout a better location for characters to talk than a random open field. And you can't tell me there's not one pretty place in that entire town. 

I'm sure that GL's crew did the best they could, but a lot of those sets were visual junk.

And even more bizarre... why while they are talking about Josh in the woods (what better place to do that)... you hear the dialogue like it's shot in studio or a quiet room. There is not enough natural background noise and etc. Maybe that was some random mistake in that particular episode... but the whole thing looks not only ugly and sloppy, but sounds creepy. The silence in background while they are yelling at each other with crisp voices... is eerie. 

And one thing also... maybe it's just a pet peeve and personal taste of mine, but the constant camera shaking is unnerving. I can't focus on people's faces. The camera is constantly shaking from left to right in some pathetic attempt to give the scenes some energy... but it fails completely. It just doesn't look right. It's Lars Von Trier's "Dancer in the dark"... gone bad.