38 minutes ago, P.J. said:

I don't think that's just your taste. I would've called it off-putting and amateurish.

Repeating myself but most common complaint!

1 hour ago, kalbir said:

The P&G shows were effectively over in the aftermath of OJ. The ABC shows were effectively over with the sale of ABC to Disney.

It's not that I ever am unappreciative of the perspective you add, but, the other side of the coin is that it wasn't over till the bitter end or put another way when the fat lady sang & when it came to the once remarkable NY soap scene she sang her heart out & fans were left with both bittersweet memories & plain ole bitterness, both! 

2 hours ago, Khan said:

Which is tragic, because, for many years, ABC and CBS appeared to be very invested in their soaps.  More so, I would say, than NBC, whose interest, IMO, was half-hearted.

GL was the CBS soap that barely held on. Sometimes I wonder if ATWT might have been kept if Moonves hadn't wanted to give his wife a job, but P&G seemed fully checked out, so I put some blame on them.

If Frons had genuinely cared about all the ABC soaps, they could have run a few more years. He sacrificed them for a show that only lasted a few months, and a show people only remember because of a guy that was accused of harassment. I would say he could be happy his beloved GH is still on, but he's on the outside looking in, forever and always.

Edited February 4Feb 4 by DRW50

I think Frons genuinely tried to remake and reignite the ABC soaps when he came in. He brought back popular, well-known writers who were considered emblematic of their shows, which wasn't a bad idea conceptually. Except he then proceeded to either micromanage them according to his own preferences and needs, or let their worst creative excesses play out onscreen - or both. And it only got worse.

Frons felt he could rebrand each soap into the image of a popular primetime or cable show - he was very explicit about turning AMC into Sex and the City, GH into The Sopranos, OLTL into Law and Order or something, etc. - and he couldn't. And when he couldn't he instead just kept tripling down. It's only in recent times we've begun to really scratch the surface of some of his preferential treatment (like the horror stories out of 2000s AMC). He only abandoned the soaps when it was them or his job. And ultimately it was both.

I think everything post-Frons at ABCD (outside the show) has been largely total disinterest and cruise control with brief flare-ups of executive investment, like around 2013-2015. I do think Varni, who used to be a loudmouth nobody and potentially still is, has a heavier hand than he usually would in typical circumstances because it seems like there's just no one else at the network but Frank and him who cares enough to mind the store. Except when it's time for an anniversary, or when they get a breakout star like Nicholas Chavez.

3 hours ago, kalbir said:

NBC never really recovered in daytime from their ratings drop in the second half of the 1970s.

I agree.  Once ratings for AW and TD fell, it was curtains for the NBCD lineup. 

I don't think NBC was all that invested in TEXAS or GENERATIONS - Brandon Tartikoff might've been high on the latter show, but I don't think anyone else at the network was.  Whatever enthusiasm they might've had for SaBa likely evaporated in the wake of all those lawsuits; PASSIONS only ran for as long as it did, IMO, because they were paying JER through their noses and they needed something to fill that time slot; and once SuBe proved to be a non-starter, they pretty much washed their hands of that show, too.

The only real successes they've had post-1970's were courtesy of DAYS, which had a resurgence in the next decade.  But, as you've said, @kalbir, it all fell apart toward the end; and in the meantime, DAYS turned itself into a completely different show (and would again during the JER era).

People like Brian Frons never understand that emulating whatever is "hot" atm just makes you look pathetic and like a poseur.  Don't ask AMC to copy whatever SATC is doing, because if viewers want to watch SATC, then that's what they'll watch (God help 'em).  Just let AMC be AMC, and the viewers will come.

Edited February 4Feb 4 by Khan

20 minutes ago, Khan said:

emulating whatever is "hot" atm just makes you look pathetic and like a poseur. 

100% this.

Plenty of examples in these threads

https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/65429-1980s-trends/

https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/65814-1990s-trends/

 

 

10 minutes ago, kalbir said:

100% this.

Plenty of examples in these threads

https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/65429-1980s-trends/

https://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/topic/65814-1990s-trends/

Don't get me wrong, there were instances when incorporating trends into the storytelling actually worked for a soap.  For example: when DAYS went all in with the MTV/"Miami Vice" stuff during the run-and-gun '80's.  Al Rabin and Shelley Curtis did phenomenal work producing those moments, often outdoing GH, which thought anything could be made better if you edit it like "Saturday Night's Main Event."

Edited February 4Feb 4 by Khan

After Lin Bolen left NBC daytime lacked direction. Madeliene David/Michael Brockman wrought havoc.

Lovers and Friends yanked after 13 weeks. For Richer/For Poorer a dismal failure.

Days  and TD plummeting . 90 min AW. Spinning off the misguided Texas from an ailing AW.

Constant headwriter changes.

They never really recovered from that era.

 

That special often feels like a goodbye to the genre for me.

9 hours ago, DRW50 said:

GL was the CBS soap that barely held on. Sometimes I wonder if ATWT might have been kept if Moonves hadn't wanted to give his wife a job, but P&G seemed fully checked out, so I put some blame on them.

If Frons had genuinely cared about all the ABC soaps, they could have run a few more years. He sacrificed them for a show that only lasted a few months, and a show people only remember because of a guy that was accused of harassment. I would say he could be happy his beloved GH is still on, but he's on the outside looking in, forever and always.

I take objection to your phrasing, saying as you have here, If Frons had genuinely cared about & then you go on but I want to stop here. In 1983 when Michael Kape first interviewed him, already, at that point, so relatively early on, Frons already hated soaps & wanted to destroy them. So, my question to you is why are you under the impression that Frons cared about the ABC soaps at all, much less genuinely?

Still shocked OLTL was canceled and it got better rating than GH... Angela Shapiro was the best President for ABC Daytime in the 90's 

13 minutes ago, Marco Dane said:

Still shocked OLTL was canceled and it got better rating than GH... Angela Shapiro was the best President for ABC Daytime in the 90's 

Well, I count her better than Frons or his boss, Sweeney, but how do you explain Linda Dano on all 4 soaps? You have to admit that was a peculiarly bone-headed move. As a matter of fact when I look at leadership at ABC during that time I get as far as Wendy Riche & then one more step to FMB but then I can go no further for my reason mentioned above.

Edited February 4Feb 4 by Contessa Donatella

14 hours ago, DRW50 said:

This is one of the reasons why ATWT's last years just make me angry to even think about - so much of their last 10-15 years. Many of the pieces were still in place. Yet we got so much heartlessness, callous, and sickness with people who were clueless or ashamed of ATWT's essence - and as a bonus, a steady stream of stunt casting that no one asked for and led to a slew of characters being ruined.

It had been tepid for years beforehand, but to me, ATWT's heart was really gutted under Chris Goutman and Hogan Sheffer. HS' writing became cold, mean-spirited, and emotionally and morally bankrupt. It was clear he neither understood nor cared about the legacy of the show and its characters. The foolish stunt casting was painful to endure. None of the stunt-hired actors matched the quality of their predecessors, and because some/most of the newbies were poorly miscast, beloved characters were gratuitously decimated. Nostril-flaring, hammy Roger Howarth was a disaster compared to charming Scotty Holroyd. The once nuanced and multi-dimensional Craig Montgomery became smarmy and shallow  when Scott Bryce was replaced by Hunt Block. Dusty Donovan, once a decent, upright young man with a moral compass, devolved into an unpleasant, grubby schlub when Brian Bloom was replaced by Grayson McCouch. UGH!

14 hours ago, DRW50 said:

I don't really care about how location shots looked as that was never what I watched soaps for. You could bring F.W. Murnau back from the dead, I'm still not going to sit through Danielle pawing all over Craig as she calls him "daddy."

THAT. WAS. EGREGIOUS.😡

1 hour ago, vetsoapfan said:

It had been tepid for years beforehand, but to me, ATWT's heart was really gutted under Chris Goutman and Hogan Sheffer. HS' writing became cold, mean-spirited, and emotionally and morally bankrupt. It was clear he neither understood nor cared about the legacy of the show and its characters. The foolish stunt casting was painful to endure. None of the stunt-hired actors matched the quality of their predecessors, and because some/most of the newbies were poorly miscast, beloved characters were gratuitously decimated. Nostril-flaring, hammy Roger Howarth was a disaster compared to charming Scotty Holroyd. The once nuanced and multi-dimensional Craig Montgomery became smarmy and shallow  when Scott Bryce was replaced by Hunt Block. Dusty Donovan, once a decent, upright young man with a moral compass, devolved into an unpleasant, grubby schlub when Brian Bloom was replaced by Grayson McCouch. UGH!

And then there's Meg. Her character was completely different when they recast her. From snarky and manipulative to weak and neurotic. With all of those recasts, I never thought of them as the old characters. I just thought of them as new characters with the same name as the old characters.