I really liked Langan. I mean give him some credit. He wrote most of the baby switch, he created Shelle, he came up with NEW things (ex. tropical temptaion). I thought he was great.

And people think JER was bad. This is why I have to remind them of the October 1999-April 2002 era.

I only ever was driven to not watch during the summer of 2001. I stopped watching during this JER era atleast 4 times.

I really liked Langan. I mean give him some credit. He wrote most of the baby switch, he created Shelle, he came up with NEW things (ex. tropical temptaion). I thought he was great.

but he didn't write the good parts. Cwikly & Brash did. Bo & Hope finding out about the switch ... JT leaving ... Lexie running off with Isaac and getting comitted.

Kinda true. He did direct The Affair, which was no only well written (*cough*Sheri*cough) but visually breathtaking.

but who was the production designer and art director?

Question.

Was he responsible for the two Romans fiasco back in 1991? If so.......

May he burn in everlasting hell, forced to watch an endless loop of Farah Fath acting tapes.

well ... really, Mimi was always the sidekick untill Chloe left and Dena Higley needed someone to fill the void. She didn't get her own airtime or stories till Higley, really. Langan kept her in her place

Sorry, I don't think he was any better as a producer than a writer.

I hated him as a writer, but I do believe in giving credit where credit is due. The show looked professional and classy under his watch, even if the content was not - think Salem Place, Titan, Marlena's Penthouse, refurbished hospital, Maison Blanche, Aremid, Paris, Rome, Alamein mansion (which Viv burnt), refurbished Di Mera mansion (which was tacky as Kimberly's mansion and then tacky again as Tony's place) etc. The lighting was better, makeup, clothes - all better than today - the producer is responsible for co-ordinating that. Read this post for a good explanantion - http://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/index.p...st&p=247524 Anyway, he learnt his producing craft at Y&R, and he did it well at Days.

It was him who presided over the departures of Shaughnessy, Evans, Reckell, Pease, Ashford, Chappell & Sabatino all in the space of 2 years.

Some of those were budget cuts, most were voluntary (Shaughnessy, Evans) (Chappell & Sabatino - Chappell didn't like days, they both wanted to go to the East Coast), one was health related (Pease), one was even JERk (Ashford).

It was him who made the disastrous decision to SORAS the teens and make them the focal point of the show in 99/00 (that was producer, not a writer's decision).

Since he was both at the time, can't say this with certainty - One thing is certain - he had too much power and Corday let him do whatever he wanted. I remember a rumour that Corday wanted to fire him much sooner, but NBC blocked it until the ratings went down the tube in late 2001.

It was a producer's decision to fire a 3-time Emmy winner in Lorraine Broderick and appoint himself headwriter.

Again, he had too much power. JER said after Maison Blanche, the show didn't interfere with him, and Langan obviously convinced Corday to let him write the show. Sussman Morina hinted that she left because the show interfered especially in the second year (she had no control over storyline). Broderick implied the same thing. After JER left and sometime into Sussman's tenure, Langan became a control freak - but the overiding theme is Corday trusts his no.2 way too blindly. I happen to believe that this is still true - I think he acts on Wyman's recommendations - I think all the firings on the show are decided by Wyman, not Corday. I don't think Corday is involved in day to day runnings of the show, but he backs his trusted man, the co-EP. JMO - I can't prove it, I just see the trend.

The show lost nearly HALF of its viewership during the 12 years he was executive producer.

Thats clearly not true. When he took over in 1991, the show was averaging around a volatile 5; The highest the show got was the Susan reveal of 6.9 in 1997. Under his writing watch he started off consistently ar around 4.2. When he was fired the ratings had slumped to 3.4, which was only in the last 4 months - from stupid teen island onwards and the non-november sweeps of 2001. Oddly enough the ratings were solid for most of writing tenure (no idea why they were so robust - the show was awful). In 1991, a rating point was 931k homes. In 2001 it was 1,055k homes. Converting his worst 3.4 to 1991 standards = 3.85 - round up to 3.9 because it recovered a bit once he was fired, implies a 28% loss.

To conclude, from start to finish under his producing tenure, veiwin went down 28%, NOT half as you say. Under his writing tenure, they declined 23.5%. From start to finish, there was moderate decline - most soaps did worse. However if you compare to the peak of 1997, yes he ended badly. If he had exited with Reilly in 1997, you'd be calling him a king. As with most, he exited way after his prime. BUT I maintain he knew good production values until the end. I reckon no soap wants him because of his ego, power trips and control issues.

I think it's safe to say, on the writing end of the stick, Higley, Reilly 2, and Langan eras are tied in the bad, worse, and the just plain ugly.

No way. Reilly 2 had highlights that Langan and Higley can only dream about.

The same can be said for several things (but not enough) when it comes to Higs or Langan.

Some of those were budget cuts, most were voluntary (Shaughnessy, Evans) (Chappell & Sabatino - Chappell didn't like days, they both wanted to go to the East Coast), one was health related (Pease), one was even JERk (Ashford).

Evans' departure wasn't voluntary. Langan called her into his office and said there was no story for Kayla and he wasn't interested in giving her one. So she was essentially forced out.

JER wasn't responsible for Ashford's firing...it was Langan. He had tried to fire Matt in 91 but NBC intervened at the last minute and brought him back (though he was offscreen for 6 weeks). Two years later, Langan got his wish. Reilly just went along with it.

I don't know about Chappell and Sabatino wanting to go to the East Coast but they were both fired. At the time, Mimi Torchin wrote a scathing editorial in SOW about DAYS firing 3 of their most popular actors.

Langan was not a bad producer except towards the end of his run things were getting a bit to bright. He did write some good things like the coronation, Kate/Victor, J&J, etc. Days actually did get decent writings even though the show was horrible most of the time with the exception of Fall of 2000-Spring of 2001 in which I thought the show was pretty good except the the Eden plot. I mean it always hung out between 3.8-4.5 during that time I beleive and held it's own when alot of shows were dropping so that is a plus. Langan was a control freak and most of the departures in the 90's were his fault primarily. I do think Chappell and Sabatino were fired but I do know they had interest in heading to the east coast so I don't know abotu their situation. He also wrote Vivian out in 2000. He pushed out SSM and Broderick and I do think Corday bascially gave him free run of things. I think Langan is the reason why Corday never interfered with JER because Langan was clearly a fan of out there stories too as obvious by what he did with the Eden plot and all the sci-fi he did with Stefano which ruined him IMO.

Corday did want him out for awhile and the summer of teens and bad ratings is what finally did it. It is sad because late 2000/early 2001 was great with the baby switch, Marlena/Brady (which came out of nowhere but was entertaining), hints to the Brady/Dimera feud, Jennifer's return, Jack's return, the coronation, Kate/Victor, the Salem bombings, etc. Good stuff there but then the teens came on full force and the show was a mess. I liked the teens in 2000 but then it just became overkill. I will also give Langan credit because we had some great character interactions and he was willing to mix things up even if the pairings didn't always work. We had Jack/Greta, Jennifer/Brandon, Sami/Brandon, Sami/Austin, Victor/Nicole, etc. He did family stuff well too IMO and I loved the Jack/Greta/Jennifer drunk stuff with Alice watching in October 2001. He wasn't horrible IMO but he was bad and had way too much power. I will give him credit though-under him we never get SFX like we do with Wyman .

Langan was HW from 1999-2001 right? Which meant he was HW when the show celebrated it's anniversary. I remember anticipating the anniversary episode (they were publicizing it everywhere), but missing the episode. To this day I still haven't watched it. I wonder if it was something I needed to miss, or was it actually a good episode?

God, was it only 2 years!?!?! It seemed like SO MUCH LONGER.

Evans' departure wasn't voluntary. Langan called her into his office and said there was no story for Kayla and he wasn't interested in giving her one. So she was essentially forced out.

JER wasn't responsible for Ashford's firing...it was Langan. He had tried to fire Matt in 91 but NBC intervened at the last minute and brought him back (though he was offscreen for 6 weeks). Two years later, Langan got his wish. Reilly just went along with it.

I don't know about Chappell and Sabatino wanting to go to the East Coast but they were both fired. At the time, Mimi Torchin wrote a scathing editorial in SOW about DAYS firing 3 of their most popular actors.

I always thought Evans went voluntarily, but I don't have proof of that so, I apologize if I am wrong.

I was always under the impression JER fired Ashford. Afterall, it was Langan who bought Ashford back in Feb 2001. Also when it was announced Jack was the SSK's second victim, everbody was pissed but everybody saw it coming because it was common knowledge JER fired him the first time and disliked the actor.

Chappell & Sabatino were fired, but they weren't going to renew anyway. I can't find an earlier SOU (probably chucked it when I moved), but I found this one from 1999 fairly quickly so I post it instead. Check out the caption with C & S, where it says they love their East Coast home (sorry, if I find better proof, it does exist, lol, I'll post it...)

I was always under the impression JER fired Ashford. Afterall, it was Langan who bought Ashford back in Feb 2001. Also when it was announced Jack was the SSK's second victim, everbody was pissed but everybody saw it coming because it was common knowledge JER fired him the first time and disliked the actor.

For the last damn time, a head writer cannot, I repeat CANNOT, fire an actor. They don't have the firing or hiring position. They can suggest a character being wrote off or killed, but the Executive Producer is the only one that can make that decision. Why can't people understand this?

Well, JER had producer credit during his second run. I always thought that was for final say on casting, but I don't know.

For the last damn time, a head writer cannot, I repeat CANNOT, fire an actor. They don't have the firing or hiring position. They can suggest a character being wrote off or killed, but the Executive Producer is the only one that can make that decision. Why can't people understand this?

You're right.

I would take it a step further and try to make people understand that a Head Writer can't even write a show without the EPs explicit participation, but all the blame for everything is placed on the HW.

Well, JER had producer credit during his second run. I always thought that was for final say on casting, but I don't know.

That's different and it's very rare. Only he and Brad Bell had that level of power.

I was always under the impression JER fired Ashford. Afterall, it was Langan who bought Ashford back in Feb 2001. Also when it was announced Jack was the SSK's second victim, everbody was pissed but everybody saw it coming because it was common knowledge JER fired him the first time and disliked the actor.

The show needed Ashford in 01 to get Reeves. He only returned after her because he had exisitng commitments that delayed his return. I think both Langan and Corday would have brought back Missy on her own if it was possible. As recent events suggest, Corday only values Matt as a bargaining chip to hold onto Missy- hence the new contract followed by the firing when Missy refused to take the bait (all my speculation, of course )

Reilly probably agreed 100% with Langan in 93. However, Matt has stated in interviews that he does not think the decision was made by Reilly...but by those above him.

PS: Thanks for the scan. I'm glad they settled in NY so well.