Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Viewing Single Post From: Ratings for the Week of June 25-29, 2012
Member Avatar

Jul 9 2012, 11:02 AM
Jul 9 2012, 10:37 AM
Jul 9 2012, 10:32 AM
Jul 9 2012, 07:21 AM
Days wasn't focused on a younger set in 2009. It was focused then on the same people it's focused on now.
Yeah, it was.

They made Arianna/Brady/Nicole/EJ/Sami/Rafe the center of the show and then formed a really good potential quad in Nathan/Stephanie/Philip/Melanie. They also had Lucas/Chloe/Dan and were building something with Will/Mia/Chad. The show was skewing younger. The vets were no longer being represented as the top tier group. True, Bo/hope/John/Marlena/Steve/Kayla had been backburnered alot in recent years but they were still being touted as the A players. They were no longer being represented as such as 4 of them were fired and the two leftover were pushed to the backburner. Hence, the show went in a younger direction. True, the Sami/Rafe/Nicole/EJ grouping isn't exactly very young but it's younger than the vet grouping of Bo/Hope/Marlena/John and being represented as such.

It doesn't matter anyway. It's all about the STORY. It doesn't matter who is on every day or who keeps getting the same material. If the story is good, it will work. If the story blows chunks, it won't.
I don't see how the age of the cast is any different now except that the "young" people have aged. I agree that it's the story that makes a difference, but trying to say the show was skewin younger then is false, IMO. The show is still focusing on the same characters only they've swapped one twenty something group for an even crappier twenty something group. And the vets weren't getting a whole heck of a lot of focus prior to 2009 anyway. That focus dropped around 2005-2006.
I know Sami/Rafe/EJ/Nicole aren't exactly teens or in their 20's but they were made the central characters on the show as opposed to Bo/Hope/John/Marlena. Even when they were backburnered, the show still made it clear they were the central characters. They pushed them aside and gave the show over to a younger core. And they are younger. Are they noticeably younger? Not really but they are still younger. Then, you had the much younger B story in Philip/Stephanie/Nathan/Melanie. I mean, the show FELT younger and much more vibrant.

I guess it's just a personal perception thing Or, maybe, it just felt more "new" and less predictable at the time. I always describe that year more in that vein than "younger." All I know is I seemed to come across younger people who became fans during that time, some of which became fans because of the Passions gang joining and some, in the case of my niece and a couple of her friends, who started watching because they seemed to think the show was more about younger characters. I still recall my niece walking in on me watching several years before and having no interest. Fast forward to 2009 and she watches a couple segments of Philip/Stephanie and Sami/Rafe and all of a sudden, she's interested and watching every day. Hell, she actually thought Sami was a 20 something character and I had to explain to her she's played as a mid-late 30's character. It's really funny to see how differently people perceive things.
My point is that the focus on that age group wasn't new in 2009. And no, I don't think they're young enough but regardless, thu were focused on long before 2009. The show was skewing younger in the early 2000s. It wasn't even close to skewing young in 2009.
Edited by lysie, Jul 9 2012, 11:59 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post
Ratings for the Week of June 25-29, 2012 · General Daytime News