|Hello, soap fans -- and welcome to Daytime Royalty!|
For those unfamiliar, we are an uncensored community for fans and lovers of the daytime genre. We have a no-holds-barred atmosphere in regards to the shows, writers, actors etc. but we do not allow member bashing in any form.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
If you're already a member, please log in to your account to access all of our features.
|LATEST RATINGS: CBS Up in Viewers; DAYS plummets in 18-34 & 18-49|
|Tweet Topic Started: Jun 26 2008, 09:39 PM (4,341 Views)|
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 02:12 PM Post #61|
Sorry but I think I can and I will.
It is not just the fact that other writers copied him. He caused the daytime soap opera genre to lose credibility.
Soap operas have always copied one another. It is a known fact. They all see something that works on one show and they copy it. Hell it's not just soaps it is all of TV and entertainment. Do you think if the first reality show had failed others would have come along - hell no. They saw them working and copied them.
Why do you think they steal writers, couples, actors, etc. They want to duplicate what works on one show.
Gloria Monty and JER are both to blame for what has happened to the genre. And I agree with Phoenix, JER will go down along with Monty as 2 of the people who killed the daytime soap opera genre. They did some good but to me the bad things they did far outweigh the good.
|PhoenixRising05||Jun 27 2008, 02:14 PM Post #62|
Steve is right but the problem is people don't seem to have the patience anymore to adjust to new characters. They just don't. That is why it seems soaps like Days have to just stick with what works, sadly. I think the time has passed where they can effectively pass the torch and attempt to get people to accept it.
I do agree with Sindacco though. Not necessarily here on the DR but if you go to other boards, people just don't give new characters a chance. Hell, there are some people still upset about the Reeds/Roberts family having an important place on the show for years.
To go along with Steve's post, it's a shame that Monty and JER have to be put into the category of destroying soaps but they do. I say it's a shame because they could write good things. In regards to JER, he just needed to be tamed. That is why he did so well with Sheri Anderson. All both Monty and JER did was provide short-term fixes and encouraged others to go along with that and it's a trend soaps continue to this day and it's why so many fans, particularly the ones who matter in the ratings, now only want events and action.
Edited by PhoenixRising05, Jun 27 2008, 02:17 PM.
|Kenny||Jun 27 2008, 02:15 PM Post #63|
Well, don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of overflowing the canvas with a thousand newbies either, but I do recognize the need for a few of them now and again.
|Manny||Jun 27 2008, 02:19 PM Post #64|
You can all say this or that... but I just think that after so many years of soaps being on TV, people just got tired of them. And I guess that's normal... and even if Bill Bell came back to life and wrote for DAYS or whatever soap, that ratings wouldn't go up...
That's just my opinion... Yeah, bad stories increase the drop of ratings, but they would drop sooner or later (only at maybe a smaller rate..)
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 02:22 PM Post #65|
I think the biggest thing that hurts new characters - esp. Days news characters is that Days has not tried to develep a good new character for years - outside of a purpose on the show.
They create new characters for one purpose alone - usually as an interloper. Kate, Billie, and others have never really been develped beyond their original purposes. So people are just tired of them.
Plus with soap fans being so couple oriented now - interlopers never get a chance anyway.
If the fans of today were transferred back to late 60's and early 70's, we would have never had characters like Erica Kane or Rachel Davis to have lasted long on soaps. They would have been gone - because that is all their original purposes were. Erica was the interloper in Phil & Tara's romance and Rachel was the interloper in Steve & Alice's romance.
Agnes Nixon created both and she did a wonderful job of creating the characters in such a way that the audience loved them. but today that wouldn't even be given a chance.
The sad thing is that today the writers don't really try to make you like them or understand them.
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 02:25 PM Post #66|
It all goes back to what you condition your fans to be like.
If Bill Bell came back to Y&R and wrote it - you would see the older Y&R fans who would come back. Bell conditioned the fans to a certain type of viewing and they were happy with it. They were accustomed to things happening at a slower pace. Things didn't change back and forth with each new regime.
Days has groomed a certain kind of fan in the last 15 years and now they want to change that. And they just keep trying to change it too often. They created in the last 10 to 15 years, a fan who looks for the big stories like Kristen, Maison Blanche, the big supercouple fans and stuff. Now they can't live up to that.
|Sindacco||Jun 27 2008, 02:25 PM Post #67|
Thanks for answering my question. I have only seen edited clips from the 80s, never full episodes so I don't know how they built it back then.
The reason I asked was because I was looking at the episode rankings on Jason's site and I noticed that the top 10 for some years didn't have many vets. And alot of those that today complain about the vets being pushed to the side are 80s fans.
Here is top 10 for 1985
1. Patsy Pease (Kimberly Brady) 160
2. Peter Reckell (Bo Brady) 158
3. Kristian Alfonso (Hope Williams Brady) 157
4. Charles Shaughnessy (Shane Donovan) 153
5. Lisa Trusel (Melissa Anderson) 146
6. Deidre Hall (Marlena Evans) 135
7. Michael Leon (Pete Jannings) 133
8. John de Lancie (Eugene Bradford) 115
9. Josh Taylor (Chris Kositchek) 113
10. Leann Hunley (Anna DiMera) 109
1. Kristian Alfonso (Hope Brady) 163
2. Charles Shaughnessy (Shane Donovan) 162
3. Drake Hogestyn (John Black/Roman Brady) 161
4. Patsy Pease (Kimberly Brady) 155
5. Peter Reckell (Bo Brady) 154
6. Stephen Nichols (Steve "Patch" Johnson) 152
7. John Aniston (Victor Kiriakis) 147
8. Deidre Hall (Marlena Evans Brady) 123
9. Michael T. Weiss (Mike Horton) 116
10. Derya Ruggles (Robin Jacobs) 105
1. Mary Beth Evans (Kayla Brady) 167
*. Stephen Nichols (Steve “Patch” Johnson) 167
3. Patsy Pease (Kimberly Donovan) 155
4. Charles Shaughnessy (Shane Donovan) 153
5. Judi Evans (Adrienne Johnson Kiriakis) 147
6. Drake Hogestyn (Roman Brady) 142
7. Wally Kurth (Justin Kiriakis) 135
8. John Aniston (Victor Kiriakis) 130
9. Melissa Brennan (Jennifer Horton) 116
10. Billy Warlock (Frankie Brady) 114
1. Drake Hogestyn (Roman Brady) 158
2. Stephen Nichols (Steve "Patch" Johnson) 154
3. Mary Beth Evans (Kayla Brady Johnson) 150
4. Genie Francis (Diana Colville) 149
5. Charles Shaughnessy (Shane Donovan-145/Drew Donovan-36) 145
6. Judi Evans (Adrienne Kiriakis) 120
7. Wally Kurth (Justin Kiriakis) 116
8. Patsy Pease (Kimberly Brady) 114
9. Charlotte Ross (Eve Donovan) 107
10. Michael T. Weiss (Mike Horton) 104
1. Stephen Nichols (Steve “Patch” Johnson) 163
2. Mary Beth Evans (Kayla Johnson) 147
3. Patsy Pease (Kimberly Donovan) 136
4. Matthew Ashford (Jack Deveraux) 127
5. Charles Shaughnessy (Shane Donovan) 126
6. Drake Hogestyn (Roman Brady) 124
7. Charlotte Ross (Eve Donovan) 120
8. George Jenesky (Nick Corelli) 116
9. Wally Kurth (Justin Kiriakis) 109
10. Judi Evans (Adrienne Kiriakis) 108
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 02:32 PM Post #68|
The sad thing about Days is that they didn't have a lot of long time veterans around at the time for people to get mad about. They had fired most of them back in 1980 when they lost the majority of their big ratings from the 1970's. the biggest uproar at this time came from teh firing of Bill & Susan Hayes. That did get a lot of uproar.
But Deidre Hall was really the only big time vet of the time. And she was still used a lot.
Suzanne Rogers quit the show during some of those years.
But the other remaining vets Josh Taylor as Chris was still around while he was there, Mac Carey & Frances Reid weren't in the top 10 but they were always around. John Clarke was always seen too. The stories don't have to be essentially about the vets - just as long as they are part of the story - guiding the new characters and establishing them. Give them a sense of the familiar.
But sadly at this time Days didn't have a lot of vets left. They were just about all gone.
|Dayzfan||Jun 27 2008, 02:57 PM Post #69|
||How the hell are Days,ATWT and GL going to make it past this year without being canned?God Almighty,those are Passions kind of numbers!|
|Rakesh198||Jun 27 2008, 03:13 PM Post #70|
Atleast Passions dominated that 12-17 demo.
|Mason||Jun 27 2008, 03:48 PM Post #71|
Believe me. We know.
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 03:50 PM Post #72|
Not at the end they didn't.
Many times in 2005 and 2006 in particular GH and OLTL beat Passions in the 12 to 17 girls demo.
|King||Jun 27 2008, 03:53 PM Post #73|
It is really hard. I don't know what storylines DAYS could tell that we haven't seen in form or another.
I love my blog, and I think I do fun/good stuff there, but I know most of it wouldn't fly on daytime. I don't know if it is Corday or NBC or what, but I know it will never end.
|Mason||Jun 27 2008, 03:56 PM Post #74|
I'm not even gonna get into the Higley/Corday/Hogan/JER/whomever debate.
All I'll say is that DAYS deserves these numbers, and they're no surprise to me, whatsoever.
|King||Jun 27 2008, 04:07 PM Post #75|
I just think it's clear that DAYS has had a severe decline in quality and in ratings in the past 8 years, no matter who the writer is. I think this is due to Corday gaining more and more creative control, but I guess we will never know. And basically, I think we are all tired of caring/trying to figure it out. :laugh:
I don't really know why OLTL is dropping. I mean I don't think it's unbelievable right now, but everyone else is obsessed with it.
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 04:10 PM Post #76|
Mike, I think the biggest thing is that it is not they won't fly in daytime - it is just that we don't have the powers that be anymore who have the balls to let them fly in daytime.
They are too scared to tell a story anymore. The networks have always been scared but many times the powers that be like Irna Phillips and others had to fight for what they wanted. They aren't willing to fight anymore. One hint of negative feedback and they pull the plug. Or they back down.
I think if daytime were more daring and more willing to push the buttons with some stories - it would make a world of difference. Give viewers some shocks again. Make them wonder what is going to happen next.
Let a big character die and let them stay dead. Soaps have done it before and they didn't give in to the masses. As I have said before there was no bigger outcries ever than when ATWT killed off Jeff Baker and AW killed off Mary Matthews and Steve Frame. Did they back down? No. Did they give into the fans? No.
did the ratings bottom out and drop? No.
They need to tell a good gay love story and so on. They need to tell stories for all generations, etc.
Most of all they need to just get a plan and stick with it.
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 04:13 PM Post #77|
Honestly I think OLTL is just suffering from apathy for all soaps in general. They are sandwiched between 2 soaps that are not that great right now. And sandwiched in a genre that is just losing respect.
I admit that I love OLTL but often I find myself watching something else in the mornings and I end up leaving it on that channel and forgetting to change when OLTL comes on. So I will either try to catch it that night or SoapNet or just say hell with it and read the recap the next day online.
|Mason||Jun 27 2008, 04:18 PM Post #78|
||I think it's gotten to the point that, no matter how great any of the soaps get, the ratings are still just going to keep going down. The ratings haven't reflected quality in years, now.|
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 04:26 PM Post #79|
See that is where people misinterpret ratings. Ratings have never been about quality. Not from the beginning of their creation. Some of the poorest quality shows have been at the top of the ratings pack from time to time - in primetime and daytime.
Do you think ATWT which was #1 in ratings for 20 years was top notch in quality all that time. No they weren't. Shows like Love of Life esp. were top notch in quality at times esp. under Labine/Mayer, but their ratings were never that great.
Where the Heart Is was always a good quality show but never had outstanding ratings.
People keep comparing quality and ratings but they are two totally different things. Ratings were never designed to judge quality - that is left to the critics.
Edited by Steve Frame, Jun 27 2008, 04:28 PM.
|Steve Frame||Jun 27 2008, 04:27 PM Post #80|
||One last thing on that subject, if ratings reflected quality a show like Hill Street Blues which was one of the most critically acclaimed shows ever in primetime would have been in the top 10 shows but it never was. It always hovered near the bottom.|
|1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)|
|Go to Next Page|
|« Previous Topic · General Daytime News · Next Topic »|