Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]



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.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Days Backstage Drama Gossip; Well...........hmmmmm
Topic Started: Jul 13 2008, 06:46 AM (8,773 Views)
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Sweet Sauce
Jul 13 2008, 03:25 PM
PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 02:38 PM
I think even those that hated the character (Steve/Kayla fans, J&M fans) at least appreciated the actress and wanted better for her and I noticed alot of those that disliked her seemed to like her when interacting with Nicole so I do think the character was well-received.
I didn't enjoy either. But I didn't enjoy Tamara as Carly either (hated Carly 2.0), and I don't buy her friendship with Nicole. She's probably a lovely woman, but I haven't enjoyed having either character shoved down my throat.

Deidre has never badmouthed the show. EVER. Not even in 1987. Not even when it was crap. She always keeps a smile on, promotes the show, stands up for it and does her job. She doesn't complain in public and if she goes to Corday to speak her mind that is something entirely different. There's a difference between taking it to the media and taking it to your bosses one on one. I mean, it's a job for her the same way ours is to us. We have differences, we have complaints sometimes. But she could take it to the media and probably create a ruckus, but she hasen't. That's how she chooses to do it, and that's how she's always done it.

Quote:
 
As for Dee, I was one who said she never seems to speak up forcefully for things she should. I've heard that for years now. However, there were rumors that she did speak up upon her return in 1991. I may be wrong but the rumor was that she pushed for Wayne to return soon after her as Roman and then, shortly after, she saw how popular John/Isabella was and made a push to put John back in Marlena's orbit. Again, this is something I've heard for years. I don't know if it's true, which is why I won't really comment on it since it's not clear if it is true. I love Dee and have no agenda against her at all. I liked all couples and characters involved back then. I have heard numerous times that she isn't forceful when it comes to story but all those whisperings have been in the past few years.


Well, then someone either twisted the truth or didn't know for sure either. Because unless Deidre, Drake, Wayne and Corday all lied on TV and in interviews when ased, that's not how it was. They were all toying with ideas about what happened to Marlena while she was gone for 5 years, and Deidre had the idea that maybe Marlena found the real Roman somehow. DAYS took it from there, and asked Wayne if he'd be interested in a return (Deidre was only signed for 6 months at this time) but they asked Drake who he wanted to be, Roman or your amnesiac John Black. He eventually said JB would be interesting, and he wanted Wayne to be on board again.

And John/Isabella weren't popular according to DDH. In fact, he was thrilled when both Deidre and Wayne came back because he'd been without a story for sometime, and the audience wasen't taking to the couple. Finally getting to bring Marlena back (Days had asked Deidre for several years to come back) mixed things up and eventually it became a quadrangle.
I never said she did for sure. I said it was rumored. Also, don't always believe what actors, execs, etc say on camera and in the media. Do you really think Dee would announce publicly that she demanded Wayne to return or that she wanted an end to John/Isabella? Most actors do not want that stuff out in the media because it puts them in a negative light so citing what they say publicly is not good enough evidence to suggest Dee never did that. Again, I'm not saying she did. I doubt she did. I just said I HEARD it. It's a RUMOR. That's it. Not proven true. Just stuff thrown out there for speculation.

Seriously, some of you are taking every little rumor people post as fact. We are just speculating things we have heard. That's it. We are not having a Deidre Hall bashing party or anything like that. Most of us here like Dee and appreciate her work when it's warranted.

I also disagree about John and Isabella. There is a reason why many called Isabella's death one of the most tragic and memorable moments in Days history. It was heartbreaking and they were quite popular with fans. I know many J&M fans did not care for them and that's fine. I and others did. Did I like J&M more? Yeah but I still liked them.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

IMissAremid
Jul 13 2008, 03:56 PM
jules
Jul 13 2008, 03:31 PM
PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 03:06 PM
jules
Jul 13 2008, 02:46 PM
PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 02:38 PM
I think Dee has enough power to complain. She just doesn't, which is both a good thing and a bad thing. I, personally, hate those that complain about every little thing they get as an actor but, if she feels her character is being wronged (and let's face it her character was crap under JER his second run and now under Higley) she needs to say something. SN and MBE were very open in the media and behind the scenes about the way the Ava thing was handled and they got results. I know it's too late after the fact but they at least got something.

As for Java, we don't know what the studio is basing that on if that part of this info is true. Maybe alot of Tamara Braun fans sent feedback or maybe alot of Drake fans like the pairing. Then you also have many general fans that like them too. We don't know what the deal is. They may think it's a hit based on the feedback they have so far. We don't know what they are measuring or going by. I expect J&M fans to not deem them a hit and it's those fans that seem to be the only ones in this thread saying that.

I think it's right to say nothing on Days right now is a definitive hit. EJ/Nicole come close but that's it. Philip/Morgan hasn't gotten going enough yet to make an accurate judgment but they have the potential. John/Ava will likely fade before it can be determined they are a hit since Tamara is leaving. I do think the character of Ava was a hit. I think even those that hated the character (Steve/Kayla fans, J&M fans) at least appreciated the actress and wanted better for her and I noticed alot of those that disliked her seemed to like her when interacting with Nicole so I do think the character was well-received.
Seems like J&M fans opinions get no creedance on this board and/or are dismissed. There were several other posters who are not J&M fans who agreed with my post concerning the ratings and the beginning of Java. You state that "many general fans like them". That is your opinion, but haven't seen that on many other boards (NBC, SNS, SoapCity). There were some who liked their friendship at the beginning, but thayt's it. I will agree that the Drakers would rather see John paired with a blow up doll before Marlena!
Ok...maybe it seems that way but I can assure you it is not the case.

J&M fans and their opinions are just as important as anyone else's. Those that know me around here know that I often times complain about fickle fanbases and what have you and, yes, I do mention J&M and their fanbase alot. However, that is in general terms. I'm not stupid enough to think every J&M fan is a rabid, obsessed nutcase. We have many J&M fans on this board who I do disagree with at times but are rational, kind, thoughtful posters.

I disagree about John and Ava. Your not looking well enough because there are many out there that do like them, many of which are on this board and other boards like SON and a few others. It is not just my opinion because, if it was, I would speak more from a personal sense. There is enough evidence out there to suggest that they have their share of fans. Hell, Drake even seems happy with it according to the mags. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to like them or to think they are just great love story. All I am saying is that they have their fans and it seems like SOME J&M fans don't want to acknowledge that. That is my point.
Well, I will have to respectfully disagree with your opinion. I read all those boards and I don't really need to be told to look harder. I don't recall saying they didn't have any fans. And what does Drake liking working with TB have to do with whether or not they are popular. Having fans and being popular are two different things. And many posters on this board don't want to acknowledge that since they starting sharing scenes (the first week in fact) the ratings have nose dive.
This board can be pretty hard on J&M fans but I don't see folks going out of the way to be especially mean to Jarlena fans in comparison to other couples as on this board I have seen people mean to EJami, Lumi, Stax and Chan (LOL) fans too. I think it's just a case where the Jarlena fans actually are numerous and ballsy enough to show up and respond to things posters here say about their favored couple, which aren't always nice but that's the case for a lot of things said here at this free-wheeling censorship-free board.

Also, I don't think anyone expressing their like for the Java pairing is doing so just to piss off Jarlena fans nor if they have different theories about why ratings go down than Jarlena fans do is that a case of them trying to deny some unvarnished truth. They just have a different OPINION. No one knows for sure what is the exact cause of the ratings slide, and given the fact that a lot of people here (including me) see A LOT screwed up on the show right now it's hard for me to pin all of the ratings woes on Java. Not because of some Jarlena grudge, but because I just don't think it's possible to know based on ratings what couples work and don't work when the show is trying about five different new couples at the same time.
Exactly.

I love Dee and I've come to enjoy Drake again. I'm down on J&M together but I do think they can be salvaged in my eyes. I'm just a fan of the whole show who is enjoying seeing John interacting with Ava and I'm enjoying the pairing, much like I enjoyed the John/Isabella pairing and even the John/Kristen pairing. Again, for those that don't enjoy it, fine. I'm not trying to convince some otherwise. I'm just saying that people do like them and I think that much needs to be acknowledged.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Ellie
Jul 13 2008, 05:07 PM
ladyofthelake
Jul 13 2008, 05:06 PM
Now wait a minute.............. :redface:

I like James Scott. I brought over stuff about EJ. I like Nicole. I brought over stuff about her. I was merely bringing over what was on the other board. THAT was what was mentioned. Just because it's Deidre Hall? If they had said anything about the rest of them, I would have brought that over, too. It's just convenient for you that those posts just happened to mention the actress I have the least respect for. Maybe I should make up things about the others to balance the score?
You yourself just wrote, "I did post it because I can see it happening."
And that is her opinion. She said SHE could see it happening. She wasn't stating it as fact. She just believed it and posted it here to get the feedback of others.

Seriously, some are taken this way too seriously and making it sound like some are trying to bash Dee for the hell of it. That isn't the case. We are just commenting on something posted here and adding to the discussion others RUMORS we've heard. It's speculation. It happens and it involves many actors, actresses, etc.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Sweet Sauce
Jul 13 2008, 06:34 PM
ladyofthelake
Jul 13 2008, 05:02 PM
Thank you, Phoenix. That means a lot to me. I just get angry when any and all actors are fair game for speculation except Deidre Hall. That smacks of unfairness to me and has ever since I started posting on boards.
Who the frak said she is? But if I see something being held as correct or belivable when I know it isen't true, aren't I allowed to speak my mind? That's what everyone here is doing, or do some have more right to do so than others?
That is what YOU believe and you are quite right. Your allowed to post what you believe and what your opinion is but that doesn't stop those who may see Dee in a negative light for whatever reason from also commenting on what they feel. However, unless you work for the show or know someone that does or know someone close to Dee Hall, then you don't know what is true and what is. None of us do, even those of us that do get some behind the scenes info. It doesn't always pan out or end up what it sounds like. None of us here said that any of the stuff in this thread was a solid fact. Some of us may personally believe it is but we aren't acting like any of the rumors SHOULD be treated as fact. We are just speculating, plain and simple.
Edited by PhoenixRising05, Jul 13 2008, 08:02 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Room Stops
Member Avatar


I'm a fan, and I know where she stands, and it makes me happy. I don't need her to do an article in SOD saying she hates what the writer is doing, because I already know she cares. I know that she does 100% to keep Marlena as close to the core of who Marlena is and should be.

There were some rumors in 03 that Deidre didn't like what Higley was doing to Marlena, but she didn't say a word to the media while Higley was there. IMO, you saw it in how she portrayed Marlena onscreen. Moments that were obviously supposed to drive Tony and Marlena closer, by having Marlena act out of character, but she played it as best she could. I don't need her to make a big statement or yell it out, because she tried to keep the parts of Marlena that she could true to who the character was.

I am not saying what fans thought, I'm saying what the actors said, the people getting the feedback and response. And they said that John/Isabella weren't a popular couple, so please, don't shoot the messenger. Rumors are rumors, but when several different people say the same thing without having to, to me, that's a reason to belive them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Sweet Sauce
Jul 13 2008, 08:13 PM
I'm a fan, and I know where she stands, and it makes me happy. I don't need her to do an article in SOD saying she hates what the writer is doing, because I already know she cares. I know that she does 100% to keep Marlena as close to the core of who Marlena is and should be.

There were some rumors in 03 that Deidre didn't like what Higley was doing to Marlena, but she didn't say a word to the media while Higley was there. IMO, you saw it in how she portrayed Marlena onscreen. Moments that were obviously supposed to drive Tony and Marlena closer, by having Marlena act out of character, but she played it as best she could. I don't need her to make a big statement or yell it out, because she tried to keep the parts of Marlena that she could true to who the character was.

I am not saying what fans thought, I'm saying what the actors said, the people getting the feedback and response. And they said that John/Isabella weren't a popular couple, so please, don't shoot the messenger. Rumors are rumors, but when several different people say the same thing without having to, to me, that's a reason to belive them.
And that is fine but you clearly are misunderstanding my post.

I don't want her to go to the mags or media with it because that accomplishes nothing. I want her to handle it behind the scenes. That is what I'm saying.

I also don't take everything as an actor says as Gospel, whether I like them or not. They are human and they do lie. It is also important to note that they have an image they want to uphold and I doubt they would say certain things publicly that could cause people to look negatively upon them. If they felt John/Isabella wasn't popular, that is fine. Their opinion. However, do we know when they said that? if they were saying that to J&M fans, it has a whole different context IMO. They aren't going to tell J&M fans that John/Isabella was more popular. That serves no purpose and it's a given J&M were and are still more popular then John/Isabella ever was.

I'm not shooting the messenger. I could care less. I'm just saying that we are speak from our own personal side of things so we all are going to react differently to rumors and such.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason


Do I think Higley would be better without Corday's influence? Maybe, but even the one story she should be knocking out of the park is flopping miserably. To me, the fact that she can't even give justice to what's practically her own life story speaks volumes.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

I still doubt it was her idea. Seriously, I watch her interview on the Today show and she looks very uncomfortable while talking about her son and the story. That and in her blog she seems very hesitant too and was trying to justify how it could be good for her and her son to do this.

I think NBC and Corday pushed this. Maybe they wanted it to help calm down the bachlash against Higley due to the strike or maybe they wanted to tell a social issue since NBC is all about things like that lately with the Green movement and all.

I really do think if Higley was into the story it would be featured far more and she would seem to be much more excited about it then she is.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason


Yeah, but regardless of whether she wanted to do it or not, it's her job.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

That goes back to the same thing people said about Hogan, which I clearly disagree with.

Writers are human just like us and I don't care if it's your job or not. Even if you try your best to still make it work, sometimes it's just too much to overcome. Casiello even mentioned on ITZ how executive producers will take what the writers do, make revisions, and return it, leaving the writers to fill in the blanks. With someone like Corday, he probably revises quite a bit to push his agenda and we all know how much of Hogan's stuff got ruined by either extending it far longer then intended or gutting it altogether to fit a certain agenda.

Yes, the writer's have to do their job, just like we all do in our jobs. But imagine someone taking your work and changing things so much that things are far more different then they were or even completely different. It's like someone is constantly working against you to sabotage you. I'm not saying the writer isn't responsible at all. All I am saying is that it's a double-edged sword, especially at Days. We don't know who much is Corday, Higley, or whomever. It's like that with all soaps now. Too many visions and too many agendas. I look at OLTL and it works because there is one vision, little interference, and Ron is getting to do what he wants and has to do. You can sense it. No other soap has that feel right now and Days hasn't had that consistently in 10 years, easily.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Room Stops
Member Avatar


But how do you know what someone does or doesn't do behind the scenes?

Of course they're human and pull a white one at times. We all do. But I tend to belive the actors if what I see supports it, and if it's repeated by several.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ellie


PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 09:28 PM
That goes back to the same thing people said about Hogan, which I clearly disagree with.

Writers are human just like us and I don't care if it's your job or not. Even if you try your best to still make it work, sometimes it's just too much to overcome. Casiello even mentioned on ITZ how executive producers will take what the writers do, make revisions, and return it, leaving the writers to fill in the blanks. With someone like Corday, he probably revises quite a bit to push his agenda and we all know how much of Hogan's stuff got ruined by either extending it far longer then intended or gutting it altogether to fit a certain agenda.

Yes, the writer's have to do their job, just like we all do in our jobs. But imagine someone taking your work and changing things so much that things are far more different then they were or even completely different. It's like someone is constantly working against you to sabotage you. I'm not saying the writer isn't responsible at all. All I am saying is that it's a double-edged sword, especially at Days. We don't know who much is Corday, Higley, or whomever. It's like that with all soaps now. Too many visions and too many agendas. I look at OLTL and it works because there is one vision, little interference, and Ron is getting to do what he wants and has to do. You can sense it. No other soap has that feel right now and Days hasn't had that consistently in 10 years, easily.
I disagree completely, but I want to ask you an honest question - I'm really curious. Using your theory, let's say that Corday took a year off (yippee!) and Dena could do whatever in the world she wanted. No interference from anyone at all. Corday, Scott, whoever you think is interfering - they all left her completely alone. What do you think the ratings would be with pure, 100% Higley?

lol I know my answer, but I'd like to hear yours. (Seriously.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Sweet Sauce
Jul 13 2008, 09:33 PM
But how do you know what someone does or doesn't do behind the scenes?

Of course they're human and pull a white one at times. We all do. But I tend to belive the actors if what I see supports it, and if it's repeated by several.
Normally, we don't. If anything, we rely on backstage info that can be a misinterpretation or very unreliable. However, I tend to think that what JER did to Marlena and what Higley is doing to her now would not happen if Dee said something. I'm not saying she would see major results but I do think we would see some sort of response, especially given how SN and MBE's pushing led to the Ava issue being mentioned finally.

We will just have to disagree about the actors. I see what your saying but I, personally, just need more to go on then just the actor/actress and people around them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Ellie
Jul 13 2008, 09:38 PM
PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 09:28 PM
That goes back to the same thing people said about Hogan, which I clearly disagree with.

Writers are human just like us and I don't care if it's your job or not. Even if you try your best to still make it work, sometimes it's just too much to overcome. Casiello even mentioned on ITZ how executive producers will take what the writers do, make revisions, and return it, leaving the writers to fill in the blanks. With someone like Corday, he probably revises quite a bit to push his agenda and we all know how much of Hogan's stuff got ruined by either extending it far longer then intended or gutting it altogether to fit a certain agenda.

Yes, the writer's have to do their job, just like we all do in our jobs. But imagine someone taking your work and changing things so much that things are far more different then they were or even completely different. It's like someone is constantly working against you to sabotage you. I'm not saying the writer isn't responsible at all. All I am saying is that it's a double-edged sword, especially at Days. We don't know who much is Corday, Higley, or whomever. It's like that with all soaps now. Too many visions and too many agendas. I look at OLTL and it works because there is one vision, little interference, and Ron is getting to do what he wants and has to do. You can sense it. No other soap has that feel right now and Days hasn't had that consistently in 10 years, easily.
I disagree completely, but I want to ask you an honest question - I'm really curious. Using your theory, let's say that Corday took a year off (yippee!) and Dena could do whatever in the world she wanted. No interference from anyone at all. Corday, Scott, whoever you think is interfering - they all left her completely alone. What do you think the ratings would be with pure, 100% Higley?

lol I know my answer, but I'd like to hear yours. (Seriously.)
The same or worse because the genre is in trouble.

Look at a soap like OLTL. It's doing everything fans claim to want. Character-driven stories, romance, using history, balance, etc and it has nothing to show for it. It's +1 ahead of Days. That's it. The ratings only reflect events and action now, which is why Days only saw a number above 2.2. That was all the plane crash. The rest of this year Days has not exceeded a 2.2 and most of this year it's been stuck at 2.0-2.1 in HH until now where it is at 1.9 (and all soaps have dropped so no surprise).

I'm not saying Higley is good for this job. There are many others I would want. However, I don't think it makes any difference who writes. I think soaps need to just focus on keeping the viewers they have because you will never see a soap make a big rise again from where they are at. It just won't happen. People just don't have the interest and the ratings are based on the short--term now. They are based on gimmicks and stunts and TPTB have themselves to blame for that but that is another issue.

I don't even think getting rid of Corday will make a different. Sure, the HW could now be left to write but, like I said, I doubt ratings would reflect any increase in quality. If OLTL can do what it has done in the past few months and get nothing (despite good press and word of mouth and being on a network that supports it shows), then I doubt no matter what Days does it will make much different. You will probably see it stuck around a 2.0-2.2, at most, which may not be bad considering all the other soaps are falling. Days could advance up as the others fall.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ellie


PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 09:47 PM
Ellie
Jul 13 2008, 09:38 PM
PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 09:28 PM
That goes back to the same thing people said about Hogan, which I clearly disagree with.

Writers are human just like us and I don't care if it's your job or not. Even if you try your best to still make it work, sometimes it's just too much to overcome. Casiello even mentioned on ITZ how executive producers will take what the writers do, make revisions, and return it, leaving the writers to fill in the blanks. With someone like Corday, he probably revises quite a bit to push his agenda and we all know how much of Hogan's stuff got ruined by either extending it far longer then intended or gutting it altogether to fit a certain agenda.

Yes, the writer's have to do their job, just like we all do in our jobs. But imagine someone taking your work and changing things so much that things are far more different then they were or even completely different. It's like someone is constantly working against you to sabotage you. I'm not saying the writer isn't responsible at all. All I am saying is that it's a double-edged sword, especially at Days. We don't know who much is Corday, Higley, or whomever. It's like that with all soaps now. Too many visions and too many agendas. I look at OLTL and it works because there is one vision, little interference, and Ron is getting to do what he wants and has to do. You can sense it. No other soap has that feel right now and Days hasn't had that consistently in 10 years, easily.
I disagree completely, but I want to ask you an honest question - I'm really curious. Using your theory, let's say that Corday took a year off (yippee!) and Dena could do whatever in the world she wanted. No interference from anyone at all. Corday, Scott, whoever you think is interfering - they all left her completely alone. What do you think the ratings would be with pure, 100% Higley?

lol I know my answer, but I'd like to hear yours. (Seriously.)
The same or worse because the genre is in trouble.

Look at a soap like OLTL. It's doing everything fans claim to want. Character-driven stories, romance, using history, balance, etc and it has nothing to show for it. It's +1 ahead of Days. That's it. The ratings only reflect events and action now, which is why Days only saw a number above 2.2. That was all the plane crash. The rest of this year Days has not exceeded a 2.2 and most of this year it's been stuck at 2.0-2.1 in HH until now where it is at 1.9 (and all soaps have dropped so no surprise).

I'm not saying Higley is good for this job. There are many others I would want. However, I don't think it makes any difference who writes. I think soaps need to just focus on keeping the viewers they have because you will never see a soap make a big rise again from where they are at. It just won't happen. People just don't have the interest and the ratings are based on the short--term now. They are based on gimmicks and stunts and TPTB have themselves to blame for that but that is another issue.

I don't even think getting rid of Corday will make a different. Sure, the HW could now be left to write but, like I said, I doubt ratings would reflect any increase in quality. If OLTL can do what it has done in the past few months and get nothing (despite good press and word of mouth and being on a network that supports it shows), then I doubt no matter what Days does it will make much different. You will probably see it stuck around a 2.0-2.2, at most, which may not be bad considering all the other soaps are falling. Days could advance up as the others fall.

lol the one thing you and I should agree on is that we'll almost always disagree. :smile:

I just can't agree that the head writer shouldn't take the blame. First you're pointing out that Higley is a victim of interference, but even if she weren't, you're saying she's a victim of the genre itself, which is doomed anyway.

I agree with what Kenny said the other day (which is featured in Mason's sig, I believe), that there is a talent to headwriting, and Higley just doesn't have it. I don't agree at all that as you're saying, it doesn't make any difference who the writer is.

And with the comparison to OLTL, the interesting thing about Days, imo, is that they have the largest "potential audience" of any soap except maybe Y&R. This is completely my opinion, I'll say that upfront. I have not seen a source for this. But what I have seen is that Days online sites get by far the largest turnout, and more important, that when Days does do a "blockbuster" storyline like SSK, everyone comes running back. I think many, many people flip through SOD in the supermarket to see what the Days characters are up to, and that doesn't happen with other soaps. My point is that if OLTL and Days both had excellent writing, Days would come out ahead in the ratings, no question. Since that's not happening, OLTL is a bit ahead.

That's why it really gets me that Corday can't seem to hire a talented head writer. There is such an audience waiting for good storytelling on Days, and if Corday would just hire someone who could accomplish that, I think the ratings would go up very quickly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Ellie, I'm not saying Higley would be much better. She very well may be worse without interference. All I am saying is that I'm sick of interference, in general. I'm in total agreement that the HW deserves blame but I do think all parties should be mentioned, not just the HW. It's a team effort. The network, the EP, writers, etc. We know they all have their hands in the proverbial "cookie jar," which is why I think giving Higley or any other HW sole blame is wrong.

Maybe with another HW, more of those disliking the show now would be pleased but then you would probably have many who disliked the show still. Just like with past writers over the past 10 years, it always seems like 25% (estimating here) of the audience is happy at a time. There will always be a percentage of fans not happy, no matter who is writing. Corday could hire a talented HW right now. Hell, he has. He hired Lorraine Broderick and ran her off with his interference before she even wrote a week's worth of stuff. SSM was decent but had to deal with his shit. B&C were unbelievable and even they had their work influenced by Corday and ended up losing their position despite all the good they did. Hogan (and I know many will disagree here) was a talented HW with a fantastic team and he got fucked over left and right and had almost everything he wanted to do gutted. It's one thing to interfere but for a writers' work to constantly be gutted, it's ridiculous. Corday could hire Shakesphere himself and the work would end up sucking because he would interfere and screw it up.

I do agree Days has the largest potential audience but I don't think that matters anymore because they will tune out as quickly as they tune in. We've seen it. There is also no guarantee they will give the show a chance again or even consider watching it full time since we all know many only like certain characters or couples.

I just think the genre is at a point now where it's just about survival and holding on to what you have. I don't see any soaps making a consistent surge and maintaining it.
Edited by PhoenixRising05, Jul 13 2008, 10:24 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ellie


Ok, thanks for clarifying. LOL I do disagree with most of that (especially the part about Hogan). Also, regarding the part about fans tuning out because they only like certain couples - I think being online can give a distorted view of this. The "online community" is full of fanbase wars, pro/anti character threads, and posters arguing vehemently in support of certain characters. But if you ask the "fan on the street", the mothers or grandmothers who turn on the TV every day at 1 pm to tune in to Days, they usually watch it live, without their hands on the FF button. They don't watch a week's worth of shows at a time. I can't see how your argument (which I disagree with anyway, lol) would apply to them, and they make up by far most of the numbers in the Nielsen ratings.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

The fans you are talking about, Ellie, are the show's core fans. They may be people who have watched since the beginning, like my grandmother, or people who more or less still watch out of habit or just love of the show. I know many like that for many soaps. They probably do make up a good percentage of the Nielson system. That wouldn't surprise me.

I don't think we get a distorted view online because I've actually witnessed people in real life turn off a TV or only watch if their favorite character/couple is on and there are definitely many online that do that or just watch youtube clips of their faves instead of viewing the whole show. Usually, they will watch the first act and turn it off if they don't see who they like (which is stupid now because Days will have characters pop up during the show. Fans are quite fickle now and that is the case for all soaps but especially Days.

I know we disagree alot but I do appreciate the way you respond. It's not antagonistic or forceful. I like that we can have respectful debates like this and I look forward to many more :smile: .
Edited by PhoenixRising05, Jul 13 2008, 10:30 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ellie


PhoenixRising05
Jul 13 2008, 10:29 PM
The fans you are talking about, Ellie, are the show's core fans. They may be people who have watched since the beginning, like my grandmother, or people who more or less still watch out of habit or just love of the show. I know many like that for many soaps. They probably do make up a good percentage of the Nielson system. That wouldn't surprise me.
Yep, my grandmother too, lol.


Quote:
 
I don't think we get a distorted view online because I've actually witnessed people in real life turn off a TV or only watch if their favorite character/couple is on and there are definitely many online that do that or just watch youtube clips of their faves instead of viewing the whole show. Usually, they will watch the first act and turn it off if they don't see who they like (which is stupid now because Days will have characters pop up during the show. Fans are quite fickle now and that is the case for all soaps but especially Days.
Hmm... interesting point. I hadn't thought of that, but that is true. When I started watching, I'd sometimes turn it off if Marlena wasn't in the opening act, though when she was, I'd watch (and usually enjoy) the entire show. lol how long does someone have to have the TV on for, for the show to count in the Nielsens?

I do, however, think that (as others have said), the fast forwarding or "turning off the TV" is the effect, not the cause.


Quote:
 
I know we disagree alot but I do appreciate the way you respond. It's not antagonistic or forceful. I like that we can have respectful debates like this and I look forward to many more :smile: .
Thank you! The feeling is mutual. :smile:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PhoenixRising05
Member Avatar
GET EM STEPH!!

Ellie
Jul 13 2008, 10:38 PM
Quote:
 
I don't think we get a distorted view online because I've actually witnessed people in real life turn off a TV or only watch if their favorite character/couple is on and there are definitely many online that do that or just watch youtube clips of their faves instead of viewing the whole show. Usually, they will watch the first act and turn it off if they don't see who they like (which is stupid now because Days will have characters pop up during the show. Fans are quite fickle now and that is the case for all soaps but especially Days.
Hmm... interesting point. I hadn't thought of that, but that is true. When I started watching, I'd sometimes turn it off if Marlena wasn't in the opening act, though when she was, I'd watch (and usually enjoy) the entire show. lol how long does someone have to have the TV on for, for the show to count in the Nielsens?

I do, however, think that (as others have said), the fast forwarding or "turning off the TV" is the effect, not the cause.

That's a good question, Ellie.

I'm not sure. I know for sporting events they often look at the ratings in time increments, as in how the event did at certain points in the day or evening. I would think they measure the show in time increments and average the number together come up with the total number but I'm not sure.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply