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 suffering succotash 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:
Locked Topic
Nelson Branco Soap Uncensored: Is Eileen Davidson back?
Topic Started: Jun 26 2012, 02:29 PM (30,978 Views)
Kyrai
Member Avatar


I like soaps being 'soapy'. I don't think people in the 60s-now were stupid and just ate up camp because they were brainless. I think they enjoyed soaps because they were fun and involving. It's fun to make fun of how over the top Soaps are/were, but I do think that was a big part of the enjoyment. They were melodramatic. (I love the Carol Burnett, Mr. Mom, and Ellen spoofs of soaps).

Of course, there are times it can be buffoonish and trivialized that it's just stupid and not enjoyable ('Garden of Eden' comes to mind, and much of Passions), but even the fans then realized that.

It needs to be interesting stories that reel you in, like Miami, Orpheus, Maison Blanche, Possession, Aremid, the Secret Room.

I do not want or need a soap to be a documentary of the times. I want daytime drama, and by that I don't mean who are in what beds today.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DesignatedShelley
Member Avatar


I think soaps have to be emotionally relevant, I think what they offer that is unique is that hyper-dramatic emotional catharsis. But different people have emotional responses to different things. Days has cultivated a certain audience with its stories over the years so, bottom line, if it wants to hold on to its audience it better try to tap into that.

Speaking for myself though, I need a certain amount of emotional logic to care. Also, I need some semblance of reality from soaps because I never find that they do the absurd/abstract/conceptual/kitschy well enough to care, not any more any way. If nothing else, they just look too crappy now. (And personally, I get sick of watching straight white people with unlimited bank accounts waltz around keeping jobs they'd never in a million years be able to keep blah blah blah; it's just unrealistic to the point of distraction for me.)

I also don't think MarDar are a great example of why realism sucks. They're far less realistic than the aforementioned Mad Men, argued herein as a high-functioning soap (it's just that Mad Men is very intelligent even in its humor; it's less indulgent than a Tarantino movie by far). MarDar were just heavy-handed and ham-fisted about the ripped-from-the-pages thing.

I'm not really an escapist so it's always been weird to me that I watch Days. But my favorite storylines don't draw me in for their escapist elements. Jack and Jennifer are my favorite couple because they are filled with human foibles and believable emotions. As long as the outlandish elements served to highlight the emotions it worked for me. But at some points too much of their angst came from Dimera plots and emotional stupidity that pushed the point of believability for me to care.

Daytime drama is never going to be hyper-real. Even the most socially relevant soaps had soap cliches like paternity switches, babynapping, blah blah blah. I think for the future, soaps just need to avoid being ... embarrassing. If they're going to go OTT there needs to be an element of coolness to it. It may not be what I want to watch but it's smarter than being goofy, I don't think goofy sells. And Days has been pretty goofy and dippy for a long time.
Edited by DesignatedShelley, Jun 28 2012, 09:27 AM.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
six
Member Avatar


PhoenixRising05
Jun 28 2012, 01:34 AM
^Yep. That is something the show doesn't do much of anymore. It's not very fun. The show could stand to have a bit more of a lightness and even dabble in some comedic moments like the one you posted. Ron and Frank brought that to OLTL and have also brought a little of that to GH. I wouldn't do too much of it but I think Days really could use it. It's all doom and gloom all the time and, when it isn't, it's just the usual cheesy crap between couples. The problem is Days doesn't have characters around that can bring that naturally like they did before with Vivian, Ivan, Rolf, Bart, Hattie, etc.
They still have Nicole, who always had her serious and silly moments like the catfight. In 2008, she was a very good updated version of camp. Swooping in with her little dog, making a gagging noise when she saw stax kissing... I think there are some elements of camp in this thing she has going with Dan, too.

I don't like soaps to go too ridiculous ( e.g., Identical quads - even though it was fun at the time), but there does need to be a certain amount of 'only on a soap' type things to keep me interested, since I can get much better drama elsewhere.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
blueskies
Member Avatar


Soaps have always been OTT and campy. I mean, Marie fell in love with her amnesiac presumed-dead brother. If that doesn't scream "Days has always been campy" I don't know what does.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Liz<3Days
Member Avatar


I just want a story with a sold beginning, middle and satisfying end. A story that doesnt re-write history (ok, maybe a little re-writing is ok...but not a major event) and follows logically (as in makes sense.) I'm willing to believe in a bit OTT points in a story, if the overall outcome makes sense.

When there are too many WTF questions, that's where I stop connecting with a story.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Classic Soap Fan

The best "camp" is not written to BE camp. IMO, one of the BEST campy movies of all time is "Valley of the Dolls", but that movie was NOT written to be a campy movie. It was written dead serious and intended to be a serious drama. It's just SO melodramatic and broad in its drama that it crosses over into camp in retrospect. I can assure you that when Bill Bell sat down to write Marie falling in love with Mark Brooks who would turn out to be her presumed dead brother Tommy who was suffering from amnesia & had had plastic surgery, he did go "hmmm... let's write a really campy storyline." And, to be honest, I don't find that all that campy. JER could go so far into deliberate camp that I'm surprised the boy scouts didn't move in en masse.

IMO, "soap opera" as a genre HAS to contain some form of realism. It has to be realistic and believable. Now, that said, it has to be believeable within the parameters set up for that individual series. Realistic/believeable for "Dark Shadows" and realistic/believeable for "As the World Turns" are two TOTALLY different things. Likewise, I have to be able to relate to something. I can have character with whom I identify, understand, and believe who become in completely out-there and extreme situations, but their individual actions/reactions HAVE to maintain some sort of logical realism. Likewise, I can have competely out-there and extreme characters, but their individual situations have to have some sort of logical realism (say, for example, a family of blood crazed vampires who just happen to relate to each other like any normal family would, but under the specific rules of vampirism).

What I HATE is when some writers seem to think that to be a soap opera, it's SUPPOSED to be completely OTT and deliberately campy. Far too often, when a writer sets out to do that, it quickly falls into the realm of slapstick and comedy. Yes, real life is funny, but when you're trying to sell me a serious, dramatic storyline but there's so much crazy camp going on around it (because you HAVE to be campy if you're a soap opera, after all), it functions as nothing but noise in the message and distracts from the drama.

In short (yeah. this is me. get real), I want to make an emotional connection with the characters. I want to see how they react to certain situations. I want to see them interact with other characters in deeply personal ways that allow me to know the characters better. I don't want to laugh, chuckle, or marvel at the next looney or shocking thing a character with the depth of a wading pool does.

IMO (I have a lot of those), good soap opera is not about the plot or the story, it's about how the plot and the story affects & changes the characters and how they react to those affects and changes.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
SoapGal1
Member Avatar


Okay, seriously.

What's not to like about Matt's post?

I need some specifics here.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
annie21


Liz<3Days
Jun 28 2012, 10:05 AM
I just want a story with a sold beginning, middle and satisfying end. A story that doesnt re-write history (ok, maybe a little re-writing is ok...but not a major event) and follows logically (as in makes sense.) I'm willing to believe in a bit OTT points in a story, if the overall outcome makes sense.

When there are too many WTF questions, that's where I stop connecting with a story.
Yes, and it has to be grounded in strong characters. If the camp comes out of recognizable character traits, then we can buy it.

When characters skate around on the surface and are made to react randomly or differently than otherwise, the whole campy illusion falls apart and it's just irritating.

And there has to be balance. Where there's camp in one place there should be serious drama unfolding elsewhere. If the whole show becomes a series of insta-pairings, bed-hoppings, and ludicrous, out-of-character interactions and set-ups, the whole show careens off course.

Yes, Days has had camp along the way. All of the villains were basically campy. Certain characters were brought in for the campy factor. Calliope and Eugene come to mind. But those two worked well for so long only because the writing for those campy characters and their hijinx was taken really seriously and done well. As soon as the writing fell off, they became caricatures of themselves and the charm waned.

In other words, "camp" is a serious business, lol. These writers just go through the motions (e.g., the CAFE ice cube scene) and it shows.

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Shadow
Member Avatar


It looks like Sony and NBC want to save the show and I'm thrilled. It also probably means TomSel will be writing what Sony and NBC want, which I'm also thrilled about because I had very little confidence in them. But they are team players and will do what they are asked, unlike MarDar who seemed to resent the interference.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Mason


Shadow
Jun 28 2012, 11:23 AM
It looks like Sony and NBC want to save the show and I'm thrilled. It also probably means TomSel will be writing what Sony and NBC want, which I'm also thrilled about because I had very little confidence in them. But they are team players and will do what they are asked, unlike MarDar who seemed to resent the interference.
Writing what NBC wants is exactly what I would be worried about.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
lysie


SoapGal1
Jun 28 2012, 10:49 AM
Okay, seriously.

What's not to like about Matt's post?

I need some specifics here.
It is rather lengthy.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
DesignatedShelley
Member Avatar


I don't recall anything that ever gave me the impression that Sony and NBC necessarily have the same vision for the show.
Online Profile Goto Top
 
Mitchapalooza
Member Avatar
^ My face watching DAYS

I actually fear what NBC would do to DAYS if they have 100% control....I don't think it would be great and for evidence, take a look at some of their gems in primetime.

I have more confidence in Sony, but even them I am not sure.

Too many cooks in the freaking kitchen!
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Andre


SoapGal1
Jun 28 2012, 10:49 AM
Okay, seriously.

What's not to like about Matt's post?

I need some specifics here.
LOL @ how this post is one of the few not suspiciously disliked.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Dreamy
Member Avatar


No news from DAYS, ED or SOD??? What is keeping them so long?????
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Classic Soap Fan

I had to change my board theme so I could understand this "like/dislike" reference. (My typical Winter theme doesn't show likes & dislikes). I see now.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Mitchapalooza
Member Avatar
^ My face watching DAYS

Matt
Jun 28 2012, 03:41 PM
I had to change my board theme so I could understand this "like/dislike" reference. (My typical Winter theme doesn't show likes & dislikes). I see now.
Really? I wasn't even aware that you could not see them with other themes.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
annie21


lysie
Jun 28 2012, 11:30 AM
SoapGal1
Jun 28 2012, 10:49 AM
Okay, seriously.

What's not to like about Matt's post?

I need some specifics here.
It is rather lengthy.
That must be it. Because Matt and I posted at about the same time and made similar points -- although his post was far more articulate than mine.

But mine was shorter, so that must be it. :)

Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ArizonaDaze
Member Avatar


Matt
Jun 28 2012, 03:41 PM
I had to change my board theme so I could understand this "like/dislike" reference. (My typical Winter theme doesn't show likes & dislikes). I see now.
I really like your post Matt, but I don't have like/dislike buttons no matter what theme I use. Can't see most avatars including my own either. Don't know why. I have a question for you - when did you start watching Days? I have watched since late 1965/early 1966 and as I recall, it wasn't very campy back then.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Classic Soap Fan

ArizonaDaze
Jun 28 2012, 05:29 PM
Matt
Jun 28 2012, 03:41 PM
I had to change my board theme so I could understand this "like/dislike" reference. (My typical Winter theme doesn't show likes & dislikes). I see now.
I really like your post Matt, but I don't have like/dislike buttons no matter what theme I use. Can't see most avatars including my own either. Don't know why. I have a question for you - when did you start watching Days? I have watched since late 1965/early 1966 and as I recall, it wasn't very campy back then.
I've watched for as long as I can remember. Probably my *earliest* memory is of Julie & Steven in her shop with Karl & Sharon Duval (don't even ask my why I remember that). The earliest I can remember what was going on and actually paying attention was around 1981. I remember Doug & Julie's wedding at Doug's Place by the Lake and how much my grandmother was looking forward to it. It didn't really start to get into it until around the Salem Strangler and then I was REALLY into it with Bo/Hope and Pete/Melissa (along with Alex/Marie/Neil/Liz who I flipping LOVED). I remember Mickey being presumed dead in South America (but was really being held hostage by Stefano) and Maggie moving on with Don Craig.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DAYS: News, Spoilers & Discussion · Next Topic »
Locked Topic