.
As I write this, it has been exactly one year since the cancellation of NBC's long-running soap, Another World. And, I still miss it. Why? It's not as though I haven't seen other soaps cancelled before.
Maybe it was the finality of it. When NBC canceled Generations, that show ended with patriarch Henry Marshall having a heart attack. That's right, TO BE CONTINUED–forever. The only thing a soap fan dreads worse than one of their shows being canceled is the show being canceled without resolving any of the current plotlines. Still, unresolved plotlines give the feeling that somewhere, the show is still going on, the characters are still living their lives.
Maybe it was the respectfulness of it. AW, with all of it's faults, knew better than to go out like Loving did. Loving wasn't just canceled by ABC--it was murdered. In what still has to be the most shocking, contemptible ratings-grab in daytime, Loving spent it's last few months in a convoluted murder mystery where nearly all of the long-running characters were snuffed out by a serial killer–who, of course, turned out to be another vet! Then, the rest of the characters (ages 40 and below–well below) moved to New York City, and their own soap, The City. The City went out of it's way to appear hip with it's state-of-the-art sets, frequent location sequences, and ‘'daring'‘plots. It fell flat on it's ass. Loving lasted 12 and a half years; The City 18 months. I miss Loving too, but I can't think about Loving without my thoughts turning to boiling anger. Sure, I feel anger about AW too, but it's not the same.
Or, maybe it was the disrespectfulness of it. It's no shock that attracting the young demographic has become the master of television programming–and daytime in general. But, has anyone been so blatant as NBC Daytime exec Susan Lee when, referring to the last focus grouping of AW, said that a lot of the older actors wouldn't want to hear what was said about them? The message was clear; the older you are, the less valuable you are. And AW and it's audience had become so old, that they were no longer valued at all. And now, NBC has what they want. A young-skewing, two-soap lineup, with brainless writing, and "actors"who couldn't act their way of a wet paper bag. They have James E. Reilly's Passions, which is so mindnumbingly idiotic, it makes James E. Reilly's work on DAYS look like Masterpiece Theatre. But who cares, as long as NBC is Passions' owner, thereby getting a much larger percentage of the profits we could ever ge tfrom P&G-owned AW, right? Yes, NBC must be happy with the low-rated Passions, and increasingly low-rated Days. (In fact, if the numbers get any lower, NBC might need to change the title from Days to Numbered Days.)
So, why was Susan Lee recently fired? Oh, I forgot, they changed their story. She left. I told you I was angry.
Perhaps it was AW's potential. Apparently, the idiot execs can't conceive of a thirty-five year old soap as still having potential. But, it did. Especially,when the show was in the middle of making a dramatic comeback in quality.
Is that it? Is it because Another World went through years (some might say decades) of systematic destruction, outrageous character changes, idiot plots, beloved actors fired and their characters written out in the cruelest of ways, half-hearted flirtations with sci-fi and the supernatural, and other horrors that brought A-Dub so low I was practically begging for cancellation as a form of mercy killing? Is it because AW went through all this, finally emerging stronger, as a force to be reckoned with, a soap with potential finally being tapped–and THEN it was canceled? They say what doesn't kill you makes you stronger? Well, AW went to Hell and back, came out strong, and then it was killed.
Is it because I can flip all over the daytime dial, and find pieces of AW, but not the real thing? Look,there's Jordan Stark on Guiding Light! Okay, the Lumina plot was stupid, but damn, he could act! And there's Michael Hudson on OLTL! What the hell happened? And look! There's Felicia...everywhere! And we can't forget Jake, the only one to actually make the jump to another soap, with character intact. Oh ATWT, the worst of them all! How many other A-Dub characters have you featured, if only for a fleeting moment? Vicky, Marley, Donna, Cass, Lila–you even show some of the old sets, use some of the actual clips, air in the same timeslot! But, you're not Another World. Nothing is.
And that's why I miss Another World. No matter how people tried to change it, homogenize it, bastardize it, or turn it into a carbon-copy of crap–when all was said and done, Another World was still Another World. An original. One of a kind. A classic. And there will never be another one like it.
.
I had this thought while writing the above piece, but it didn't quite fit. I'll say it now. Soap operas are an entirely different animal than prime-time. Prime-time is meant for a limited run, a relatively short time frame; it's disposable. Soaps are not. You might think they are. There are 22 episodes of a prime-time show produced per year, compared with 260 episodes of a soap. But, soaps are designed to get involved with on a daily basis. The genre exists to draw it's viewers in slowly, like a spider tightening it's web. It has to give the viewers characters that interest them, and keep them interested, and will hopefully get them interested in other characters and storylines, until, one sweet day, the viewers find themselves hooked on the whole show. If this works out, the viewers should stay hooked for years–maybe even for life!
Dear networks, I understand that you need to attract new, younger viewers to your daytime lineup. But, must you do it at the expense of your older viewers? Soaps are not anthologies; they are not telenovelas. They are soaps, ongoing, neverending. If a soap has a high percentage of viewers who have been watching for ten, twenty, thirty years or more...then maybe...just maybe... THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING RIGHT!!!! Older soaps should have a high percentage of older viewers! Learn it! Live it! Love it! Or get out of the soap business altogether, and find a new genre to vandalize, you flippin idjits!
Thanks for listening.
.
"I understand One Live To Live [is considered to have]had a wonderful year, but I have to tell you I think it's unwatchable. We have got to get that show moving. I look at the poor actors and think, ‘They're acting their little hearts out, but they're acting in a void!' It's a very dark show. It's melodramatic. I don't think people want to watch it. It needs life!"
This is so true. I've long felt that OLTL is easily the worst of ABC's lineup, but with all the accolades being heaped on the show, I wondered if Behr would say it. Well, she did. No, I don't think FMB is the greatest talent in the world, or infallible. But, I do believe that she is a woman who actually cares about the genre, and wants to see it succeed, instead of just trying to get a paycheck. And I do think FMB has had more hits than misses. And I am beyond thrilled to see someone in a place of authority who does not seem snowed by the meaningless Emmy GH won, or how fantastic OLTL is doing in the demos of a genre that virtually no one is watching? Who cares if you're near the top of the garbage heap, if you're still garbage? If Behr's bite is even half as good as her bark, ABC viewers are in for some great changes.
That's all for this week. If you want more, you'll have to come back next week. But, if you can't wait until then, drop me a line at snarkieposter@yahoo.com. I'm cool now, but maybe you'll write something that'll get me hot again! (And, believe me, you don't know how censored I am, until you see one of my e-mails. I'm talking TV14 stuff! Ask Jilly, she can vouch!)