Anthony D. Langford
2003-10-28 03:32:06 UTC
Here is the interview with Gary Tomlin. It appeared in the Kansas City
Star.
Are Soap Operas All Washed Up?
By Raena Hewitt
They were once the kings of the afternoon airwaves, pulling in viewers
of all generations, primarily female, who wouldn't miss a day of their
favorite soap. Even as more women entered the workplace in the 70's and
80's, the VCR proved that soaps could still maintain high ratings. Now,
however, these shows are dropping annually at a rate faster than any
other programs on the major networks. With increased competition from
cable, and a general sense that viewers have seen it all, it seems very
likely that that sound you hear is the death knell for the remaining
nine shows on the air. Already this year, ABC's Port Charles succumbed
to cancellation, and it's rumored two shows on another network will be
gone before the end of 2004. Can anything be done to prevent what looks
to be the inevitable conclusion of these continuing dramas? We talked
with former One Life to Live executive producer Gary Tomlin, credited
with bringing the show it's first Daytime Emmy for Best Drama, about his
tenure at the show, and his thoughts on the future, if there is indeed
one, for daytime dramas.
RH: Okay, so what is your opinion on the big question? Are soaps a dying
breed?
GT: Frankly, yes (laughs). But then, all shows are a dying breed. By
nature, television programs have an expiration date. None of them will
go on forever. That said, I do believe we are in the twilight of the
soap opera genre. There is less time ahead of them than there is behind
them. The key is to extend the time that they have left. Under the best
circumstances, I think that some of the shows could go another twenty
years. Under the worst circumtances, I would expect to see the majority
of them gone within five years.
RH: So what are the best circumstances?
GT: There are too many cooks in the kitchen right now. The networks are
so worried about appealing to such a narrow demographic, that every
single thing that happens on the shows now is tested and focus grouped
to death. There are constant re-writes, constant storyline changes, and
zero opportunity for a writer to sit down and write a story from start
to finish. You will have this great story in mind, and yet even if the
network okays it, there are no guarantees you will see it through. In
fact, more often than not, the opposite is true. It will be twisted and
turned, and re-written, until it bears little resemblance to what you
had originally planned.
RH: That sounds like difficult circumstances to work under.
GT: Oh, it is. Impossible circumstances. And it's not just story, it's
casting too. When I first came to OLTL, we had a wonderful umbrella
story planned involving Skye Chandler that would've incorporated
virtually every character on the show. But Robin Christopher (Skye) had
a contract with ABC, not our show in particular. NBC wanted her for
something in primetime, General Hospital wanted her, and we wanted to
keep her. But we lost that fight. We lost her, and we lost Skye, and
with it our whole story. Yet, we were still paying a big
chunk of her salary, even though we couldn't use her (laughs). It looks
great for your bottom line when one of the biggest payroll amounts on
your show is earmarked for someone whose services you're unable to
utilize. So I brought back Fiona Hutchison (Gabrielle), who I adore, but
it was a different story, and frankly, Robin has such undeniable
charisma and talent that she proved impossible to replace.
RH: Is it true you tried to bring back Robin Strasser (Dorian) and
Andrea Evans (Tina)?
GT: Yes on both counts. Both were shot down by ABC, but since I left, I
notice that Robin (Strasser) has returned.
RH: Why didn't ABC allow them to return when you were there?
GT: In Andrea's case, I was told that she was too old for the role
(laughs heartily). Can you believe that? Too old for the role she
created. Uh-huh, okay. In Robin's case, there was some bad blood there
that I'm assuming has since been forgotten.
RH: Apparently. Yet her return hasn't exactly lit a fire under OLTL's
ratings.
GT: That's because no actor can single-handedly raise the ratings. You
need the right story to back them up. When you have perfect casting,
combined with powerful writing, and great direction, that's when you
have a hit. Unfortunately, in the current climate, the networks are so
panicked that you're never going to have it. They want to play it safe,
and cheap, and it's biting them in the ass.
RH: Ouch. That's some harsh criticism.
GT: Actually, I think I'm being easy on them. You have to wonder what
their mindset is right now. They seem to be trying very hard to get the
shows cancelled. appear to be doing the opposite of what they should do
to make sure these shows have some life left in them.
RH: So what do you suggest they networks do?
GT: First of all, don't fire anyone who's been on the show for more than
3 years. Familiarity is the most important thing to a soap opera viewer.
Secondly, stunts are great in the short-term, but long-term, you need
compelling character-driven story. We were always told to go for the
shocks, and surprises, but when that's all there is ”plot, plot, plot”
eventually, viewers figure out hat there's nothing worth sticking around
for. And perhaps most importantly, stop hiring models who can't act. In
the 70's and 80's, there were beautiful people in soaps, but there were
also people who looked like real people. Now, there's such an emphasis
on physical beauty that the acting talent is an afterthought. That
should never be the case.
RH: So what do you think? Do you think the networks will start making
decisions that will help the soaps survive a little longer?
GT: No (laughs). I wish I could say otherwise, but I worked under the
Gestapo at ABC for two years, and I don't see anything changing anytime
soon. I think we really are witnessing the end, and that's a real shame.
Because with the right people in charge, people who really cared, these
shows could thrive for some time.
Star.
Are Soap Operas All Washed Up?
By Raena Hewitt
They were once the kings of the afternoon airwaves, pulling in viewers
of all generations, primarily female, who wouldn't miss a day of their
favorite soap. Even as more women entered the workplace in the 70's and
80's, the VCR proved that soaps could still maintain high ratings. Now,
however, these shows are dropping annually at a rate faster than any
other programs on the major networks. With increased competition from
cable, and a general sense that viewers have seen it all, it seems very
likely that that sound you hear is the death knell for the remaining
nine shows on the air. Already this year, ABC's Port Charles succumbed
to cancellation, and it's rumored two shows on another network will be
gone before the end of 2004. Can anything be done to prevent what looks
to be the inevitable conclusion of these continuing dramas? We talked
with former One Life to Live executive producer Gary Tomlin, credited
with bringing the show it's first Daytime Emmy for Best Drama, about his
tenure at the show, and his thoughts on the future, if there is indeed
one, for daytime dramas.
RH: Okay, so what is your opinion on the big question? Are soaps a dying
breed?
GT: Frankly, yes (laughs). But then, all shows are a dying breed. By
nature, television programs have an expiration date. None of them will
go on forever. That said, I do believe we are in the twilight of the
soap opera genre. There is less time ahead of them than there is behind
them. The key is to extend the time that they have left. Under the best
circumstances, I think that some of the shows could go another twenty
years. Under the worst circumtances, I would expect to see the majority
of them gone within five years.
RH: So what are the best circumstances?
GT: There are too many cooks in the kitchen right now. The networks are
so worried about appealing to such a narrow demographic, that every
single thing that happens on the shows now is tested and focus grouped
to death. There are constant re-writes, constant storyline changes, and
zero opportunity for a writer to sit down and write a story from start
to finish. You will have this great story in mind, and yet even if the
network okays it, there are no guarantees you will see it through. In
fact, more often than not, the opposite is true. It will be twisted and
turned, and re-written, until it bears little resemblance to what you
had originally planned.
RH: That sounds like difficult circumstances to work under.
GT: Oh, it is. Impossible circumstances. And it's not just story, it's
casting too. When I first came to OLTL, we had a wonderful umbrella
story planned involving Skye Chandler that would've incorporated
virtually every character on the show. But Robin Christopher (Skye) had
a contract with ABC, not our show in particular. NBC wanted her for
something in primetime, General Hospital wanted her, and we wanted to
keep her. But we lost that fight. We lost her, and we lost Skye, and
with it our whole story. Yet, we were still paying a big
chunk of her salary, even though we couldn't use her (laughs). It looks
great for your bottom line when one of the biggest payroll amounts on
your show is earmarked for someone whose services you're unable to
utilize. So I brought back Fiona Hutchison (Gabrielle), who I adore, but
it was a different story, and frankly, Robin has such undeniable
charisma and talent that she proved impossible to replace.
RH: Is it true you tried to bring back Robin Strasser (Dorian) and
Andrea Evans (Tina)?
GT: Yes on both counts. Both were shot down by ABC, but since I left, I
notice that Robin (Strasser) has returned.
RH: Why didn't ABC allow them to return when you were there?
GT: In Andrea's case, I was told that she was too old for the role
(laughs heartily). Can you believe that? Too old for the role she
created. Uh-huh, okay. In Robin's case, there was some bad blood there
that I'm assuming has since been forgotten.
RH: Apparently. Yet her return hasn't exactly lit a fire under OLTL's
ratings.
GT: That's because no actor can single-handedly raise the ratings. You
need the right story to back them up. When you have perfect casting,
combined with powerful writing, and great direction, that's when you
have a hit. Unfortunately, in the current climate, the networks are so
panicked that you're never going to have it. They want to play it safe,
and cheap, and it's biting them in the ass.
RH: Ouch. That's some harsh criticism.
GT: Actually, I think I'm being easy on them. You have to wonder what
their mindset is right now. They seem to be trying very hard to get the
shows cancelled. appear to be doing the opposite of what they should do
to make sure these shows have some life left in them.
RH: So what do you suggest they networks do?
GT: First of all, don't fire anyone who's been on the show for more than
3 years. Familiarity is the most important thing to a soap opera viewer.
Secondly, stunts are great in the short-term, but long-term, you need
compelling character-driven story. We were always told to go for the
shocks, and surprises, but when that's all there is ”plot, plot, plot”
eventually, viewers figure out hat there's nothing worth sticking around
for. And perhaps most importantly, stop hiring models who can't act. In
the 70's and 80's, there were beautiful people in soaps, but there were
also people who looked like real people. Now, there's such an emphasis
on physical beauty that the acting talent is an afterthought. That
should never be the case.
RH: So what do you think? Do you think the networks will start making
decisions that will help the soaps survive a little longer?
GT: No (laughs). I wish I could say otherwise, but I worked under the
Gestapo at ABC for two years, and I don't see anything changing anytime
soon. I think we really are witnessing the end, and that's a real shame.
Because with the right people in charge, people who really cared, these
shows could thrive for some time.