Veterans away: What (not) to do

Today, by all accounts, was the final appearance of Don Diamont on the Young and the Restless. The story was told cryptically. By a series of coincidences, Brad was in the Wisconsin woods at the same time as Noah Newman had fallen through ice and was dying. The hero came out in Brad, and he tried to rescue Noah.

Then, in an interesting storytelling device, next we saw Noah, he was in hospital and apparently on the road to recovery. No sign of Brad, but the final shot of the episode was on an emergency lantern at water's edge...flickering, and about to be extinguished.

Only the most spoilerphobic do not know what will happen next.

My point, though, is to address how fundamentally respectfully Y&R dealt with this transition. In the days before this event, they actually ramped up Brad's story. He was in conflict with his ex-wife, his (adopted) daughter was starting to drift away to her biological father, he was at a crossroads in business. He confessed his true love to Sharon Newman, and was rebuffed. He even had a sweet reunion with his first (Genoa City) wife, Traci Abbott.

Now, this is an intriguing writing choice. It makes any subsequent loss of Brad even more poignant. He doesn't just fade away. He is, instead, snatched away with a plethora of unfinished business and a whole new bevy of storylines (fighting Victor, reclaiming his daughter's love, finding new romance and new occupation). In the last days, Brad had been more active than he'd been since Lynn Latham left the show.

Then, on top of it, he is apparently given a hero's farewell. He died (did he?) saving the son of the woman who had just rejected him!

If previews for the next episode are to be believed, this will also spin out in months of new stories...all premised around Brad's death. Nick and Sharon reunited, after a fashion. The increasingly psycho Phyllis will discover Nick's betrayal. Colleen will be bereft...and apparently turn to the (hitherto happily married) first love JT. Abby will surely be rocked by guilt...probably Ashley and Victoria too. Good, juicy, soapy stuff.

Killing a character off like that -- with long term repercussions -- is an act of love. It says, palpably, "you will be missed; your absence will be felt".

========

Now, I contrast this with the 1/23/2009 farewell of John and Marlena on Days of our Lives. Pillars of the show, they'd languished under years of uneven writing, sudden story switches, and -- most criminally -- long phases of backburner neglect.

Their story was tied up -- literally -- within the span of a single episode. Then...off they were...to Switzerland (presumably never to be seen again). Since leaving, their departures have scarcely been mentioned.

No opportunity for farewells...even with daughters Sami or Belle. No dramatic or heroic departure. No repercussions. By my previous criteria, that equals disrespect...for John and Marlena, and for the fans who loved them for so long.

========

Time and again, Y&R shows how it should be done...and Days...doesn't. Could this, possibly, be part of the reason for the huge ratings difference between them?

And yet, I scratch my head. By all accounts, DOOL is the only show that is consistently GAINING viewers these days. That makes me think I do not understand what soap fans even want. I do know what I want....respect for fans.

Oh yeah. And that they never find Brad's body.

Soap budget cuts: Salvation or sign of the end?

(Small non-sequitur: I have updated my cross-over list and GLBT list and image gallery to reflect some late-in-2008 additions)

So, this last week brought revelations that NBC required a 40% budget cut (from print edition of Soap Opera Digest) from Days of Our Lives for renewal, and ABC has recently asked for up to 50% budget cuts from cast and consultants. Guiding Light had much publicized budget cuts last year (e.g., 50% cuts in writing staff; hence, the new production model). I think this is not a sign of hope ("teamwork to save the show"), but the futile last gasp.

It seems that Y&R and B&B aren't going through such horrible cuts. Are they being "saved" by relative success on the foreign sales market? My sense is that the official story is that foreign sales are nice, but "chump change". They do not apparently offset the bulk of US production costs. At the same time, when I look at the two most popular international shows (Bell shows), I (and others) seem to see them spending MORE not less money. Their ratings (esp. B&B) are not high enough that they should be protected from this economic downturn. So maybe the foreign dollars do matter?

I also assume that the production houses may be willing to take less profit...as long as they break even...during a downturn like this. So, this leads me to conclude that ABC and NBC and P&G are not even breaking even on their soaps?

Could Y&R and B&B more quietly be asking for pay cuts from their actors? I wondered if this was what he was alluding to in a recent TVGuide.com interview...saying "I am happier with the storyline, I have to say. Much happier. I really mean that. I'm happy along those lines; along some other lines, no. But that's a different story."

I worry, actually, that when the pay cuts hit Y&R, we'll lose many of our starts. In recent years, Braeden, Scott, Woodland, Case, Morrow (others?) have all walked when contract negotiations fell apart. Heather Tom left the show when her pay cut (reduced guarantee; used less) happened.

I fear there are performers on Y&R who will just walk. Therefore...all the headlines that "Drake and Dee" are getting now....I expect them to repeat for "Eric and Melody" before the day is done. With that, the heart of these shows is expunged...and there seems little value in continuing to follow the empty shells that remain.

On the other hand, maybe the sheer scarcity of roles these days keeps some actors as a captive force on their shows. Is there another game in town?

I was actually in a situation in the last year where the economic downturn led to the issue of across-the-board paycuts being DISCUSSED. It's one thing to say theoretically, but when you suddenly have to live on less money...it's a hard pill to swallow. Especially if you have the same workload.

With that in mind, however, you're more apt to swallow this if there is no other game in town...and if your previous earnings have not made you independently wealthy.

So, unfortuntely, this becomes the classic "over the barrel" scenario: Do it, or have no job....and good luck finding another. That is essentially what Ken Corday said about his show: "Demonstrate teamwork or... goodbye".

For me, in the end, this all feels like we're closer to the end than I thought (for the genre).

We see this in many failing industries. The last step is "employee concessions". In some industries (like air or automobile) it CAN work because there is a hope for economic recovery.

Not for soaps. Sure, there may be more advertisers in the future, but the advertising game has changed. They value broadcast advertising less. AND nothing happening here will bring back soap viewers. They're gone forever.

I really thing the Days scenario describes where all of daytime is headed. These massive cuts will eke out another 18 months or so...and then the shows are gone. We've seen it at Days/NBC, we're seeing it at ABC now, and we saw it last year and before with CBS/P&G. Only the Bell soaps seem less publically to be going through this. (Years ago, Shaughnessy said they were doing significant cost cutting, but it was their goal for us not to notice it on screen. That began the era of use of fewer sets....but these days we seem to see MORE sets).

In that sense, I think all this cost cutting is heroic, but ultimately futile.

Remember, all soaps are going to end by 2016 anyway (insert wan semi-smile)