• About Us
  • FAQ
  • Archives
  • Links
  • SOD Columns


  • Serial Drama on Facebook

Subscribe to Serial Drama

  • Add to Google Reader or Homepage

    Subscribe in Bloglines

    Add to My AOL

    Powered by FeedBurner

« Go Fug Yourself, Soap Style | Main | (Yesterday's) Dumbest Dialogue »

March 27, 2007

Very Important Memo

DATE: March 27, 2007

TO: Julie Hanan Carruthers, Jill Farren Phelps, Frank Valentini

FROM: Brian Frons


As you all know, we've been moving forward full steam ahead with our new goal of younging up ABC Daytime and you've been doing a great job:)

Frank added a big name to his list today by getting rid of Phil Carey. Your bonus check is in the mail, Frank! Way to go!

We've been making a lot of progress, but we still have some work to do. Remember, the viewers want to see NEW characters, not the same one's they've been watching and attached to for decades. They just don't know it yet.

I have some suggestions:

  • - Julie, do you think we could possibly bump Susan Lucci to recurring status? And then possibly only show her on the phone with Kendall, Josh or Bianca, much in the manner of Chrissy on Three's Company?
  • - Frank: we can't have Vicki and Dorian, we can only have one or the other. Which one is older? Fire that one.
  • - Unrelated, but Jill, I think we should look into bringing Courtney back. Maybe she has a twin sister who can get together with Jason, or a cousin on her mother's side who can be Sonny's new love interest. Please let me know what you think.
  • Thanks for all of your effort and hard work. Pretty soon, we'll have the median ABC Daytime cast age down to 27 and ratings will be through the roof.
  • Brian
  • Julia Barr Cady McClain
  • David Canary
  • JILL
  • Stuart Damon
  • Tony Geary
  • John Ingle (again)
  • Jackie Zeman
  • Phil Carey
  • Hilary B. Smith
  • Robert S. Woods
  • - Promising Ingénue


    The people at ABC daytime are a gaggle of morons. I can't believe they are letting Phil leave and take Asa with him.

    While I commend the creativity of your post, I feel you ought to refrain from commenting on One Life To Live.

    You yourself have said in previous posts that you do not watch this show; but you "hear bad things."

    Do you feel you're best suited to draw a corollary for all three ABC soaps when you watch but two of them? To be fair, you are *only* a blogger and make no journalistic claim, but don't you think you lose some credibility when you critique a show you don't watch?

    Let us look at the facts. Hillary B. Smith was long rumored to be on the chopping block. And yet, she signed a new contract. Phil Carey, while of great value to those of us who have watched One Life To Live with anything amounting frequency, has clearly been off his game for years. He obviously has a great deal of trouble remembering his lines - he is NEVER standing when he's on the show and recently survived a battle with cancer. What does that say to you about the man's health, or his ability to do his job?

    I, for one, will miss him. But the simple fact is that, outside of color and shading, the character of Asa ceased to add anything of relevance to story two years ago. Thus the fact that the character of Clint - who, while not the original actor, is certainly a veteran CHARACTER, and played by an veteran actor - was brought back onto the canvas.

    I do not mean to flame you. I rather enjoy your blog. That said, I think all of us who sit at home and ream the people who work on these shows ought to turn our critical eye inward from time to time. We have no idea what actually went on when Mr. Carey was let go. Apparently he was not offered a new contract but was told in good faith that the show intended to employ him on a recurring basis. As for Mr. Carey's comments, we know them to be his opinion, or his interpretation of events. If we don't trust TPTB to tell us the truth, why should we trust *actors* to do the same? Everyone has an agenda - so, apparently, do you.

    van der meer wrote:

    "Everyone has an agenda - so, apparently, do you."

    I don't watch the show (I only sort of watch Days), but I find this blog to be very entertaining. It's fun, snarky, extremely well written, and all around good stuff.

    Heck, I read about shows I've never watched, just because I enjoy their writing.

    I think we should take it for what it is -- entertainment. Your mileage may vary, but that's my opinion.

    The trouble with the list for Jill is that they're going to want to keep it balanced or they'll have backed themselves into a corner of their own making where the only person on the show older that Maurice is Tony Geary, and then how would they sell him as a sex symbol?

    Point taken, Celine. I have no issue with which person reads this blog, nor his or her reasons why. I merely question the standing the writer has to criticize a show that she herself has said in previous posts she does not watch. It smacks of the same hypocrisy that some viewers often level at those who write and produce these shows.

    Watching OLTL or not, and following industry news, are not mutually required. You can not watch OLTL and still see some disturbing ABC casting -- or uncasting in this case -- trends. And use hyperbole in a blog to shine a light on those trends. And not be an expert on one of the three ABC shows to do it.

    Anonymous said:

    Watching OLTL or not, and following industry news, are not mutually required. You can not watch OLTL and still see some disturbing ABC casting -- or uncasting in this case -- trends.

    Van der Meer says: to imply that a person who takes critical license need not have at the very minimum a *passing* familiarity with the product she judges is at best a fallacy. This is Expository Writing 101.

    As I said, I tend to enjoy this blog's critique. But I take particular issue when someone does not know of what they write. Clearly the author heard about Phil Carey and linked it to *anecdotal* evidence from other ABC shows. But she did not take the time to scratch the surface of the news, nor look at the larger picture of OLTL. Had she done so, she might've drawn a different conclusion. Or maybe not. Who knows.

    However, I do know that identifying a *trend* without taking into *context* into account is just plain lazy.

    To trot out that old canard: just my humble (informed) opinion.

    I'm sort of surprised I even have to say this, but . . . this isn't an expository writing course, or a jury trial, it's a blog that mocks soap operas. We have fun with the silly things the characters and the showrunners do. Commenting on the firing of a nearly 30-year veteran, when it's done by the same network that's been firing long-term veterans like it's a reality show challenge isn't exactly purporting to offer an in-depth analysis of a show. van der meer, I think you might be taking Promising Ingenue's post a bit too seriously, and personally.

    Unless, oh wait, are you Brian Frons?! In which case, we have so much to talk about! If you could meet us out back behind the dumpsters, that would be great. Let me just go fetch my stilettos....

    Wow, van der meer, way to be condescending. You really have been trained by Frons and company, haven't you?

    Verify your Comment

    Previewing your Comment

    This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

    Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
    Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

    The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

    As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

    Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


    Post a comment