|
Post by ghoulgirl on May 7, 2011 21:07:21 GMT -5
'Days of our Lives' Alison Sweeney on how soaps are fighting to stay alive
With the news that ABC canceled "All My Children" and "One Life to Live," soap opera fans are wondering if other soaps are in danger of the same fate. Alison Sweeney, who has played Sami on "Days of our Lives" since 1993, says she understands how great the loss of those shows is for fans.
"It hits close to home. It's really sad," Sweeney tells Zap2it while promoting the Hill's Science Diet "Million Pound Pledge" for pets. "I know, like many soap opera actors do, when you meet fans, that soaps have been a part of their family for generations. They've watched it with their mom or their grandma and it's close to their heart... It's hard to say goodbye."
On the other hand, Sweeney says she understands the business side of daytime soaps and the challenge the industry faces in order to keep the shows viable.
"They have to find a way to make money," she says. "And at 'Days of our Lives,' we're working really hard to fight to be a financially good decision for those people who make those decisions and hopefully we tell good enough stories that the fans want to keep watching."
The actress, who also hosts "The Biggest Loser," knows that reality and nonfiction programs are much cheaper to produce than scripted series, so the industry has had to make strategic changes to make sure it still turns a profit for the networks.
"At 'Days,' it's clearly a different place to work than it was 18 years ago when I first started," she says. "We don't have a lot of rehearsal time and we have to keep going. And the writers have to work harder and be able to write very simple scenes that are easier to shoot, inexpensive, without any fancy special effects, but still tell really compelling stories. Ultimately, most of the responsibility falls on the writers to tell really good stories and the actors to have to turn it around and bring it to life with a lot of constraints."
Source: Zap2It
Courtesy of Daytime Royalty
|
|
|
Post by MrsM on May 7, 2011 21:45:34 GMT -5
it is a shame that the bottom line is what ultimately is affecting the show we love. Some of the things we said we missed in the other thread are the exact things they cut out to save on the budget
|
|
|
Post by Tom Horton on May 7, 2011 23:39:07 GMT -5
Thanks for posting the article GG.
It annoys me more than it probably should when I read interviews like that about how Days has to cut back because of budget yada yada. In the very best of times, I don't remember Days ever having "fancy special effects", the soap genre has always required actors to have little rehearsal time, and how does writing "very simple scenes" equate to the writers having to work harder. I also don't understand how not using sets that you already have built saves money ... or not using actors you are already paying for that matter, but what really irritates me is that it does not cost one more dime for the writers already being paid to write the show to write "compelling" stories than it does for them to write ones that aren't ... it may take more talent and effort but it doesn't take any more money. Maybe I'm just jaded from the number of times I've seen agencies use budgetary constraints as an excuse for unpopular actions (or inactions) that would have happened regardless of the economic picture. I can't muster up sympathy for Days' economic woes - all companies face those challenges and the energy Days wastes on making excuses costs precious recources that they should be using to make the show better so that the two cancelled soaps (and every other one) stops beating them in the ratings.
|
|
|
Post by Kpatch on May 8, 2011 8:19:40 GMT -5
Great post Kazz.
I once worked with a graphic artist who complained when he had to change something. His boss told him "we'll pay you to make the change." In other words, he was being paid regardless.
Budget has nothing to do with whether you write romance or mayhem stories. Someone is making the story decisions. We need to have more balance, less Dimeras. Less Hernandi.
And I don't mind telling you that it annoyed me to see the Safe House again when we can't get even one scene at Titan HQ. They kept the Safe House set???
|
|
centexgirl
Member
Brady, Brady, Brady. Madison is not right for you!
Posts: 90
|
Post by centexgirl on May 8, 2011 9:02:11 GMT -5
Seems like I heard the reason we don't have John and Marlena's old penthouse is because the studio sold it. So, maybe that is what happened to some of the other more favored sets. Maybe. (shrugs) I dunno. It's a shame in such uncertain times the show is limited on what it can do to survive, but I am so very glad we still have the show to watch every day. It cannot last forever, but look how many other shows have gone by the wayside. When I was a kid, there was Days, Young and the Restless, One Life to Live, The Doctors, Search For Tomorrow, Guiding Light, As the World Turns, General Hospital, All My Children, and probably some more I cannot think of right now. Days is STILL here. As much as it has changed, I am going to keep enjoying it till I cannot. (And I really do miss the OLD Days!!)
|
|
|
Post by DancingDays on May 8, 2011 10:55:24 GMT -5
Great stories do not require complicated sets. Relationships grow and unfold in all kids of places. Too bad the producers don't realize that. And that's where I lay the blame. At the producers' feet. They are the ones that hire the (often) less than stellar writers. The writers are only working within their limitations set by the producers. Sometimes they hit gold (Magic, the reunion of Safe, Nicole taking control). Other times, well, let's just say they missed the mark. I just hope that, with the awesomness that we are seeing this month, we are on an upswing. Regardless of budget.
|
|
|
Post by MrsM on May 8, 2011 12:09:18 GMT -5
I hope you are right DD! Days has survived some pretty rough times and terrible story lines. I hope that the upswing we are getting now continues and that they will find a balance and try to restore our soap to the way it used to be.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on May 8, 2011 14:10:17 GMT -5
Everyone in this thread is right about how the writing doesn't cost any more, so that's where they need to focus. I do, however, have sympathy for the constraints the show is under. I work in TV, and seriously, guys, the way these people are working to keep producing this show... it's ASTONISHING. The actors have zero rehearsal time. They're shooting multiple episodes' worth of material in each day. They have to be done by a certain time every day to avoid paying any of the crew overtime. It's a very different world from where daytime was 10 years ago. It annoys me more than it probably should when I read interviews like that about how Days has to cut back because of budget yada yada. In the very best of times, I don't remember Days ever having "fancy special effects", the soap genre has always required actors to have little rehearsal time, and how does writing "very simple scenes" equate to the writers having to work harder. I also don't understand how not using sets that you already have built saves money ... or not using actors you are already paying for that matter, but what really irritates me is that it does not cost one more dime for the writers already being paid to write the show to write "compelling" stories than it does for them to write ones that aren't ... it may take more talent and effort but it doesn't take any more money. Maybe I'm just jaded from the number of times I've seen agencies use budgetary constraints as an excuse for unpopular actions (or inactions) that would have happened regardless of the economic picture. I can't muster up sympathy for Days' economic woes - all companies face those challenges and the energy Days wastes on making excuses costs precious recources that they should be using to make the show better so that the two cancelled soaps (and every other one) stops beating them in the ratings. You're totally correct about the writing aspects of it, but I'll try to offer a little bit of inside-the-industry perspective on this. The general way the soaps have always worked is that they have a limited amount of studio space (it used to be 2-3 stages, now it's one). Therefore, all the sets for a day's episode are stored -- often off-site, since there's no room at the actual stage -- and have to be put up and taken down every day. That means that a night crew has to be paid to do all the setup/takedown. When Days did the big budget slash, they basically went to a model where a handful of sets are left standing all the time (Maggie's house, DiMera mansion, Kiriakis mansion, Brady Pub, that damn pier, the hospital). That way, they almost completely cut the expense of those setup/takedown crews. When we see sets for the first time in a long while, it's because they've knocked down something else and put something in its place. It's why Java Cafe and the Cheatin' Heart were gone for a long time, because they had that mausoleum set and some other stuff they were using on a regular basis. They essentially have a few 'swing' spots where they can put up some sets to use for a while, and then they'll replace those and we'll see the replacement sets for a while, etc. Notice that we've been seeing a ton of the Cheatin' Heart but haven't been inside any of the hospital rooms for a good month. I would imagine a lot of the old sets still exist in some form, like how they dragged out Shawn/Mimi's old apartment for Sami & Rafe, but they're broken down and in storage. It's why the Horton living room was still around but went unseen for so long. (I know Marlena's penthouse got taken apart, and the spiral staircase was used to rebuilt the DiMera set in 2007, but I'm willing to bet the "bones" of the penthouse are still around.) Anyway, that's why we see the same sets so often. IMO, it sucks, but if that's what it takes to keep Days on the air, then so be it. And as everyone in this thread has said, it just means the writing has to be even sharper so that we're drawn into the characters and their dynamics rather than paying attention to the scenery. (Also, they need to work on the damn lighting. It's way too bright. I think they have a "standing" lighting setup now, which makes it easier to shoot, but someone's gotta work on making it a little more subtle and dynamic.)
|
|
|
Post by DancingDays on May 8, 2011 14:19:13 GMT -5
Wow Mikey. Thanks for the inside scoop! It really is incredible what they do and with what little they have to do it with. Kudos to them!
|
|
|
Post by Kpatch on May 8, 2011 15:45:59 GMT -5
I agree. Thanks for the insight Mikey. It helps explain a lot.
|
|
|
Post by MrsM on May 8, 2011 15:46:45 GMT -5
Thanks for the info!!! It is so cool to learn how things work!
|
|
|
Post by sportsgirl on May 8, 2011 17:05:53 GMT -5
Very interesting... Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Tom Horton on May 8, 2011 19:51:43 GMT -5
Thanks for the info Mikey and good point about how we wouldn't notice the background anyway if the scenes are compelling enough.
|
|
|
Post by fluffysmom on May 8, 2011 22:13:32 GMT -5
I think I read somewhere that the Horton living room is a permanent set and takes up lots of room. If we get consistently good writing I can live with fewer sets.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on May 8, 2011 22:59:32 GMT -5
Yeah, I think the reason the Horton set looks slightly different now is because they might have re-created it or something... I know it was a BIG deal for them to haul it out for Alice's memorial, and they were saying they were going to deconstruct it and only keep Alice's chair. I think they might've taken it apart and re-built it in a more manageable way (i.e., using a lot of the same pieces, but in a way that it can be dismantled). They don't have room in the stage for permanent sets of that size anymore, I don't think, which is sad, but I'm glad we at least get to see that place more now!
|
|