OLTL: A Theory of One Life to Live Viewership (long)
SandyWeeks
Reading over, the FABULOUS "Critical Look at Claire Labine" on Angela Earlye's
IMHO page, I caught myself reading and re-reading the following disturbing but
inciteful paragraph, courtesy of RATSA's own Marg Harris:
"When the Labines took over, it was a tough situation. Fans were unhappy.
Viewership was declining. Still, there were four loyal blocks of viewers
remaining: the Antonio/Andy fans, the Marty/Patrick fans, the Kevin/Cassie fans,
and the Todd/Blair fans. These were fans who had stuck with the show through
thick and thin, hoping for a bit of happiness and resolution for their
favorites."
And suddenly, the problem of declining viewership that has plagued OLTL since
1995 or so, came into sharp focus. I thought I might propose a theory of mine
and see what other people think.
Note how Marg accurately describes OLTL's viewership: as four separate blocs of
fans, each watching mainly for a specific couple. This observation is played
out repeatedly on RATSA, and the various other discussion boards around the web.
Such places are rife with complaints from viewers about what the writers have
done to their favorite couple, and threats made by the viewers to quit watching
the show unless their favorite couple is revived. The result: viewership of
OLTL is not only declining, but it is also clearly fragmented.
Now, maybe I was too young to understand such things at the time, but when I
first began watching OLTL in the late 1980s, I was under the impression that
OLTL viewers were fans of the "show" in general. Sure, there were Max-Megan
fans, and there were Tina-Cord fans, but you never heard viewers threatening
to quit watching the show if Tina and Cord didn't get back together for the
billionth time, or if Max chose Gabby over Megan. And the ratings played this
fact out quite nicely: for much of the time, OLTL hovered near the top of the
ratings. The reasons for this loyalty to "One Life to Live, the show" during
the late '80s as opposed to loyalty toward the "Supercouple of the Week" is
quite clear: in nearly every way, OLTL was infinitely better then, than it is
now. Therefore, even if Max kicked Megan to the curb, fans still tuned in
because there were a lot of other wonderful things going on to pick up the
slack.
In short, OLTL had *fans*
Today, Andy-Antonio have *fans*. Marty-Patrick have *fans*.
Kevin-Cassie have *fans*. Todd-Blair have *fans.* But does OLTL have any
fans left? Is this an example of the parts of the show not summing to a whole?
I think it is. And I also think this is the reason why OLTL is going to have
an incredibly difficult time pulling its ratings out of the gutter.
The audience is as fragmented as the show often is. And I'm left wondering
"Well, gee, where do I fit in? I'm not a fan of any of these couples." Or,
more accurately, while I may enjoy the dynamic between Todd and Blair, they are
not the be-all and the end-all of the show where I'm concerned. If Todd and
Blair never get together, I won't threaten to quit watching the show forever,
because there are still a few remaining characters I love: Viki, Clint, Dorian,
Asa, Bo, Renee, etc. Not to mention the show's spirit and history, no matter
how much a given headwriter may decide to screw with it. I love THE SHOW. I
am a fan of THE SHOW. I watch THE SHOW.
But as Marg has correctly pointed out, there does not seem to be a separate
bloc of such "OLTL fans" anymore. Therefore, we see the problem. If
1/4 of the viewing audience is tuning in only to watch Andy and Antonio, we
might expect to see 80% of these viewers tuning out when they leave. Same goes
for Marty and Patrick. Again, ratings seem to corroborate this: they rose
to 3.9 for M/P's wedding, but are now down to 3.5.
So who's to blame? The fickle viewers who only watch the show for one couple in
particular and stop watching whenever their couple leaves? Or the producers and
writers who created this problem to begin with? I suggest the latter.
When did this problem arise? As near as I can figure, it began around the time
that the stories on OLTL stopped being about character interaction and
development and began revolving wholly around supercouples. Todd and Blair were
the first to come our way. They dominated much screen-time in 1995 during
MM's regime. On the plus side, T/B and RH/KDeP had phenomenal chemistry
together. They were also written extremely well, with complex stories to play
out and character development going on constantly. But there was also a down-
side, as many have pointed out. By the time of RH's departure in late 1995,
Todd and Blair had come to monopolize most of the show. Simulatenously, IMO,
MM let the rest of the show's characters and stories disintegrate in favor of
the "Todd and Blair Show". Unsurpisingly, many viewers who didn't care for T/B
tuned out, because there was nothing else of interest going on. And then when
RH left the show, a chunk of the fans who watched only for T/B, left as well.
And so we began our long but steep slide into ratings oblivion.
I won't go into all of the couples, because they follow much the same pattern.
Marty and Patrick were perhaps the most egregious example. When Leah Laiman
and Peggy Sloane came aboard, they searched for a way to raise the show's
ratings and mistakenly came to the conclusion that what we wanted was
supercouple after supercouple. The fact that they were utterly incompetent with
a pen in their hands, only aggravated the situation. Stories ceased to be about
character development or interaction and became entirely about throwing
obstacles in the paths of the show's rising supercouples.
Here's a case study: The notorious "Get Carlo" storyline that streched on
seemingly endlessly during the summer and fall of 1996. Look briefly at the
story and you get the impression that it was one of MM's famous and successful
"umbrella stories" (Viki's personality disorder, eg) In other words, one
large story that encompasses a multitude of smaller, equally engaging stories
that, ideally, interwine and surge together for a stunning, heart-racing
conclusion. But analyze the "Get Carlo" saga closely and see what happens:
in effect, it splits up into four unconnected, uninvolving, incoherent
plots:
(1) The Marty-Patrick plot (w/Kineally, exploding Wild Swan,
Marty, queen of mnemonics, etc)
(2) The Andy-Antonio plot (w/Antonio working for Carlo, Andy's
near rape, later Antonio's trial)
(3) The Max-Maggie plot (w/the miracle water, the cave, oh
please, I don't want to remember more of it!)
(4) The Kevin-Cassie plot (w/the completly inept reporters
supposedly fighting each other for the scoop)
There was also some Alex and Asa and Bo stuff thrown in, but that was mainly
as comic relief or filler. Each of these four "mini-plots" had a bad effect
on the show as a whole. First of all, they were nearly completely wrapped in
isolated packages. When did we see any of them interact? Sure, A/A came
to rescue Max-Maggie from the cave, but that was meaningless and pure garbage.
Basically, most of 1996 and early 1997 was just one sustained effort to
develop isolated couples as opposed to a coherent show. And in that, Leah
Laiman & Co. were utterly successful. Fans of OLTL in general (which includes
most long-time viewers) left, finding nothing of interest on a show now
dominated by new supercouples. Meanwhile, the viewers that remained (mostly
new viewers), realizing that OLTL was pretty bad in general, found solace in
the fact that they could latch on to a supercouple and watch solely to see
them. It's much easier to watch a show like this: it requires less time,
thanks to Fast Forward, it also requires less investment. When your couple
leaves the show, you can leave the show. You don't have any loyalty to the
characters that still remain (Viki, eg).
This is, IMO, the major crime Leah Laiman & Co. perpetrated against our show.
Their writing stunk, sure. But bad writing can be fixed very easily by hiring
someone like Claire Labine. That OLTL's ratings have not increased since the
Labines arrival suggests a greater, deeper problem. That problem is, IMO,
viewership fragmentation. We've lost a lot of the A/A fans. We've lost a
lot of the M/P fans. We've lost Max/Maggie fans (if there were any). And
it looks like we may risk losing the Todd/Blair fans and Kevin/Cassie fans
as well, since these two couples don't look long destined for this world.
But what will fill their void? New viewers? Maybe, but how do you lure them?
If the Labines answer is supercouples, this show is doomed. A better answer is,
the remaining loyalists, (who are few and far between) and any old-time viewers
that can be lured back. The key to the show's success in the ratings is going to
hinge on whether or not the Labines *can* lure these old-time viewers back
(Speaking personally, they have yet to succeed where I am concerned.) or whether
they will push ahead with the dangerous Laiman philosophy of "supercouple the
audience to death." At this point, I'm not sure which way they are leaning. I
don't like the recent rash of storyless, plotless coupling going on. Kelly-Ian,
Todd-Tea, Joey-Dorf. Sure, a couple written well can be a big bonus. But unless
the Labines pay attention to the show as a whole, they are going to fall into
the same trap as their predecessors and God only knows how much lower OLTL will
fall in the ratings.
*Phew* Well, this is how I see it. Maybe I'm totally off-base. But when I
hear so many people on so many discussion boards saying how they have quit
watching the show because so-and-so left, I can't help but wonder if the
problem with OLTL's ratings today is due to more than just a lack of compelling
plots.
Sandy
Linda Martindale
On 28 Oct 1997 SandyWeeks@.MISSING-HOST-NAME. wrote:
I'm going to cut areas and address the pertinent as I too have a view
here.
> Reading over, the FABULOUS "Critical Look at Claire Labine" on Angela Earlye's
> IMHO page, . . . Marg Harris wrote
>
> "When the Labines took over, it was a tough situation. Fans were unhappy.
> Viewership was declining. Still, there were four loyal blocks of viewers
> remaining: the Antonio/Andy fans, the Marty/Patrick fans, the Kevin/Cassie fans,
> and the Todd/Blair fans. These were fans who had stuck with the show through
> thick and thin, hoping for a bit of happiness and resolution for their
> favorites."
>
Then Sandy wrote:
> And suddenly, the problem of declining viewership that has plagued OLTL since
> 1995 or so, came into sharp focus. I thought I might propose a theory of mine
> and see what other people think.
>
I checked something I had yesterday for overall ratings and here is what
I found:
1986-87 3rd 1989-90 4th 1992-93 6th
1987-88 3rd 1990-91 6th 1993-94 6th
1988-89 3rd 1991-92 7th 1994-95 5th
1995-96 6th
1996-97 7th
Folks the trend didn't just start.
>
> Note how Marg accurately describes OLTL's viewership: as four separate blocs of
> fans, each watching mainly for a specific couple. This observation is played
> out repeatedly on RATSA, and the various other discussion boards around the web.
> Such places are rife with complaints from viewers about what the writers have
> done to their favorite couple, and threats made by the viewers to quit watching
> the show unless their favorite couple is revived. The result: viewership of
> OLTL is not only declining, but it is also clearly fragmented.
But you know the show is much, much more than that. I love the
Dorian/Viki scenes. I like Jessica. It's what I've been harping on for
what seems forever. The show must be for all. This "super couple"
mentality is a thing of the past. I don't see super couples on any show.
>
> Now, maybe I was too young to understand such things at the time, but when I
> first began watching OLTL in the late 1980s, I was under the impression that
> OLTL viewers were fans of the "show" in general.
And here Sandy you hit the nail on the head. We should be fans of the
show not of couples. A true fan sticks with the show through good times
and bad. It takes the good characters with the bad and they can see a
multi-layered life. Unfortunately so may that post forgets this. If
their favs aren't on screen they don't watch which means they are not
true fans--they are character fans. And by being character fans they are
missing a bigger, more complex picture.
Illustration of division below.
>
> Today, Andy-Antonio have *fans*. Marty-Patrick have *fans*.
> Kevin-Cassie have *fans*. Todd-Blair have *fans.* But does OLTL have any
> fans left? Is this an example of the parts of the show not summing to a whole?
> I think it is. And I also think this is the reason why OLTL is going to have
> an incredibly difficult time pulling its ratings out of the gutter.
>
I am a "fan." I've stuck with the show over some rough spells and you
want to know why: writing and characters. WHen OLTL is on--the
characters shine. Nora, Viki, Renee are strong women who in their time
have told Asa off. Bo, Clint are good old boys who care for family above
all else unless dad is doing something stupid.
And this leds back to something I feel sincerely. For a show to succeed
you need key families. When you look at the "characters" with fans, only
Kevin-Cassie, Todd and Blair come from "key" families. Both Andy (who
arrived originally in the late 80s played by someone other than Wendee)
and Marty (who arrived when Megan was dying of lupus) had any longevity
with the show. If they had played Andy's abuse story out, I might be in
more sympathy with her.
> The audience is as fragmented as the show often is. And I'm left wondering
> "Well, gee, where do I fit in? I'm not a fan of any of these couples."
I think you and I are both in the same boat--we love the show for the sum
total not parts.
> So who's to blame? The fickle viewers who only watch the show for one couple in
> particular and stop watching whenever their couple leaves? Or the producers and
> writers who created this problem to begin with? I suggest the latter.
The blame does not exist with anyone. If you look at the numbers, most
shows are down. OLTL is really in better shape that a lot in one key
area--the number watching in the key advertising range. They are
consistently number 5 which makes the show solid. Actors do what writers
write but writers are controlled to a certain extent by executives and
networks. And this network is owned by Disney. We don't know what their
vision is yet.
Also blame can be placed with the "Trial of the Century." People stopped
watching then and haven't come back yet. We need to realize that real
life interferred and accept it.
I'm not going to address the rest. I know I'm going to get flamed for
the above as it is.
Probably sent to discriminating RATSA.
Lesley Foss
Well,
I'm going to have to seriously disagree with some, many actually points
that Linda and others made in their posts. I do NOT believe and never
will that in order to be a true fan of the show, that you have to stick
by it no matter what they do to your favorite characters, or the
underlying assertion that you can't be loyal to certain characters and
actors and still be loyal to the show.
For myself, as a fan of Kamar de los Reys and Wendee Pratt and their
portrayals of Andy and Antonio, I have never in my life been as touched
or as moved or had two actors in their performances endear themselves or
their characters to me as much as they did.
>>This "super couple"
mentality is a thing of the past.>> While this may be in part true, I do
not believe that couples are a thing of the past on Soaps. A good deal
of the appeal of soaps is the romance. On OLTL right now there is NONE!!
Claire Labine has NO idea whatsoever how to write romance or happiness
or love. I like the way she writes dialouge but her storylines and
everything else for me leaves much to be desired.
>>If their favs aren't on screen they don't watch which means they are not true fans--they are character fans. And by being character fans they are missing a bigger, more complex picture.>>>
How is this so? I used to watch and enjoy the entire show until 1995
when Andy and Antonio became a couple and then I found that I became
more fans of them and the actors than of the show. I don't see how I
would be missing anything bigger, I think it is what you like, what
characters and actors you are interested in.
>> If they had played Andy's abuse story out, I might be in
more sympathy with her.>>
ICAM about this one. I would have LOVED to see Wendee be able to play
out a story like this, but unfortunately we didn't get to see
that...because of the ignorance and stupidity of TPTB and writers like
CL who are so short sided and are still attempting to transform OLTL
into a redone version of GH/RH. They focus on their select few favs and
ignore other extremely talented and gifted actors, AND ones that have
been on the show for years, such as Phil Carey, Patricia Elliot,
etc..not to mention TK, SH, WP, KdlR, and CC who left and didn't have a
story from almost the time the Labines took over up until they had to
write the exit stories.
>>>Also blame can be placed with the "Trial of the Century." People stopped
watching then and haven't come back yet. We need to realize that real
life interferred and accept it.>>>>
If you are referring to Antonio's trial here, YOU COULDN'T BE MORE
WRONG!!!! The ratings were in the low to mid 4's during the entire trial
and now they are at best a 3.8....It is stupid storylines like Patrick
as a teenage terrorist and Todd's revenge and not balancing the show
between the older characters and the younger characters, allowing those
only over the age of 50 to have sex on the show and many other things
that have drove the ratings to where they are.
I don't believe that it is the fault of the couples, because they wrote
for couples even more in the 1980's that you all were mentioning than
today. I think it is the changing taste and makeup of the viewership and
other things that they want to see different things. OLTL is definately
not bringing in new generations of viewers by ignoring their younger
audience like they have since the Labines came on, either.
Lesley
FOC Andy, Keeper of Andy's Love for Antonio, Holder of the "Keys" to
Andy's Heart
Webmistress of the Wendee Pratt and Kamar de los Reyes pages
Tracee Manettas
Sorry if this posts twice, computer troubles!
SandyWeeks wrote:
Thanks for the thought provoking post Sandy! I just wanted to opine on
where I stand as a viewer and what happened for me...
>So who's to blame? The fickle viewers who only watch the show for one couple in
>particular and stop watching whenever their couple leaves? Or the producers and
>writers who created this problem to begin with? I suggest the latter.
I started watching OLTL about 8 or 9 years ago, as best as I can
figure, late 80's or 1990, I can't really recall, as I didn't have
much time on my hands then, I was young, in school and didn't have a
VCR. I started watching daily a bit before Malone started. I was
totally involved and invested in the entire show, and I do mean the
entire thing. Even if I didn't like certain characters, I found pretty
much all of the stories compelling. I couldn't give you a favorite
character, or favorite story, I just watched the whole thing and was
left satisfied by pretty much all of it.
Then somewhere in 1995, things just started petering out. I still
maintain that much of Malone's problem was that he was terrific at
starting stories, and perpetuating them for a finite amount of time,
but had no idea when to end them and move onto the next thing. He got
so wrapped up in his ideas, he just let them spin out of control and
couldn't rein them back in. And because of it, overall storytelling
suffered. There was just no way to stop the moving train once it was
barreling out of control, and things started to slip by the wayside,
characters got stretched, poked, prodded, bent within an inch of life,
to breathe life into the story. The grasp on stories and characters
was just getting out of his hands and it's when I started not really
caring about much of anything going on. I can remember FF'wding
through whole episodes because the show was no longer a cohesive
whole.
Then I gained interest in the Angel Square story, heck I even had a
semi-interest in Carlotta/Clint, and I wasn't thunderstruck by A/A,
from moment one, but they held my interest much more than anything
else happening, did. I found myself coming to rely on them as the one
bright spot, amidst stories that were segregated, were stretched until
they ripped in half, and they became what got me through 1996. It's
why I became such a big fan of them, because it was all that kept me
watching last year.
Now they're gone, and I've continued to watch, but I watch and wonder
if there is any story, here. Other than the Cramer clan and their
various neuroses, I can't think of any real story. Yet I don't seem to
find any character exploration either. Todd and Tea aren't a story for
me, they're a condition, they're just plodding along with nothing to
them. It's not two people having bounds of character growth by being
together, it's just a mode, a state of life, that's basically going
nowhere.
The Club Indigo thing, until this week, was just a condition too, they
sat and talked shop and did nothing. But out of nowhere suddenly this
condition supposedly was much more involved than what transpired on my
screen. I did not see RJ falling for Jacara, or Jacara falling for
him, so much that I'm supposed to hope she doesn't take her business
elsewhere. Frankly, I don't care if she does.
Viki and Clint, Kevin and Cassie, both of them are in conditions, are
in a mode, with no progress, no story, other than they exist and don't
seem to be going anywhere. There is no plot, for me, it's just
existance, and again I don't find myself intrigued by what's little
character exploration they've been attempting. For some reason it's
not clicking.
Talk about just existing, Bo and Nora, what plot do they have? Bo's
search for a home for Mudd/Penny isn't exactly my idea of thrilling
TV. Rachel, does she even have a reason she's still on the show?
Then suddenly in the last couple of weeks, people are just being
chucked together, in the hopes something clicks. Kelly and Ian
suddenly started going full steam ahead, because Joey was coming home.
Then there's Joey and Dorothy in an elevator, am I meant to care about
this entire situation at all? Max and Blair have suddenly become best
friends, out of the clear blue sky (Blair just showing up after losing
custody of Starr, huh?).
So what's missing for me, is the entire lack of plot. It's why the
only thing that interests me is the Cramer family secret, at least
something is happening there. I can't think of anything that's
happening with anyone else, anywhere on the canvas, and that's a real
shame. I know that I'm capable of loving different facets of the
entire show and appreciating the whole thing, because I've done it
before.
What will it take to win back fans? It'll take more than a slice of
life moment here or there, a few situations, and a few conditions. I
need to know I'm watching stories that have a purpose that are going
somewhere that will incorporate more than an isolated few. These
people need to *do* something, other than exist. When they finally do
start doing something, and they stop this obsession with creating
triangles and geometric nightmares (it seems like they just throw
people together for the express idea of having even more triangles)
and start focusing on having real purpose and real meaning, and a real
story not a state of life or conditions, I might be more inclined to
invest again.
Until then...
--
Tracee Manettas (tra...@pipeline.com)
CEO FOC Eddie
FOC Andy-- Keeper of her Pride (sometimes wavering)
FOC Antonio-- Keeper of the Kitchen Apron
JK
SandyWeeks wrote in article <635flk$p...@drn.zippo.com>...
Another great, insightful post, Sandy! I started watching One Life to Live
in 1984, and I really enjoyed watching the show through 1990. The problem
in a nutshell is that I don't care about the characters on the show
anymore.
Since you mentioned my favorite couple again, I will comment further. I
enjoyed watching Max's relationships with Tina and Megan, but in the back
of my mind, I knew that one day Max was going to get together with
Gabrielle. Maybe Megan would have been 'better' for Max, but Gabrielle was
the mother of his child, so their coupling did not cause a riot for the Max
& Megan fans.
The same thing applied to Cord and Tina. I liked Cord's relationship with
Kate Sanders, but I knew that Cord would go back to Tina for the same
reason. Maybe these two scenarios were too predictable, but I wanted both
to happen and the writers delivered.
Both of these couples worked because their characters were built up through
many adventures together in Argentina, Texas, etc. Also, the quality time
with the kids showed that they were parents who loved their children.
Now, I just don't feel confident we will see Max & Gabrielle and Cord &
Tina back together again. Gabrielle's last words to Max were: "I CAN find
my own way home." When she said these words, I felt confident that one day
we would see Gabrielle back in Max and Al's life again. However, I didn't
expect that the writers would wait six and a half years to release
Gabrielle from prison. On top of that, Gabrielle is just an off screen
character! Yes, this is a big disappointment to a long time viewer like
myself.
On the Cord & Tina subject, having Tina chose Cain Rogan over Cord ruined
the magic of their relationship. I still wanted Cord and Tina to get back
together this last time, but when they went their separate ways, I lost my
confidence that I would see them together again.
Adding to the above couples, I don't have a lot of confidence in Clint and
Viki's getting back together. I still have a hard time believing that Viki
threw her marriage away with Clint to be with Sloan Carpenter. The affair
really hurt Viki's character, so the writers will have to work really hard
to convince the viewers that Clint and Viki belong together.
In conclusion, maybe my interest in OLTL is vested mostly in the couples.
But I do like action, adventure, and family togetherness in a soap, and
OLTL is batting near zero on these fronts. All of these couples had these
elements.
One Life to Live is more unpredictable now, but sometimes viewers like
predictability, just like that old pair of slippers. I just feel like my
pair of slippers has been torn apart by the dogs.
A Martin
Tante Joan wrote:
> Each day brought anger,
> depression and, sometimes, worse: apathy. I shouldn't have to put up
> with that just for the sake of history, of fandom. I didn't.
>
> I'm not a contract fan for any show. I bring a lot to the table,
> including loyalty, but my allegiance is not blind.
Brava Tante Joan: I am sometimes amazed that some people proudly
declare I would tune in to watch _______________ (fill in name of your
favorite) read the phone book.
I, on the other hand, declare that I am not doing my favorite any favor
by applauding drivel. I started watching in the mid-eighties. Although
I wasn't always interested in the adventures of Tina or Dorian, they -
and others - along with Viki assured that there were multiple stories
going every day. It was truly something for everyone. I was driven
away by MM's destruction of character but also his tendency to feature
one story dominating for weeks at a time so that there was nothing of
interest to me. And when my favs might show up, I didn't care that much
anymore. Amanda
Naeem Chaudhry
> >>>Also blame can be placed with the "Trial of the Century." People
> stopped
> watching then and haven't come back yet. We need to realize that real
>
> life interferred and accept it.>>>>
>
> If you are referring to Antonio's trial here, YOU COULDN'T BE MORE
> WRONG!!!!
I think this was alluding to the O(ught to be in) J(ail) Simpson trial
that disrupted daytime television across all US networks.
--NaeemC
JK
Linda Martindale <mart...@numen.elon.edu> wrote in article
> I checked something I had yesterday for overall ratings and here is what
> I found:
> 1986-87 3rd 1989-90 4th 1992-93 6th
> 1987-88 3rd 1990-91 6th 1993-94 6th
> 1988-89 3rd 1991-92 7th 1994-95 5th
> 1995-96 6th
> 1996-97 7th
>
> Folks the trend didn't just start.
My viewing pleasure with One Life to Live corresponds to the ratings.
Since my belief is that the ratings are tied in with the actors and their
characters, here is a list of the comings and goings of some of my
favorites:
1986 Cord (John Loprieno) and Tina (Andrea Evans) were starting their
romance. Clint (Clint Ritchie) and Viki (Erica Slezak) were the main
couple of the show.
1987 The star-crossed romance of Max (James DePaiva) and Gabrielle (Fiona
Hutchison) started.
1988 Sarah (Jensen Buchanan) and Megan Gordon (Jessica Tuck) came to
Llanview. Didi Buchanan (forgot name), Bo's wife, died. Steve Holden
(forgot name), Max's brother, died.
1990 Andrea Evans (Tina) leaves OLTL in January. James DePaiva (Max)
leaves the show in the middle of Max and Gabrielle's romance (February).
Nicholas Walker becomes the new Max (February). Joe Lando (Jake) arrives
in Llanview. Jensen Buchanan (Sarah) leaves OLTL in the fall of 1990.
1991 Fiona Hutchison (Gabrielle) leaves OLTL in March. At this point, OLTL
goes into a downward spiral to its darkest days: the summer of 1991.
Everybody remembers this summer. The storylines included the Kevin &
Stephanie romance, the Bo & Cassie romance, who is Sondra?, Alex's trying
to drown Cassie at the lake, etc. Nicholas Walker (Max) leaves the show in
the fall. James DePaiva returns as Max in the fall. Joe Lando (Jake) is
on a temporary contract.
1992 Megan (Jessica Tuck) dies in February.
And since 1992, I really haven't been a loyal viewer of OLTL.