Errol

Outside of any thing to do with the writing, directing, etc...the real problem AMC/OLTL 2.0 had was the lack of MONEY. Prospect Park got a $25 million loan from a single financial firm and no one else ponied up the funds. They spent way too much at the outset with no clue how they were going to properly recoup the money they were lent. They didn't realize even $20 million was a conservative number to produce just ONE show for a single year, let alone two...especially when they'd only be available on the internet. And then they hired all those reality stars and social media personalities thinking they'd gain an audience through their followers, plus the plan to license expensive music... MESS! I do agree that DAYS is being sacrificed for the greater good of the company. Let's just hope that it works, not just for DAYS but for NBCU overall. Otherwise, yikes.

Look for a big promotional push starting today, September 1. Don’t have specifics yet but there’s a reason today is kick off day. I’ll share more in the coming days. To be blunt, our frustrations on how this transition has been handled is shared with more people than you might think. Some might say the sky is blue in public but they are pissed!

I’m actively working on getting those answers. This week interviews are happening with cast members on set and virtually. But I’m personally working on getting other aspects and perspectives on this transition from non-DAYS people.

Let's have some cake. As long as I'm not the one getting messy, let's go! He's a sweetheart. Very humble. Thanks!

Thank you! I'm a traditionalist. It'd be Wyatt Lewis. 😂

Hello Wyatt (what's his last name?) from Canada. Take off the facial hair and I'm married! Bless me father for I have sinned! Where from?

Stopped watching after the first season. But that's a teen show that airs as little as 18 episodes a season after less than a decade on the air. I can't compare it to a show that's been on the air for 57 years, but at the same time viewers knew what they were getting when both shows began. DAYS can adjust with a clean slate of characters and make a quick adjustment to quality, Riverdale can't because shows like that can't transition with a clean slate. It tends to lead to their demise. My ultimate point is that DAYS hasn't always been camp and the amount of episodes it has to produce each year, exclusively for streaming, won't work with pure camp.

In order to survive on a streaming service, the show better understand viewers are going to want quality TV. I don't know of any streaming series (i.e. drama) that has ever survived off of its silliness. I'm not saying there can't be room for fun and games, but camp all the time, every time, will not work going forward. With Peacock, they'll know what people are watching, skipping over, pausing or refusing to watch. Hope TPTB are ready for the immediate audience response.

I believe so. Related, just to be clear at this point this particular character isn’t First time commenting on the promo. Is this SAW? How is this character gonna remain free when there is video of him admitting to kidnapping and placing a bomb with his victims as a form of ransom. Like, really.

The problem is the handle is black and Billy Flynn's pants are black so it's hard to see the handle. Regardless, I'm quite surprised they showed so much blood considering how it gets bigger and bigger over time. Here's a better picture:

No. There's something in his back though. It just isn't in that particular picture.

Odd...

It sure does. Wow. Especially the latest list additions. Even with her not being on the show for over a decade, Crystal Chappell still appeared in more episode than Greg Vaughan and Martha Madison. Not to mention a 21 year gap from first appearance to last appearance despite not appearing on the show for most of the 21 years. Just wow.

I just went with what I saw in the thread. My mistake. I did find it odd they'd offer this deal AFTER DAYS moves since it would literally entice the audience to sign up and it would be stupid not to take advantage right away. The problem was their wording though. They could have just said September 1 instead of throughout September. Implication isn't something you should have in a PR. You need cold hard facts. Literally say September 1-September 30. People need dates. Haha.

You can link to stories from THR, Variety, Deadline, etc. We just don't want you c/p'ing their entire article. I'm pretty sure it's only about email address. If I had two kids and one signed up under their email and the other signed up under theirs but ultimately I'm paying for it, I doubt any streamer will be like "that card is already being used for another account." A buck is a buck. I was just about to use a free six month premium plan from my TV (via Google) just before the switch for DAYS and I still might since the $1.99 deal doesn't kick in until September 19, one week after DAYS moves to streaming. However, I'll probably purchase an account for a year since you can't pass up $19.99 for a full year of content even if the price might eventually go up, hence even more reason to lock it in for as long as possible at a reduced price.

Agree. What they did with Halloween Kills that allowed it to succeed in theaters was they didn't promote it being available on Peacock too. That way people still packed into the theaters. With movie theaters surging now I wouldn't be surprised if the movie exceeds Kills at the box office because I expect them to do the same thing, pretend it's only in theaters and not promote the Peacock aspect as much, and because it's the "final" movie. It won't do the Halloween reboot numbers but it should do decently. I for one will be watching in theaters even though by the time it releases I'll have Peacock premium. I'll watch it again at home when I feel like it. But there's nothing like a cinematic experience for a horror film.

It's interesting how Freddie Smith had less episodes than Kirsten Storms and Denise Alexander even though there were about 2,500 episodes separating him from his first episode and his final episode, and he had been on the show over the course of nine years. Kirsten Storms appeared with a gap of just over 1,200 episodes between her first and last appearance, and just about five years on the show. With Denise Alexander, things were clearly more balanced on the show during that era over her near seven year run. She had a gap of about 1,700 episodes between her first appearance and her last appearance.

To be clear, they didn't "hire" him. He met with a friend from AT&T one weekend while they were golfing and the two propose a merger of assets. Zaslov's Discovery brand merging with AT&T's WarnerMedia. So, in actuality, the guy making the decisions people are not liking right now is the one who proposed the acquisition of WarnerMedia to begin with. He definitely wasn't "hired." Also, the combined company is $3 billion in debt and they are currently doing everything they can to write down that debt while they can get away with it from a tax perspective, hence all the content being shoved to the side. I don't find that dumb actually. It's giving advance notice that in order to watch the episodes going forward they'll have to subscribe to the premium tier. Anyone afraid of losing access would therefore then upgrade their accounts. It would make more sense to do more splashy ads and banners, but hey you get what you get. Speaking of advertising, a big marketing blitz is kicking off next week with boatloads of press coverage. Will have more on that soon.

It's desperation. HBO Max is doing something similar through the end of October as well. Both need subscribers. Both are hemorrhaging money for their corporate owners, although Peacock is in a worse position than HBO Max is. At least HBO Max is getting rebranded by next summer and will be merging with Discovery+, double pumping the content available and long-term expectations from Warner Bros. Discovery. Peacock needs to build a successful service ASAP because once their Disney deal is up in 2024 they'll be without the extra income from Hulu which is far more successful than Peacock. The removal of NBCUniversal-owned content off of Hulu to Peacock is being done to drive up subscriptions which makes sense but people aren't subscribing fast enough.

That's a really nice picture. Classic. Nice use of emojis! I might steal it if you don't mind...

Despite a somewhat lackluster start in the ratings during its June launch on Disney Channel, “The Villains of Valley View” has been renewed for a second season, Disney Branded Television announced today. Available to watch on the linear network and Disney+, the series follows a family of supervillains forced to hide their powers and adopt “normalcy” in suburbia. Production on the second season is set to begin this fall in Los Angeles. “It isn’t hard to see why audiences have fallen in love with the villainous Madden family,” said Ayo Davis, president, Disney Branded Television. “Despite a penchant for utilizing their superpowers in everyday life, Amy and family ultimately care about and support one another. Even though life can be messy, ridiculous, and sometimes frightening, the Maddens demonstrate the (super)power of family and togetherness.” Recent episodes have placed the series as the #1 Live-Action Cable series with Girls 6-11. It ranks in the Top 5 among Live-Action Cable Series among Kids and Girls 6-11 according to Live+Same Day blended data from Nielsen Media Research. The series will resume airing all-new episodes from season one on Fridays, beginning Friday, October 7, on Disney Channel. Currently, there are 10 episodes of the series available to stream on Disney+. “The Villains of Valley View” Courtesy of Disney “The Villains of Valley View” follows a teenage supervillain named Havoc (Isabella Pappas) who stands up to the head of the League of Villains which forces her family to change their identities and relocate to a sleepy Texas suburb. With the help of her effervescent new neighbor Hartley (Kayden Muller-Janssen), Havoc — going incognito as Amy — must somehow hide her superpowers and quell her villainous nature in favor of something she and the rest of her family have fought against all their lives: being normal. In addition to Pappas and Muller-Janssen, returning for season two are series regulars Lucy Davis (“Chilling Adventures of Sabrina”) as Eva/Surge, James Patrick Stuart (“General Hospital”) as Vic/Kraniac, Malachi Barton (Disney Channel’s “Under Wraps 2”) as Colby/Flashform, and Reed Horstmann (“The Expanding Universe of Ashley Garcia”) as Jake/Chaos. The series was created by Chris Peterson and Bryan Moore (“Lab Rats”), who also serve as executive producers and showrunners. Note: The post Disney Renews ‘The Villains of Valley View’ Co-Starring ‘General Hospital’ Actor James Patrick Stuart appeared first on the Soap Opera Network website. Read More

True. Tyra is a bit...much. Hence, Alfonso being added. Wouldn't be surprised if she leaves after this season and he gets paired with someone else.

Agree to disagree. You and I know what it means, and yes, it's a bird as well, but it doesn't scream NBC to the average viewer. I'm just saying it's at least one of the reasons the service hasn't seen much growth. CBS All Access before becoming Paramount+ seemed to be dead man walking until the merger and name change helped things along for them. As for using plus (+) in the name for any streaming service, I too hate it. It's lazy and unoriginal like you said but that's become the industry standard for streamers these days. Just slap a plus on the name. You'd actually be surprised how people think, particularly older adults. The fact that it's a bird and it references NBC isn't necessarily a thing to a lot of people which is my point. I do like the catchphrase "proud as a Peacock" for internal team building and such, but there has to be a reason the service is getting glossed over by most people. The content is good. The price is cheaper than most services. The platform isn't too messy. So why not subscribe? I personally am not paying for it as I haven't found anything on NBC or their cable services that hooked me to them in the first place so I find it unnecessary to subscribe to it but I do have a offer for six months free for the premium plan through my TV. I'm waiting a few more weeks to take the offer because of DAYS.

What show is this?

Agreed. Although, I think Disney succeeded due to when it launched, brand recognition, its numerous deals with the likes of Verizon for instance, and a good marketing push at a low cost helped it. It didn't hurt that it launched pre-pandemic and had content that kept people in doors, similar to Netflix. Where Netflix succeeded during the pandemic was its consistent fresh content. Disney+ succeeded due to its vast library of entertainment. The other streamers launched during the pandemic and found a lot of content they had acquired or would later acquire already on a rival streamer, such as The Office and Friends for Peacock and HBO Max. Once those shows moved over, they started to do better. However, the rollout by HBO Max was slightly helped by finding a mature/adult (male) audience which is now considered one of the better, if not the best, streamer in terms of quality content. Peacock's failure starts with its name, then how it was rolled out. Peacock is a brand only recognized by TV fanatics in that it is the mascot of NBC (the Peacock network). Other than that who wants to join a service that to them makes no sense name wise and is offense when you separate out the name (pee-co-ck). Not only could you get you content banned by YouTube if you use just one of the words, or at the very least demonetized, but it doesn't scream quality content. It screams crap. Shit. Bottom of the barrel. The service needs to be rebranded. Either call it Universal+ or Comcast+. It also needs to stop trying to capture the audience who watches NBC. The shows people watched on the network were never owned by them outside of The Office. While that show was a demo hit it wasn't truly a total viewer hit which is why the service currently doesn't have a broad appealing show, even with the success of Bel-Air. That show was good and widely liked. For Peacock, it did well. But I doubt it is a Netflix sized hit. As for General Hospital. I doubt it'll ever go to Disney+ as well. It's meant for Hulu, the more adult of Disney's three streaming services. Since Hulu with Live TV is a big ticket and financial success for the company, I doubt they'd abandon that money by merging Hulu with Disney+. But I don't see any other soap moving to streaming exclusive anytime soon.