j swift

I noticed in an earlier post that ABC had a James Bond special, and now here they are replaying a 23 year old Bond movie on a Sunday night. At a time when anyone could easily rent a VCR copy of the film, it astounds me how much replay ABC got out of licensing the Bond library. I looked it up and it turns out United Artists sold the rights to the first five Bond movies to ABC in 1971 for 14 million dollars to replay for ten years, which was a record at the time. UA first offered the rights in 1967 for 30 million, but then On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969), and the one-off return of Sean Connery in Diamonds Are Forever (1971) were relative flops in comparison to their predecessors. Goldfinger was the first to premiere on the ABC Sunday Night Movie. I loved this bit of trivia about ABC having to edit the film for TV, Bond is trying to dissuade Goldfinger from using a nerve gas on Fort Knox, saying it'll kill 60,000 innocent people. Goldfinger replies “So What? American motorists kill that many people every two years” - that line was cut because the sponsor of the ‘Sunday Night Movie’ was American car manufacturer Chevrolet. In 2001, ABC repurchased the rights in order to screen the movies in case there was a writer's strike that year, but the strike was averted, and the replays failed to attract viewers, so they sold the rights for 30 million to Viacom. But for Gen Xers like me, we'll always cherish the baritone voice of the ABC announcer proclaiming, "Bond is back" on a Sunday night. http://www.007magazine.co.uk/bond_on_tv.htm https://variety.com/2002/tv/news/inside-move-abc-terminates-bond-1117864479/

At least the keys were a production/prop error, I'm still stuck on the writing about Alex sleeping naked in Allie's office. (1) How does everyone in Salem know that Alex sleeps naked? (2) Even whilst drunk would he sleep naked in someone else's apartment with a kid in the next room? (3) Those do not look like the type of underwear we've already seen Alex wearing in prior scenes It seems like the prop department, whether it is keys or boxer shorts, is distractedly bad this month.

Sometimes it feels as if B&B changed writers half way through the Sheila story because now I am confused by Deacon's motives toward her. When Sheila returned in the red wig and seduced Deacon, and he figured it out when he saw her toe, he seemed a little disgusted by her. Disgust may not be the correct adjective, but certainly he was not obsessively in love with her as he professed today. I worry that I am too much of an optimist in hoping for a twist in this story that will help it make sense, but from what I see on screen, I cannot understand the logic of why suddenly every guy in LA has the hots for nine-toed Sheila and rejects Brooke (and Taylor) like she's a piece of old toast. Didn't it seem like Deacon was going to be paired with one of them just a few months ago?

That's cool because we need more Jada stories, just like DAYS dressing rooms need new ceiling tiles.

Rhetorical question I guess, but I was looking at an image of Vicky and Grant ice skating yesterday and I wondered why they chose to write those stories using Vicky rather than Marley? Vicky as a character was completely neutered of any agency, or prior malice, by the time of her involvement with Grant and Ryan. Marley was always portrayed as a romantic who was more easily manipulated which fit better with the motivations of that plot. They costumed Vicky in romantic fashions like Marley, rather than her prior "rockstar at the office" attire. Marley was just as rich, so the Grant story makes sense. And Marley rode horses so the Ryan stuff would have fit. Finally, Jensen Buchanan seemed to me like more of a Marley than a Vicky unlike her predecessor who received so much praise at Vicky that strategically it would seem like a good plan to have the recast play the other role. I mean look at these images - who do they remind you of, Vicky or Marley?

Admittedly I've forgotten most of the content from the Day of Days preview, but have we seen all of those scenes by now? I remember images of Marlena on the roof and Eric punching EJ (did that case ever go to trial?) - but, I can't think of any other teasers...

They may each have their own reasons for leaving, but do you think production is trying to pare down the cast with the move to streaming in order to cut costs? While I am a fan of all three characters I guess the obvious take is to respond with which characters I wish they would cut. For me, I would cut Brady because he is redundant with Eric, and has less story potential since he has been in so many failed romances. I would cut Rafe, just because he's a bore and we have other cops in Salem. Then, I would write off Gabi and Stefan because there are more intriguing antagonists in other plots that have less convoluted backstories. Gabi's story is tied to Stefan, Rafe, and Will which makes her expendable. And, there's already a power struggle built in between EJ and Chad, so we don't need Stefan as a trouple. I would also imagine that the actors portraying Brady, Rafe, Stefan, and Gabi are expensive, given their experience on the show. So, it would free some money for sets and other improvements. Goodness knows we don't need more characters. Poor Jada had a one night stand followed by an off-screen abortion, but there's been no progress since Thanksgiving. I look forward to more Jada vs. Nicole scenes.

I've been looking at the poster for 80 for Brady while reading the thread on prime-time ratings from the 1980s in a coffee shop and it makes me wistful for mass media. I will probably never watch 80 for Brady because it wasn't made for me nor marketed towards me. However, I watched Steel Magnolias, which seems to have been made for a similar audience, because those were the days when big media was inescapable. Everyone saw Beaches, it wasn't just for women of a certain age. You went to school and everyone discussed Shogun, or whatever miniseries was the event of the week. There was a camaraderie in mass consumption that I mourn.

I often wonder about the peripatetic nature of the daytime audience. Most of us either grew up in, or had relatives in, households that defined themselves as NBC fans, or CBS folks. But, 1979 saw an upsurge in OLTL with the Marco Dane trial. So, I question how many of those people were new viewers, and what percent were converts from AW during it's 90 minute experiment that never returned? My mother and her friends were Another World fans, but as they went back to the workplace, and their kids became more attracted to the action of GH, and the love stories of AMC, I found myself going back and forth between AW and OLTL over the years. So, I agree that quality does not always correlate with popularity, but I still don't know how many just stop the habit of watching soaps when the quality dips and how many actually switch to other shows. I would guess that answer changed with the number of options as cable TV grew in popularity in the 80s, because in 1979 if you didn't want to see what was going on in Bay City, there were limited alternatives.

Found it - thank you @robbwolff I don't know what it is about that Audrey Peters interview (perhaps, the hysteria without actual tears), but she was born to be a daytime actress. I also smiled at the inclusion of the "Mrs." on the chyron of the audience member's name, and the puritanical "study" of the lack of morals in daytime soaps, at a time when they were still probably profitable enough to underwrite the news division.

That is sooo funny @dragonflies I’ve been meaning to ask if you get those GIfs from Alta Vista or Ask Jeeves?

We are literally judging a book by its cover, which aphorisms have told us for years to avoid Getting back to this month's GH - does anyone have a guess as to how long before they'll SORAS Donna? She's sort of an albatross because neither Carly nor Sonny need a little kid in their story, and they are already bound by history. It's not like the actor was pregnant so they needed to write a baby into the show. So, I wonder what is the plan for that kid? Her existence is so redundant to other characters that we if don't get a Donna/Charlotte teen-aged rivalry soon I will continue to forget that she lives in Port Charles.

Does anyone else recall an old YouTube video, which I can no longer locate, that was a news story about the final day of filming for Love of Life? The image that sticks in my head was a very glamorous, (and maybe slightly delusional), Audrey Peters saying that someone told her it was the finale but hardly believed it. I never watched LOL while it aired, but that clip amused me whenever I searched for classic soap interviews on YT.

Not to prolong this further, but just to clarify my intent, I meant what photos were available for license. People, SOD, or any for-profit publication would need to clear the photos through production in order to publish them, they can't use whatever stock photos are available on the internet.

Amusingly, we've now thought about the People Magazine cover for three hours longer than the editors. One imagines the images were selected due to the availability of the photos and a desire to demonstrate a variety of eras. It was not a popularity contest.

Portia's secret feels like one of those classic, but logically flawed, soap opera constructions. Realistically, Trina and Curtis might be interested, but hardly angry to find out that they are biologically related over 20 years after her birth. It is only a heightened issue because Portia kept it a secret. However, logically there was no reason not to tell them. Portia was unavailable for large portions of Trina's childhood, so it is not like there were prior opportunities to discuss the issue. The fact that Curtis was the father was only recently confirmed. Taggert loved and cared for her, and he wouldn't have loved her less if her found out that by chance they weren't biologically related. And, Trina has had plenty of other concerns recently. So, the idea both that she needed to hide the information, and that everyone will blame her for keeping something private, is very convoluted. Also, I keep forgetting that Donna exists, but the scene where Sonny took her to the hospital to see the baby is an odd reminder that everyone involved in that story was too old to have a kid.

Two orchid questions: Have they just stopped looking for it? Nobody seemed to ask Rolf if he had it, or whom he thought stole it. The women were sneezing all over Salem, is nobody else worried about a viral infection? Where are the masks? Why aren't people asking for a vaccination? Also, why is Kayla the last to be buried?

I appreciate that the "deaths" of Marlena, Kayla, and Kate has shifted the focus to their kids, but I wish it was Joey, Tripp, Rex, Brady, Stephanie, and Eric leading the revenge against Orpheus versus their octogenarian fathers. At some point everyone in Salem is going to need to start acting their age. Also, isn't Paulina rich, because much like my question about Li and Wendy last week, why do the apartments in Salem look so depressing? Can't Paulina and Abe get a penthouse in the same building as Marlena? EJ and Stefan need to get out of the fashion business and get into property development because Salem needs some upscale spaces.

I enjoy the Eric/Brady banter, even thought they are both about fifteen years too old for that dialogue (the dating stuff, not the mourning of Marlena stuff), and the topic of sobriety highlights the lack of differentiation between the two characters. Remember when Brady was a bratty rebellious teen and Eric was a stoic rescuer? All of those traits have been lost in the recasting,

I liked TJ callback to knowing Spencer since he was a boy. I also know that commenting on an actor's body is opening a hornet's nest, but Molly is distressingly thin. I thought she was unrecognizable.

Any guesses on the story for Linda and Sharon during anniversary week? I'm intrigued but I haven't watched consistently since around the time of Mick's death.

@Paul Raven & @Neil Johnson were discussing Tom King's time at Another World in 1980. From his IMDB he also wrote for Ryan's Hope and One life to live. Does anyone recall the plot highlights from his times on those soaps?

While I agree that the writing in 1980 did not match the prior regime, but I would argue that the conception of new citizens of Bay City was intriguing. Having a character based on the story of Patty Hearst was unique. The idea of a character hiding from her past is a soap staple, but a nurse who is actually an heiress that had experienced a kidnapping attempt is unique. Of course, it is ridiculous that after trying to change her name, the entire family would follow her to town, but I particularly liked Rick and his romance with Marianne. I also enjoyed the Cecile/Pat feud at Brava. It was one of the only times that Cecile was written as smart and conniving. And, I think it was good writing to use their feud as the introduction of the Harry Must Die book which became the clue in Janice's plot to poison Mac. Given that Iris was being spun off to Texas, I think Miranda was good substitute. She was well placed to be a rival for Mac's affection as well as a plaything for the nefarious Philip Lyons. Also, Jason's relationship with Tracy was interesting and it is the only role that I enjoyed as played by smarmy-guy-specialist Warren Burton It is one of those times in soap history when it is hard to pinpoint the cause of the issue because with the change in tone from Lemay, the loss of Willis and Iris, and the increased competition from OLTL it became a big ship to readjust. It was still an adult oriented soap, which I appreciate, even though there were heightened story elements that were uncharacteristic. It may be that I am a Tom King apologist (as well as a Lemay fan), but I think there is a lot of blame to spread all around at the time, and it wasn't just King's fault.

Many have noted that Soap Opera Digest seems to be on it's last legs. A review of the publisher's website shows that they only sell 55,000 copies a week, to an audience with an average age of 54.3 and an income of 35K, which obviously does not make them competitive in advertising market. Especially when one considers that even Ohio Cooperative Living sells 6x's as many copies per week. But, today's news that their parent company A360media sold the National Enquirer and The Star, which they've been trying to sell for years, leaves them with Us, Closer,and Life & Style (each which sells 3x's more copies per week), and SOD. Which makes me wonder if SOD's finale may happen this year? Also, what's up with the cooperative community in Ohio that is so fascinating?

A couple of thoughts on today's episode: 1. The whole BLQ scene seemed like a rerun of Friday's episode. I know soaps like to repeat scenes so that viewers can keep up with the story, but I actually had to check the date to see if I wasn't watching the prior show. 2. Liz exiting the scene with Finn to go to the wedding rehearsal was amusing. First because it was like she was saying 'I am going to turn myself into the police, but first I must go to this rehearsal for a wedding that I'm not going to be able to attend if I'm arrested.' And second, why are they still having the rehearsal an hour after Britt's memorial service? Talk about day-to-night, how does one figure out what to wear for a day when they're going from work to a funeral to a wedding rehearsal? 3. Laura still blames herself for not being around to raise to Nikolas? He's been in Port Charles since 1996, 27 years, more than half his life. She's had plenty of time to be a good influence since then...