te.

That's because some problems are just universal once people can see beyond black, white, gay, straight or whatever arbitrary category people may place others in. Val Jean clearly understands this from interviews and is clearly pushing for it. However, the issue will always be to get people to give a show a shot in the first place - clearly you might've walked into Queen Sugar because of Vaughan, but clearly stayed because storylines, characters and actors connected to you in a personal sense. And that's what the promotion for Beyond the Gates needs to realistically achieve - get people to give it a chance for whatever reason, but stay for the drama and because they suddenly connect to characters they might not have expected to.

You're probably right and it's me letting the complete cynic in me take over Of course it makes sense to try and promote the non-core cast members more in relation with each other (ie Mike Manning and Brandon Claybon should probably appear in the same promotional circuit). I just hope they take all opportunities to promote this far and wide and manages to walk that thin line between not pigeon-holing the show while also celebrating for it for what it's setting out to achieve.

It's clear that a lot of care went into casting those roles and it makes sense. Make a strong core to carry the show in it's infancy, while have others act more like moving chess pieces and let things fall where they may. Inevitably, there'll be some stand outs among the other cast members and others that really won't be able to connect in a wider sense. My plan would be to mainly focus on the "core four" with nationwide media coverage, with a bit of others sprinkled in. I'd then utilise local media and news outlets - especially in the rust belt - for the white cast members. Yes, it's cynical but that's a big audience that still watches linear television (see the success of Yellowstone and Taylor Sheridan), but might need an extra push to check it out. That way it wouldn't take the shine from what Val Jean and the show is trying to do, but at the same time maximise the appeal and not just pigeonhole the show as the "black soap opera". A bit like having your cake and eating it too, if you will.

Well, that's mostly on me for trying to describe where the focus will inevitably be in the early days - trying to give everyone an equal focus from day one would be a mistake because we can only process so much information. Putting the focus on a small group of people and then build it out from there is a good strategy because it gives people recognizeable faces to begin with and gives other characters a chance to grow / room for experimentation what works and what doesn't. I think Val Jean recognizes that, though hopefully she also realises that eventually she needs to expand to give others a chance to shine so it doesn't become what modern B&B is.

The "core four" makes the most sense to focus on as you said. Though I kind of hope that they start underscoring a bit that this is first and foremost a soap and not a black soap, just so that they can maximise the amount of viewers. I think subtly putting in a scene with the non-black couple in the latest promo was a smart move. The focus is still on the Duprees (more specifically on Karla), but sort of gives it a bit of a wider net.

Well, I finally watched the first episode and I'll say I understand why this didn't take off. Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman had such clear vision from day one, this is sort of just hitting the same point with all the couples featured so far - the women work, the men don't. I hope it improves eventually but it feels very one note.

The whole fatal flaw of these soap collectors - they sit on their episodes and lets them dust in case they can trade rare episodes with other soap fans... but for what really? I guess it's become a cottage industry that's sustaining itself for no other reason than ultimately scam people of money for material they themselves do not own.

In September 1994 Dunne said he was still writing the script as either a tv series or a tv movie. So I think it's more down to CBS having committed to filming something at that point or face a fine, so they did this very low-budget movie. I can only assume if CPW hadn't happened they might've given it a bigger budget to add more gloss. But I suspect it's more of a case of them quietly dropping their commitment to Dunne and doing the bare minimum. It's worth remembering they signed on Darren immediately with 13 episodes of CPW in December 1994, later expanded to a full season before even airing (later cut by one episode, likely to fund the "revamp"). Same thing with shows like The Client and American Gothic to secure the talent. Or to put it bluntly - I just don't think CBS had money to spend on making Dunne's pilot / tv movie. Did it even air in the US? I can only find a vague that it premiered in "1995" on IMDB, but no firm date. I can't find it in old listnings on Tv Tango either, but it might be that their search engine doesn't quite work.

I searched the Google News Archives for it and the only thing I can find is an article from September 1994 which mentions Dominic Dunne developing the script as either a tv series or a tv movie. I'm guessing CBS had no faith in it or need for it, especially once they landed a deal with Darren Star but had committed to filming it, so they did it low-budget to keep their end of it. ETA: to further my suspicions that this happened I took a look at when Darren landed at CBS - it was December 1994 when the deal with him was announced. So they must've been in negotiations with him for a few months. I'd assume this killed 919 Fifth Avenue.

Exactly. I don't actually think Angela was evil for the sake of it - she could actually be quite cordial to Chase when she didn't find him a threat. She went after people when they interfered with the land - a bit if Miss Ellie actually started getting more proactive and aggressive with protecting Southfork other than nagging to JR about not drilling on it lol. I don't actually think Angela really was that fussed about her family running it either, which was also an interesting quirk. Sure, she had more or less raised Lance - perhaps of some internalised sexism about having a rough time herself - to run it. But if he couldn't live up to her standards and make the land thrive? Well, Cole would do... maybe Vicki in a pinch. I actually wish the show would've in a serious way explored the Angela / Melissa dynamic in that sense, but they just turned Melissa into a crazy loose cannon.

I think soaps in general have issues with physical action unfortunately due to the lack of rehearsal time and no money for stunt co-ordinators, so it always ends up falling a bit flat because the performer ends up being too self-conscious to just go for it. I do think she has the crazy eye stare down though (since it's a discussion apparently) 😂 I mean, I want a scene like this from her:

To be honest, it just sounds like they merged the Richard character that made the Vintage Years pilot and the Timothy character.

Looks great! The sets look amazing - I guess filming in Atlanta gives them that luxury. The only thing I hope improves a bit is Karla's physical energy during her freak outs (throwing the cup / swinging the golf club), but I feel that's more of a general direction thing (being afraid of hurting other actors / sets) so that's understandable. It might get a bit better co-ordinated once everyone gets used to it.

Donna Mills, Joan Van Ark and Michele Lee are putting together their own podcast: https://michaelfairmantv.com/donna-mills-joan-van-ark-michele-lee-developing-knots-landing-themed-podcast/2025/01/15/ I'm happy about this! I've been enjoying Still the Place with Courtney, Laura and Daphne so I was actually hoping they'd do this.

Exactly. A lot of soaps in the past that have failed have tried to introduce way too many characters at the same time. I've said it before, but it makes sense to focus on a limited set of characters and establish them (even if it gives certain actors a heavy workload at first), then work from there and slowly start fleshing out other characters. But if they throw twenty characters at us in the first week and wants us to equally care for them... it won't work. Make us understand the dynamics between the core characters and then weave in how the other characters work into that.

TBF, Annalynne signed a year contract like Steve Burton did. I feel like she was always going to play that out and be done.

LOL, yeah. I assumed everyone talked about Karla's dress, not Tunie's. I think the former's dress look a bit trashy, but I think it's meant to mirror her character. You get the vibe she's desperately wants to be on Housewives of Potomac, but maybe that's what they're going for. Or rather - the overlooked daughter that's always been starved for attention because she's neither had the brains or ambitions to strike out on her own.

Exactly - "star-crossed lovers" has long been a trope for literature, but it's not the same thing as a supercouple. In all honesty, I see so many shows still clinging onto that thing and it's just not working these days - partially because of the budget (action/adventure stories rarely work without at least some budget), but also since it seemingly makes viable characters never being able to move on.

It was a classic case of season 5's issue with attempting to be grounded but it had gone too far at that point to properly be so. See also Kimberly's brain cancer and the endless will-she-or-won't-she-die. Or Jake and Alison's boring relationship from hell. Someone once described season 5 as being at a "break-neck speed and daytime slow" at the same time, which is somewhat impressive I guess. But it's stuck with me because it's so oddly accurate.

The arc in itself was pointless, just like Maggie being adopted on Falcon Crest. Ultimately, the only thing that would've made it matter is if it changed her relationship with Sydney since she put up a lot of crap with her because they were sisters. So being adopted would've given Jane leverage in theory the next time Sydney started pulling her bullshit again. Same thing with Maggie and Terry on Falcon Crest. But Jane left soon after, and no it was never acknowledged again.

I said the same thing in the Search for Tomorrow thread when an episode resurfaced from the 50s - I was amazed with how effective it was in telling its story and there wasn't a dull moment, despite not being particularly exciting or even knowing too much of the context. I really think that type of soap and storytelling would be incredibly effective for a streaming service, especially if one weeks episodes end up being no more than a bit over an hour per week (for easy binge viewing).

WTF was this?! Even barring that the actress bombed in her first scene, it's so incompetently set up. It's the anti-Alexis enters the courtroom scene (and that was just a model).

In some lighter news, Casa Walsh has so far escaped the Eaton fires: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/walsh-family-house-beverly-hills-90210-survives-eaton-fire-1236105845/ Dylan's house was still standing as of late January 7th, but no news since then.

Yes, I've noted the same thing before when @JAS0N47 posted the full charts with viewers. They don't actually look that drastically different to the numbers in the late 90s. I'd assume time-shifting viewers became bigger and most of all, there's just more media to consume that a daily soap gets lower priority (I don't think it's a coincidence that people getting more access to things like internet seem to affect the linear viewing downfall).

She was also the second-highest paid cast member, I guess due to having a decent agent after being in movies. If they had signed another contract with her, it would've also raised her salary significantly due to how the contract was designed. It's also interesting that Heather was actually directly paid by the network (who'd also fund for guest stars like Loni Anderson and Priscilla Presley); I guess any time someone has the title "Special Guest Star" they're paid outside the regular production.