te.

Another character for them to destroy! I'm not surprised that Darren Star showed up for that event. In all honesty, SatC started going downhill after he left over the reigns - pretty much all his shows tend to decline in some way or another when he does.

Pretty much. It's like moving a show on its last legs into an impossible time slot - if it succeeds there (which might be a fairly low bar) it's great, if it doesn't... oh well. Is that intentionally killing it? Well, maybe by indifference to it. DAYS was always going to go online at one point, but they aren't exactly nurturing it to make that transition effectively. If it does get renewed beyond September next year, it'll be in an entirely different format. ETA: one thing that might work in DAYS's favour, besides increased subscriptions, is if they notice that DAYS viewers interact and watch other shows - ie people'll log in daily on Peacock, watch DAYS and then something else, especially since there's still ads on some tiers to my understanding.

I guess that confirms what a lot of people thought - that the two year renewal deal had a clause that would allow them to move it to Peacock. Still, you'd think they would have been able to gauge this months ago if they were going to move it and prepare better. Now any change won't be visible until February and any curiosity watchers who might tune in to see if the show has changed will be long gone by then.

To be fair, I think a lot of it had to do with that the age difference between Jason and Gabrielle became very obvious, especially as the show progressed. I assume that's why they finally did go there with Susan, who was basically an Auh-ndrea stand-in. I think the age thing also might have hindered some other pairing - ie how Ian Ziering mysteriously never hooked up with any of the OG main cast, not even having a rebound fling with Kelly (which seems like an obvious plot line). They probably should've gone ahead with an Auh-ndrea and Steve pairing at one point, but maybe it was for the best - look at what happened on Melrose Place when they finally did pair Alison and Jake together after teasing it in season one!

While I think it's possible for her to land such a job, a huge thing for those streaming series is that they don't really tend to end up paying the bills because they're usually so short (8-10 episodes and maybe two/three months work and long breaks). There was a story the other month about one of the Euphoria actresses really struggling to make ends meet outside the show. Maybe she'll be able to make enough money on doing "social media influencer" work, but that seems like a "job" that will probably go on a downward trend as we're entering a huge recession...

Nothing about this is surprising - for the past decade CW (the network) has been functioning as a storefront window to sell CBS Studios and WBTVs productions to streamers; ironically, both getting their own streaming services (P+ and HBOMax) changed the business model and they sold it, so now they'll have to concern themselves with live ratings again. And the 18-34 demographic just doesn't watch television live - this means focus on live events and other things that draws in that casual viewer.

You know what's weird about this is? That Ron's storyline's doesn't even last that long ultimately - it's not a case where it seems like they keep them going because they're such a big hit with the audience that they're forced to extend them, they all seem to come from a "why don't we do this" perspective, there's no real plan to them and then he gets bored with them and then he lets them splutter out in the background.

The reason why Alexandra Moltke's exit was so abrupt was because her doctor supposedly put her on bed rest for her pregnancy - if it was true or if it was a way to get out of her contract earlier, we don't know. But either way, they were supposed to wrap up her story with Moltke in the role, at least temporarily. That's why Victoria #2 was so short-lived - she was only playing out what was supposed to happen. When they decided to use Victoria again, Victoria #2 would only appear again if she was given a contract and since they weren't really interested in anyone but Moltke playing the show in the long-term Victoria #3 happened for a few episodes. They apparently kept approaching Moltke to re-appear, but she was happily married to a wealthy man and had a child, so why should she do a daytime television show?

I thought the mini-series was great, even if the story of a woman who gets her face eaten by a crocodile and becomes a super model is a bit unrealistic. The following 22 episode series... eh. I thought it started out by doing pretty much all the 80s prime time soaps tropes and it didn't really feel like they put as much thought into the story as much as getting those beats in. The original cliffhanger was great though. I guess it was nice to get a wrap up, but on the other hand I've also stopped minding soaps ending on a cliffhanger (which in a way feels more "true" to the genre).

Alex is very different from Ben. He has bangs and glasses.

Had never heard of it before, the description (written by a crew member on IMDB?) is interesting: This was the first Showtime produced series. Based on a true happening in Dallas TX, where a bunch of housewives were hooking out of a bar. The series was intended to be an "x" rated series but ended up as an "R" rated top less series. The series was released after a change in management at Showtime and though the show earned the highest ratings the network had received to date the show was not picked up and was buried to try to make the old management not look good. WALT GILMORE Unit production manager/1st asstant director Seems like it was only a pilot that never went to series? Promo:

Can we discuss The Josette Conundrum and how she's an example of the show being a child of its time? When we first hear of Josette we think of her as this grand character - the sort of woman that would make a man absolutely lose his mind. Barnabas ends up confirming that - he's absolutely bonkers and would do anything to get her back to him, including brainwashing the local waitress. Then we travel back in time and Josette is... an ordinary woman and quite frankly boring and plain. This ends up working because it provides an unintentional subtext that maybe Barnabas, being a romantic and an idealist, has a completely warped perception of her. Of course, this was probably unintentional by the writers as it probably wasn't a conscious decision as much as dictated by the standards at the time. And this also is an example why it can't be rebooted - The Josette Conundrum of being an utter bore would present an issue for current day writers who would surely write her as more exciting and nuanced, which would take away from Barnabas's romantic and idealistic nature.

Oh wow, I'm actually finished with the show. The final episode is kind of a trip - first they wrap everything up, then they do a cliffhanger only to have Thayer David do a narration where he's basically "lol no that wasn't an actual cliffhanger" I already miss it.

I'd imagine it would be like turning Peyton Place into a soap - ie pick liberally between elements that they want to have on the show, while entirely dismissing others and creating something that's essentially something new under a recognizeable name.

By cutting cast members and using those that remain more. That way you wouldn't be cutting their episode guarantuees.

It was produced by Harold Faltmeyer between Laura Branigan's Self Control and Axel F, so yeah, of course it's good. The single cover is hilarious though:

That's interesting - I never knew that. She did initially feel like one of those characters that are recurring one season and then fade away, so her being on it for four years and almost 100 episodes is impressive in hindsight. It's interesting to see how the ratings sank and then shot up again after being moved back to 10PM in season 8 - makes you wonder if it was worth doing the harm to The Colby's after all, which never recovered: http://tvtango.com/series/knots_landing/episodes?page=4

Yeah, pretty much. Even if it does survive beyond September 2023 (big if, yes), there's really no sense in producing 200+ 40 minute episodes per year. Add that even if they continue to produce episodes for somewhat regular consumption for several times per week, I don't think they need to be more than ~21 minutes; the reason why they expanded soaps in the first place was because it was more cost effective to fill airtime, but creatively, soaps do better with a shorter format imho.

Realistically, they could do what other shows have done re: music rights - straight out remove it and replace it with cheap elevator music. With that said, I doubt they'll suddenly add every episode even if there's some vague plan to do so - it's just not viable endevour to add 14,000 episodes at once. With that said, I hope they start adding the first few weeks, select storylines, episodes etc. That is probably more realistic (aside from not doing it at all and all this is just a big fat lie, which is the most realistic thing to happen).

I think the issue here is the suddenness of the move - it doesn't seem planned or well-thought out; we won't get a broadcast finale that will point viewers towards it going to streaming. It'll just unceremoniously make the move. It doesn't seem to be driven by affiliates having had enough of airing DAYS on broadcast but more of a desperate move to attempt to save Peacock as a streaming service - something that's quite the burden for DAYS to bare and arguably the chance seems bigger that DAYS will sink along with Peacock rather than act as catalyst for new subscribers to save the flailing streaming service. We'll see how it works out. As I said, it's already exclusively on streaming in some markets and I've always gotten the impression that DAYS always had a much younger demographic following than the other soaps, which is part of why it fell quickly to the bottom of the ratings as they already consume the shows in patterns that isn't on broadcast. I do think DAYS is probably the soap that could possibly thrive on streaming for that reason alone, but the hand its been dealt in the Peacock move isn't great. I don't think it's a death sentence, but it's an uphill struggle. If it gets renewed next year I do think they should reduce episodes to ~20-22 minutes and cut the cast. Soaps work better in the half hour format any way.

Doing daytime might not have been seen as glamourous, but it was steady day-to-day work that usually meant that you were home by the time kids came home from school and gave a steady income. It wasn't seen as a complete career killer.

Found on Reddit:

Well, hopefully it'll stay in production long enough for us to get bare ass shots.

DAYS has been online where I live since 2015 - here they dump a week worth of episodes on Mondays at 9AM and has presumably worked out well since they've kept it there and even when the streaming service was bought out by PlutoTV. It's pretty much the show that seems to keep the streaming service afloat - I'm not saying that the same thing will happen to the dwindling Peacock (and of course, there's a big difference between just licensing it vs producing it), but there is precedent to DAYS going entirely online in other markets.

Yeah, the contract is still the current one that applies to broadcast, so presumably, any changes to the cast and format wouldn't be affected until a year from now (if they order more beyond the current order). Of course, we don't know how long they've known they're moving.