Members Pest Spray Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 And the point is that while sure, John being offscreen can be explained. He's in a coma. But there is no good reason whatsoever, besides money (which is their own goddamn fault), to keep Deidre/Marlena offscreen. We only see her with Kayla or John, and seriously... lovely that Marlena's staying by John's side like 24/7, but I wanna see her take down EJ. I wanna see her find out Sami's pregnant, or help plan the wedding (would be a great time for some tears as she remembers the wedding with John). EJ shot her husband, let her go off on him (woman's got a mean right hook). Steve and Kayla stole her husband's kidney, why aren't we allowed to see the reaction? And for heck's sake, I'd rather watch Bo and Hope up to their ears in name suggestions than watch Steve have his 400th headache. The ratings will improve when people get to see the familiar people they've watched and loved the past five, ten years. It's fine to give the fans of people who've been gone for years their time, but you can't do that and backburner the people fans have watched and loved during that time like they have John, Marlena, Bo and Hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Toups Posted March 10, 2007 Administrator Share Posted March 10, 2007 Can someone explain to me this money issue? If the actors are on contract, don't they get paid if they're on screen or not? I thought it was only recurring actors who get paid if they're on screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 I believe that's correct. I don't know why everyone is talking as if that's the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KMan101 Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 If I understand this right, all actors are guaranteed a set number of episodes a month, or a week, not sure. They get paid for those and if they go over that, they get paid for those. Am I correct or barking up the wrong tree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 I don't know, but either way, it seems that if an actor is on contract they're being paid regardless of whether or not they are actually used on screen, so I don't get all the talk about Corday not being able to use the Big 4 because of financial issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KMan101 Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ridge Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 LOL Toups I had asked the same thing weeks ago. That's the truth they are getting paid either way. Besides Corday verbally reported that there is NO BUDGET ISSUE and that is NOT the reason why half of the cast members were backburned instantly. Those were his words. He basically came out and said what we are seeing is what we are supposed to see. These are the people and stories we are supposed to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KMan101 Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 And yet Frank Parker and Peggy McCay aren't even seen anymore (Hogan used them SO much in November and December) and they still get paid for a set number of episodes. If he wanted, Corday could save money bumping them to recurring. I'm not totally sold on the budget issue either, although I believe the show has one, yet we are getting Judi Evans and Matt Ashford back. Although guest appearances, they still cost money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ridge Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 Yeah thats what sucked Hogans first months had SO much character integration and interaction, it made DAYS seem like such an ensemble which is a stark contrast from the last 2 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DaysFanJean Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 Sorry guys, but it's not the number or who plays the characters. It's the stories. A good story can have anyone playing the characters as long as they are capable of carrying the character and drawing viewers. It's the story. Steve and Kayla are not ever going to be the Steve and Kayla we grew to love. Reason: We watched them as young lovers and we believed in their love story. Now they are old (relatively speaking) and we already know their love story so there was no reason to try to convince us or even new viewers who know of it about their love. Just tell the story, one that is intriguing and believable...not hokey. I love the new characters and think too many place failings on them. To me, they are the future of Days if Days survive. Somewhere in there is the next Bo and Hope and the next Steve and Kayla. That's the way life is. A time and place for all things. When it's time to let go and move on, it's time. No amount of hanging on is going to work. Steve and Kayla are like Bo and Hope....moved into the mature adults who should be grandparents and behaving as such. John and Marlena are a figment of folks imagination. That is why I enjoy them separately. That way they can be adults and do excellent work, but together, they are cartoonish romantics, totally ridiculous and completely useless except to those who need pictures to get it on....just my view of that and why it's old folks is beyond me. Tell the stories, Hogan. Believable, researched, complete and intriguing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator Toups Posted March 10, 2007 Administrator Share Posted March 10, 2007 Also, during the past 2 months, the writing staff was dismantled. So far in 2007: - Jeanne Marie Ford last listed as Script Editor on January 4 - James Harmon Brown first listed as Script Editor on January 5 - Barbara Esesten first listed as Script Editorr on January 5 - Susan Kirshenbaum last listed as Script Writer on January 5 - Michael Slade last listed as Script Writer on January 5 - Bettina F. Bradbury first listed as Script Writer on January 16 - Tom Casiello first listed as Associate Head Writer on January 22 - Sofia Landon Geier last listed as Script Writer on January 26 - Jeanne Marie Ford back as Script Writer on January 29 - Hannah Shearer last listed as Associate Head Writer on February 16 - Peter Brash last listed as Associate Head Writer on March 1 - Bruce Neckles last listed as Script Writer on March 2 - Tom Casiello last listed as Associate Head Writer on March 5 - Tom Casiello back listed as Associate Head Writer on March 7 That's a lot of changes. And a lot of writers are brand new to DAYS: Hogan Sheffer Meg Kelly Frederick Johnson Gordon Rayfield Tom Casiello Barbara Esesten James Harmon Brown Bettina F. Bradbury I think it's wrong to only have one writer (Beth Milstein) who has history with the show helping develop stories as an associate/breakdown writer. Plus, having newbies in Brown/Esensten as your Script Editors? That doesn't make any sense. Jeanne Ford should've stayed as Script Editor - she's been with DAYS since 2000. It was also a big mistake to get rid of Peter Brash who has been with the show since 1999. There's a big disruption in the writing staff and maybe this is one reason why DAYS isn't clicking on all cylinders right now. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KMan101 Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 I agree Ridge. I think that's why a lot of fans are tuning out and are disgruntled, despite the show being in great shape (all IMO). Hogan showed amazing promise in November/December with his use of every character. It was awesome. Now ... it's lackluster, despite character driven drama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 I still can't believe DAYS got rid of Sofia Landon Geier and Peter Brash. Stupid, stupid move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KMan101 Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 I never even thought of the writers. That makes a lot of sense Toups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KMan101 Posted March 10, 2007 Members Share Posted March 10, 2007 Agreed. I do agree with SOME of the writers they dumped, but it should be more balanced, with some veteran writers and some newbie writers. Could they be a major part of why the balance sucks, although Corday and Hogan can take some of that. But hell ... at least Maggie's being used more. That tickles me. I love it. Hogan must like her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.