Members David_Vickers Posted March 13, 2007 Members Share Posted March 13, 2007 I hate to say it, but in a way I wish James E. Reilly was still at DAYS. Hogan Sheffer has lied. He's said he wasn't gonna put any new characters or famlies on, now we have Willow & Jed Stark, and this Gabriella & Duck (what an idioic name). Let's hope both of these, especially Duck don't take. I liked Joy Bisco on PORT CHARLES kinda, but she was a little irritating too. I'm pretty sure she was contract for approximately the last year of PORT CHARLES' run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 13, 2007 Members Share Posted March 13, 2007 If they left, DAYS could just recast. Putting them on contract is unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members leevo64 Posted March 13, 2007 Members Share Posted March 13, 2007 (Quick question - is their contract status confirmed?) Someone needs to send Mr. Sheffer a copy of that statement he made in an interview declaring that it was "despicable" to add new families to a show. I always thought that he was learning how to write soaps as he went along, right until the very end, and he never created a family on ATWT (unless you count Julia and JJ, which is not really a soap "family"). He must have just realized how fun it is to create a new family on a soap. It's a shame, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SteveFrame Posted March 13, 2007 Members Share Posted March 13, 2007 Yep out of the mistakes that he did make at ATWT that was not one of them. And as to the thing about the new characters being on contract. I think the difference is Hogan has penned a long term story for them. That is the reason they are on contract. I think that is the reason you don't see Jed on contract right now is that Hogan has not penned a long term story for him - just like Benji. He doesn't figure into the long term story so they are willing to risk losing the actors by keeping them on recurring. Corday is doing the only thing he can from a business standpoint. If the writers have a long term story penned they want to assure that the actors are going to be there. If they don't and they do have to recast that is just going to cost more money in the long run because they will have to pay the casting director more for auditions and the such. Plus if they did have to recast becuase the lost an actor there you have another NEW FACE to get used too. So I think Hogan has to take just as much blame here. He is the one that is creating the characters and planning the story. Corday or someone needs to stand up and say ENOUGH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members PhoenixRising05 Posted March 13, 2007 Members Share Posted March 13, 2007 PEOPLE IT'S NOT HOGAN!!! First off, this has Corday written all over it. No one can tell me otherwise. First it was all the cast changes hindering Hogan's writing and then when things finally settle down the show got good. Now he is having to deal with this again. It doesn't make sense for Hogan to go back and what he said. He wants to do a good job, I mean, he doesn't want to fail and make this a bad mark on his reputation. I am just as angry about this as everyone else, despite my fondness for Bisco, but to blame this on Hogan is ridiculous. Corday makes the decisions. Even if Hogan wanted it, Corday could always turn him down. Blame him. Like I said, this is not an issue if the balance is better then it has been and it is getting better. If things happen and the balance improves, ratings will be fine. Ratings were fine until the balance problem and the pace slowed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 13, 2007 Members Share Posted March 13, 2007 Thank you, Phoenix! I'm so sick and tired of people always pointing the finger at Hogan whenever something they don't like happens. It's past time that Corday gets his fair share of the blame. Remember Sophie? I'm sure it was Corday's idea to put her on contract too (even though it didn't last very long). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members daysfan Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 With the exception of Nick, about all the newbies so far have been supporting characters for a story. Willow was needed for what to do with Shawn after he seperated from Mimi, yeah she is not needed that much right now but she has played a role in the story. A role that was needed. Jed they could have used Connor but he is just a supporting character in the Mabby story and I cannot see him getting his own story. And I have a feeling these two will only be supporting too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Michael Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 I rarely post, but I felt the need to jump in here... Exactly. If they're going to be on a lot for even a short period, it's actually economically advantageous to put them on contract, rather than paying them as recurring/guest cast for all the episodes in which they appear. Then the show can release them at one of the 13-week cycles. This actually reminds me a bit of when HS brought in a drifter named Ruby and her dad (Gabe?) for a relatively short time on ATWT, to mix it up with Bryant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 Yeah, I'm reminded of that too, but at least they weren't put on contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Michael Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 That's the thing -- putting performers on contract doesn't necessarily mean anything. Yes, it's a sign that they want the performers around, but if they're going to be used heavily for several weeks, it might be cheaper for the show that way. It doesn't automatically mean "we want these people on the show for three years." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 Yes, but we don't know that for sure. DAYS can't just put people on contract, and then put out some sort of press release saying something to the effect of "don't worry, they won't be here very long". So, for all we know, we could be stuck with them for the foreseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Michael Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 Obviously you're right in that we have no idea what the show's intentions are. All I'm saying is, before we get all Doomsday about it, it doesn't hurt to look at the other possibilities of the situation. Besides, putting people on contract vs. paying them recurring rates is a business decision. We're waaaay more informed than the average daytime viewer -- most people watching the show will never know the difference whether they're on-contract or not. (And, honestly, I think there's a certain appeal to the show/network in putting a Filipino performer on-contract.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SteveFrame Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 In your famous words we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I see Hogan as just as much to blame. These characters fit with who he wants to write for and this to me is something he wanted. Sure as you said and I said Corday could have said no and he should have, but do you see him honestly saying no at this point to anything Hogan wants. Corday didn't dream these characters up. Hogan did. Corday is not the writer - Hogan is. Sure Corday hired them and gave them the contract, but he is only doing what he thinks is best for the show as far as making sure actors are there esp. if they are planned as part of a long-term story. There comes a point where blame has to be put where it needs to be. Corday is the POLITICALLY CORRECT choice, but sorry Hogan has to take the blame for some of this too. He is the one creating the characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mason Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 But this isn't about the creation of the characters. We're talking about the decision to put them on contract. And that blame rests solely on Ken Corday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Pest Spray Posted March 14, 2007 Members Share Posted March 14, 2007 It really does. Let's all remember the Walkers. Nicole, Taylor, Brandon and Faye. All within, what, 9 months? I wish people remembered Doug Marland's rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.