Come on now Rion and King, cool it just a bit because The Phoenix doesn't appear to be in a good mood!

Edited May 21, 200718 yr by Vanguardian

Passions never claimed to be a real soap. From the get-go, it's always been billed as a satire/spoof/send-up of the soap genre. Somewhere along the way, certain people missed the humour and camp and thought Passions was a real soap.

Because of the way NBC promotes it. The promos they air... they take the dramatic bits and try to make it look like a real, honest-to-goodness soap opera. Then when people tune in, they're like, "WHAAAAT?!" It's not that the show is terrible, but when you tune in expecting one thing and instead you get another, it's a little off putting. It's like putting a piece of chocolate cake in your mouth and having it taste like steak, instead. I like both, but the expectation of one thing and the deliverance of another would cause me to spit it out of my mouth. That's why the show never gained much of an audience -- it was promoted to one audience, while the show was creatively marketed to another. That's been a huge problem.

Also, the soap opera magazines report on it as if it's a 'real' soap opera, as well.

That's why I'm happy it's no longer on regular network television. On a cable network, it can work on its identity and hopefully DirecTV will promote it as what it REALLY is. I'm just disappointed that Comedy Central didn't pick it up. The show would be perfect for that network!

Because of the way NBC promotes it. The promos they air... they take the dramatic bits and try to make it look like a real, honest-to-goodness soap opera. Then when people tune in, they're like, "WHAAAAT?!" It's not that the show is terrible, but when you tune in expecting one thing and instead you get another, it's a little off putting. It's like putting a piece of chocolate cake in your mouth and having it taste like steak, instead. I like both, but the expectation of one thing and the deliverance of another would cause me to spit it out of my mouth. That's why the show never gained much of an audience -- it was promoted to one audience, while the show was creatively marketed to another. That's been a huge problem.

Also, the soap opera magazines report on it as if it's a 'real' soap opera, as well.

That's why I'm happy it's no longer on regular network television. On a cable network, it can work on its identity and hopefully DirecTV will promote it as what it REALLY is. I'm just disappointed that Comedy Central didn't pick it up. The show would be perfect for that network!

I'm just glad that the silly dupes who watched Passions thinking it was a normal soap won't be able to complain anymore! And after 8 long years they will finally STFU!!

I mean everyone knows how delusional you and JSF are so you can think what you two want to think...and then the rest of the world can know the truth. Sound good?

I agree with Rion.

We could agree to disagree on the semantics of "canceled" and "renewed." But here's the fact: I think you're wrong on this simple quote:

"Well, you're both wrong because Vincent's actor sucks! And the fact that people think that is good acting is a ) why daytime is in so much trouble right now and b ) why Passions has such low ratings and c ) why Passions was cancelled."

"Passions" wasn't canceled due to what you seem to call poor quality, bad actors, etc. It was JUST because they wanted that stupid "Today" show.

That was it.

And the proof in THAT pudding is that NBC worked to get it RENEWED and stated, several times, that they wanted to maintain the "Passions" brand.

So Vincent's acting, low ratings, and all the other excuses you may mention wouldn't be why the show, initially was canceled (although it IS inaccurate to call it that now since, to most people, that immediately means "dead. Out of production." It's an inaccurate term that no responsible news organization would use because of its lack of truth -- and I should know since I AM the media, baby! ) It was ALL on "Today."

Check ... mate, I think...

Edited May 22, 200718 yr by JER Soaps Fan

Passions isn't "renewed." It was never on DirecTV or its network, so how can a network "renew" a show that was never there on their lineup in the first place? The show will have been finished for a week before it's RESURRECTED on DirecTV. You can't have a resurrection without first having a death -- CANCELLATION.

Yes, the show was CANCELLED -- by NBC. It will no longer be airing on NBC. NBC has cancelled it from their lineup. It might have gotten picked up by DirecTV, on some never-before-heard-of network, but on NBC, it has been cancelled.

Kenny, you're right. The show "was" canceled. But it is wrong, however, to say that the show "is" canceled.

One is a verb, one is an adjective.

The verb is accurate, the second one, the adjective, is horribly inaccurate and false.

Edited May 22, 200718 yr by JER Soaps Fan

Definition of...

CANCELLATION:

1.) The act of erasing or the condition of being erased.

2.) An often formal act of putting an end to.

IN BRIEF: The act of calling off.

NBC has erased it from their lineup.

NBC has put an end to the show ON THEIR NETWORK.

There's no law saying that production has to be ceased in order for cancellation to occur. The show has been cancelled ON NBC. I didn't say that it wouldn't continue on elsewhere, in perhaps a new form, or that it would never be seen again someplace else on television, but ON NBC, it IS cancelled.

Oh my word!

Sorry we got you so roped into this, my dear!

That's hilarious.

Thanks for researching that.

Hmm, so, I don't watch Passions, but I caught some Chad/Vincent scenes the other day and thought Vincent's portrayer was a very good actor. The acting on the show seems to be better these days than I remember it being in the past.

Hmm, so, I don't watch Passions, but I caught some Chad/Vincent scenes the other day and thought Vincent's portrayer was a very good actor. The acting on the show seems to be better these days than I remember it being in the past.

Thanks for saying that! I agree!

You'll notice, if you read these threads that the board is SPLIT on the verdit of Vincent's portrayer. I think he's good, others think he's bad. It seems to be a controversial issue on this board, at this time. I'll update again with further developments...

^^^Vincent is nowhere near as bad as Chris, Migs and Jessica's portrayers. Those three top the list, IMO, as the worst on the show currently.

I really don't think Danica is that bad anymore.

Danica has improved.

Adrian Wilson wasn't horrible. He just had no emotion in his scenes and couldn't and wouldn't even try to convey it. It didn't help that he portrayed a boring character that was nothing more then a fill-inn for Luis when he was off.

The actor who plays Vincent is bad but it gets covered by the fact that the role is meant to be over the top. That helps him because since the role is like that it makes him seem like he is better then he actually is. Of course, that is only my opinion. There are some out there that think Adrian Bellani is the best actor on the show. To each their own.

I think Endora is the best actor on the show.

I wouldn't go that far but she is one of the best and that says alot for her age.

Nobody can rank her above Juliet Mills, Ben Masters. Kim Ulrich, Lindsey Hartley, Brook Kerr, Liza Huber, Silvana Arias, and Emily Harper and keep a straight face.

She is one of the best but not the best. Precious was one of the best too.

I really wasn't kidding. She and Mills are the best.

They are the only two who deliver on a consistent basis. I can't say that for Liza, Silvana, or Emily (as much as I am obsessed with her!)

Edited May 22, 200718 yr by King

....

Edited May 22, 200718 yr by nassaunew