Members NYC123 Posted July 6, 2007 Author Members Share Posted July 6, 2007 Yea. I was actually happy whne I heard Agnes was somewhat involved! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted July 6, 2007 Members Share Posted July 6, 2007 Am I the only one who is thinking that people are giving Brian Frons WAY too much credit for having WAY too much power? I doubt the American Broadcasting Company and the Walt Disney corporation would just give him sooo much power. The man answers to at least one person -- if not a whole buncha persons. Isn't former ABCD president, Angela Shapiro one of his superiors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NYC123 Posted July 6, 2007 Author Members Share Posted July 6, 2007 I agree with you R Sinclair! Brian Frons has way to much power! and he is detroying our Soaps! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NYC123 Posted July 7, 2007 Author Members Share Posted July 7, 2007 What i also like in the article is that they want to bring driversity back! McT wrote off Reggie, Danielle. That could have been a great couple with potential! I hope they can write Character driven stories! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kjazz Posted July 8, 2007 Members Share Posted July 8, 2007 Yes it is an overstated idea that everything begins and ends with Brian Frons. Yes he has executives to answer to at ABC and with Disney. His predecessor at his post and his eventual successor have had and shall have the same situation poised at them. At many daytime soap message boards , that talk about the ABC soaps, nearly everyone say that all the problems the soaps have start with Brian Frons. Just too easy an explaination and answer for a complex situation that can't be taken care of overnight. When you consider the network executives that both ABC and Disney have running the soaps along with their meddling focus groups and how they inject their input on how to run the ABC soaps on a daily basis without having any kind of experience in writting ,directing, or producing soap operas, then you understand the problems facing these soaps in the long run. These execs care about the bottom line in terms of advertising dollars and nothing more. If it was just Brian Frons that was the only reason these soaps are the way they are ABC daytime would be in much better shape than it is now. Network involvement on a daily basis makes that highly unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NYC123 Posted July 9, 2007 Author Members Share Posted July 9, 2007 Well, still even though I am a bit scared I have faith in them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members IMissAremid Posted July 9, 2007 Members Share Posted July 9, 2007 Good luck to you AMC fans, but all I know from these two at Days is that from the time that they were hired to the time they were announced as the new head writers at AMC was the most boring, worst period of "Days of our Lives" that I can ever remember. Maybe it was just a coincidence that they were the script editors or whatever it was during that slow, dull time and not their fault, but I can't say I am sad at all that they are gone. While "Days" still has a lot of flaws the writing is so much fresher and the pacing is infinitely better, just as it was last fall before these two were brought in last January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted July 9, 2007 Members Share Posted July 9, 2007 yes and NO! Yes, PC was behind PASSIONS in the ratings around the time Jim Brown and Barbara Estenten took over. However, once they started in with their supernatural arcs bull(no matter whose idea it was), the ratings took even more of a nosedive from a position of 2.0-2.4 to a 1.5-1.9. Please note that even though PC's ratings were in the toilet around the time Karen Harris left, it was Brown and Esenten who flushed them down with their inane crap. I don't even watch AMC anymore, but I am just careful about saying anything optimistic about any HW. Because they usually start off really good and then they crash and burn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted July 9, 2007 Members Share Posted July 9, 2007 PC's ratings were low, but for it being aired in alot less markets, it sure wasn't that far behind Passions in ratings despite that. IMO that's pretty damn good. They're not responsible for any shows being cancelled, alot of those shows were on their last legs anyways. PC was a network thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AMCGio83 Posted July 9, 2007 Members Share Posted July 9, 2007 I could see Agnes maybe be OK with the story (though I admit it's a stretch). Ok, the fetus was saved. FINE. The main problem with the story, was that Erica's reason for the abortion was rewritten. They SHOULD have kept it so that she DIDN'T feel the need to continually appologize for the abortion, did it because she was a model and DID NOT want to be a mother. That's that. I couldn't stand watching Erica talk about her Kendall trauma because that's NOT THE REASON. Again, writing was the problem. ' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NYC123 Posted July 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted July 10, 2007 PC's ratings were low already. The arcs was a terrible idea! It was there falt. But they did write for PC when they got nominated for Outstanding Drama Series in 2003 for PC:Naked Eyes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted July 10, 2007 Members Share Posted July 10, 2007 Yeah, but they never got a nomination for writing PC, and a few months later, the poor show was canceled. LOL! Honestly, a fairer comparison would be their work on GL. B&E spent a good part of their soap writing career as breakdown writers for GL, so they knew some history about the show. Where their first year on GL was good, everything after was beyond terrible and overly sensationalistic, talk about plot-driven crap. They totally neglected the rich history of the show, which was a shame, since they already had a history of being apart of the writing staff for the show. Let's keep in mind that B&E have no prior history with AMC, which in IMO is a receipt for disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NYC123 Posted July 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted July 10, 2007 Good point. But in the interview they did say that they watched AMC when they were grwoing up. Even though they had a bad track record, all the shows cancelling was not all their falt. I have some faith in them because they are coming up with a "big" storyline that involves Erica, Jack ect.. I really do hope that they can write were Greenlee is more tolarable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members whyamcwhy Posted July 10, 2007 Members Share Posted July 10, 2007 The only way to make Greenlee more tolerable is to get rid of her!! Her return has been a complete disaster. And the possibility of a Rylee redux, makes me gag. I have yet to be impressed with anything these new writers have said. I have to laugh at the comment they made about joining a show that isn't struggling and is in good shape. Have they seen the latest ratings for AMC??? They are dropping like Days has and look how hard Days is trying to regain their audience. I just don't get the sense that these writers think AMC is in trouble and drastic changes have to be made to improve the show. When they start getting a sense of urgency and bring back vets and focus on core characters, I will feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted July 10, 2007 Members Share Posted July 10, 2007 That's like saying a crap show deserved their nomination. "Oh, the show was a POS all year, but because they put on one good show New Years Eve, they deserve to be nominated." And YES, PC's ratings were low, there's no doubt about that. But when Brown/Esenten took over, the quality of the show plummeted as did the ratings into mid 1's territory. God, I'm having flashbacks of Santoses and San Cristobel. It makes me sick everytime my GL watching friend mentions that as the best period of GL. I'll take what we have now anyday over San frickin Cristobel and the Santoses. IIRC, PASSIONS was PC's biggest competition when Karen Harris took over. She was able to score at least one week where the show surpassed PASSIONS in the ratings. They were usually neck-to-neck with PC at like a 2.0 or 2.1 and PASSIONS as a 2.2 or 2.3. Once Brown/Esenten took over, the ratings eroded. PASSIONS stayed strong with their 2.0-2.4 range, but PC dove further into the depths of hell, getting household numbers of 1.5-1.8, on a GOOD week. PC wasn't on its last legs when Brown/Esenten took over. ABC just didn't want to give Karen Harris time to build an audience that wanted entertaining, yet competent storytelling and took the "shock and awe" route, which failed miserably on their part. You don't give a new Head Writer on a fairly new soap eight months to turn things around. Again, IIRC, The ratings were stable when Karen Harris took over. They fell when Brown/Esenten took over. PC was certainly not on its last legs creatively during that period, unlike when Brown/Esenten took over and they began to repeat the same damn vampire bull OVER and OVER again. I can't talk about LOVING, because I wasn't there for that. THE CITY(their own creation) was awesome, but I think it was moreso for the acting and the technological marvel and less because of the story. From the things I read, after the first two/three months, THE CITY 's stories didn't move anywhere until the Masquerader Mystery and the Azure is a tranny story. Even Michael Logan referred to it in a review/writeup as "THE CITY that always sleeps." And I don't need to bring up the Santos clan or San Cristobel again. Once was enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.