Members dragonflies Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 SID is also saying that it could be a done deal with Pratt coming to AMC Sorry LeClerc I don't agree. People said the same thing about McTrash too. If I remember righjt wasn't she let go AFTER her contract cycle had passed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevotedToAMC Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 I don't want Pratt coming to AMC...he just writes sleaze (worse than pole dancing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AddictedToSoaps Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 I'm not purposely defending B&E, but the ratings are awful for all the soaps. Me either. He would ruin AMC. I wouldn't mind if Gary Tomlin was given the job, but NOT Pratt!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 I know this has been discussed, but let's face it: Pratt and Tomlin are NOT the answer. Their track records do not support the idea that they will do anything good. This show has such a rich, rich history. A little bit of it even remains on the cast. But the soul of this show is profoundly damaged, and has been for a long time. The only way this show can be saved is to bring in someone who knows the soul. Many have mentioned Agnes Nixon, but without proteges and without control, nothing can be done. I do not believe ABC is interested in regaining the soul of this show. It's so funny: For my whole life, if you'd have asked me which of AMC/OLTL/GH would die first, I would always have said OLTL. That was always the least promoted, and often the least interesting. It had the least stable creative team and cast. Now look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members juppiter Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 I know, it's funny how things have changed. 15 years ago, AMC was ABC Daytime's crown jewel and arguably the face of the ABCD brand. GH was critically acclaimed and an emmy monster. Meanwhile, everybody in America was talking about that crazy soap on NBC, Days of Our Lives, whose ratings were skyrocketing after a weak early 90s. Now which two soaps are two of the most endangered? AMC and DAYS. What's next, Juliet Mills taking Tabitha to Genoa City? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Please stop with that Tabitha thing. Can't you remember when LML had Mimi Kennedy reading fortunes at Crimson Lights? That Tabitha thing is so plausible. The JG/MAB Y&R is less crazy...but I have no trust. Now that Restless Style is a real-world e-commerce site...with a real-world editor (from the New York Times)...I'm worried that non-dramatic considerations are going to play more and more of a role. Product placements and stories designed to sell products...rather than anything we care about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Look at this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sheilaforever Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 This shows one thing: Y&R has actually GAINED viewers until the mid-90s, ca. OJ. Ratings remained on par or just slightly dipped from the late 70s onwards. You always have to keep in mind that those enormous HH ratings from 50, 60 and 70s simply arouse from the fact that millions less households existed. I think one rating point equals double as many viewers now than it 40 years ago... Even a comparision of rating shares is sketchy since the numbers of TV channels has increased by several thousand percent since the good old days of three or four networks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Well, it was free-fall after 1993. Also, remember that rating points are percentages, thus ratios, and represent the same thing they did in the '70s an '80s. The fact that a ratings point in the '70s had a different number of viewers is irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sheilaforever Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Don't think so: To split 100 % of viewership with 3 channels leads to much higher ratings than doing with 500 channels, even if just 10 of these attract actually larger groups of audience... Therefore the transformation of rating points into numbers of viewers is more significant to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Nope. Ratings is a ratio between people watching a show and everyone who has a TV. Share however is the ratio between people watching at this very moment and all the people who have their TV on. As for the total viewers figure, that is just an estimate, given with a certain statistical error. And thus to me when someone says 5 million watched Y&R, it's the same as when someone says 4 million are watching. Completely the same. So for the networks, the most important thing are the ratings, then come the share and total viewership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MarkH Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Toups, what is this? At Roger Newcomb's blog (where he credits this link , but I can't find the item on the original), he reports the following: I don't find this Daran fella on your list. And, given his penchant for writing gay stories, is this on the agenda for AMC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Wow! Daran was (one of) the best scriptwriter(s) Corrie had. He then went on to write for Hollyoaks and since I haven't watched any of the most recent episodes, I can't tell you if he's still there. But I thought he was! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 Colour me shocked as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sylph Posted May 17, 2008 Members Share Posted May 17, 2008 From Wikipedia: Daran Little (born 11 May 1966) is a British writer, most notable for his work as a writer on Coronation Street from 2000 until 2006. While at Manchester Polytechnic, he wrote his dissertation about the show. After graduating, he was taken on by Granada Television as an archivist in 1988. He has written numerous books, both fiction and non-fiction, about the show and its characters. Daran left Granada in 2006 after writing 95 episodes of the Street and introducing the first gay characters. He created, wrote and produced a 20-part series called Hollyoaks: In the City for Mersey Television. He announced on his MySpace site in November 2006 that the series had not been recommissioned. Since then he has joined the Hollyoaks writing team. Little is also a Magistrate, sitting in Manchester City Centre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.