Jump to content

Sounds Like ATWT Really is Next to Go


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Hmmmmm. You may be onto something here.

After seeing how TPTB decimated GL throughout the last few years, I always think that it might have been better to have Millie Taggert (that last good writer the show's had) stay at the helm and write it's finale. I would have been heartbroken, but I wouldn't have had to endure the trainwreck that followed.

ATWT is certainly not at it's prime. It may very well be the worst it's ever been, but it's still not in GL territory IMHO. They still have the vets and some semblance of a production team that could carry off a respectable ending. They just need to spend some of that money that they're using on new cast members (daytime vets) and hire a good writer to finish the story.

What's the point in a preserving a show just for the hell of it anyway? They tried with GL and it

failed. Miserably. I would hate for someone to have to go through that with their show, the way I have with GL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

So true. Daytime writers are short-sighted and seem to think that stunt casting (Morgan Fairchild) and gimmicks like DOOL's 'death and reincarntion island' will get viewers to tune in. It's the entire show. There are couples I dearly enjoy watching, but they're on shows I can't stomach so I 'Youtube' them or just read about them and it's enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No, I meant "gameshows shown on mainstream network television". Yes, there's a limited syndication market. But in my area, that consists of Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune. (Though to my surprise my ABC affiliate does carry a half-hour version of Millionaire) Only TPIR is an hour long. And from what I remember, hour long gameshows were the exception, not the rule.

I still don't see LMAD succeeding on CBS. Gameshows are definitely cheaper to produce---but I don't see this dated concept appealing to a CBS audience. At least something like Pyramid invited you to participate along with the contestants. The original LMAD was more about the stupid contestants in costumes than about the games or skill. TPIR built around the games and added some "wacky" contestant moments.

Are the affiliates even obligated to carry LMAD? Because while gameshows are cheap to produce, it's still cheaper for affiliates to rerun their local news and carry some infomercial. It sounds like my affiliate is adding Dr. Oz this fall, and right now, they've only got the 9 am and 2pm slots to fill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well you have to give O'Hurley credit. At least he shows up to work sober, unlike Jabba the Hut.

I'd hardly call 2009-10's Wheel, Jeopardy, Family Feud, Millionaire, Deal or no Deal and Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader a "limited syndication market." Especially when you compare where the game show was prior to Hollywood Squares and then Millionaire. At one point, post-Richard Dawson's re-entry to Family Feud, I recall there being only Wheel and Jeopardy for a year, possibly two, before those dating show revivals.

But some game shows, even network games, have easily had double runs. Wheel, in the beginning, went to a one hour format and after that went abysmal, they went with double runs, competing against the success of Price.

I can agree with you there. Wayne Brady's 2010 Emmy may buy the show some time on the air, though.

I don't think they are, but I am willing to bet the O&O's will carry the show as will the smaller markets(because they don't have the money to buy lucrative syndicated programming).

If Bill Bell Jr. were smart, he would have(like his mother did in the early years of the show) went to every single affiliate that wasn't carrying B&B in it's designated time slot or even at all and pitched to them how beneficial airing the show in in daytime would be beneficial to their local lineup. I was shocked to learn there are still several affiliates across the country that do not air B&B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yeah I guess it's easier for networks to cancel a show instead of trying to fix the problems the show has. That's the problem right there with daytime, no one in charge wants to do anything about their shows, just put "band aids" on them.

It's the people in charge of the soaps that are killing them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I meant on daytime. During the day. Mid-afternoon. I loved Hollywood Squares. Match Game. Win, Lose or Draw. Tattletales. And even embarrassingly for a while, the one with "whammy's", which name escapes me right now. But a gameshow airing at 2pm? That hasn't been successful in twenty-plus years. A lot of serials went to an hour because the game show "died out" for a while in the mid-'80's.

I just don't think most gameshows can rise above some niche market anymore. Even the successful primetime ones are usually "hail mary's" from the networks, desperate to produce something cheap to fill airtime.

What a relief...I thought I was the only one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Millionaire and Deal or no Deal have proven otherwise.

Also, people can say the same thing about daytime soap operas or the entire network daypart.

BTW, that game show with the "whammys" was Press Your Luck. We so need a new Michael Larson to come in and [!@#$%^&*] up a gameshow budget legitimately. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I think they’re desperately trying to cover his awful tattoos. But anyway them being unable to style short kings properly has been a major pet peeve of mine for a while now.  I honestly don’t understand what some people expect from actors to even begin considering them for recognition. Let’s be real—awards mostly mean that an actor is respected by their peers and has some level of cultural relevance. Actual judgment on the acting itself? That’s often secondary—highly subjective and shaped by the times. I completely agree on both points. If you’re an actor or a dancer you shouldn’t get any tattoos (sorry not sorry). Tomas’ tattoos are ugly too. And regarding the couples- you’re completely right. These writers are unable to write romance.   Further comments: - Kat cannot be this dumb to keep tampering with evidence over and over again. And I’m officially not a fan of the actress—every time she’s in a scene with Leslie, she doesn’t seem intimidated at all. She plays it like comic relief, which is just too much, especially when paired with Leslie’s histrionics and over-the-top antics. Leslie is older, dangerous, and has literally been portrayed as homicidal—Kat should be at least a little scared. • I also didn’t like Kat playing damsel in distress with the hotel manager. It gave off the same weird energy as Dani with the cop. I would’ve much preferred the version Paul Raven suggested, with her sneaking in through housekeeping. • And yes, Dani again accused Hayley of faking the pregnancy—this time even specifying she might be using a pillow under her shirt. (No fake miscarriage being mentioned) I stand by my take: this is ridiculous writing. No one in the real world—except us, the chronically online soap watchers—would even think of such a conspiracy theory. Haley is no Beyoncé. • What in the world was Chelsea wearing in her hair the other day? And this whole thing with Madison is beyond cringe. Chelsea’s coming off as needy and toxic—basically like every other Dupree. • I’m glad the casino storyline is moving forward, but it’s still boring as hell. Honestly, I’d be so here for a plot twist where Vanessa and Doug take Joey out. • The direction and editing lately have been rough. Abrupt cuts, weird pacing… something just feels off overall. There’s a strange uneasiness to how it’s all coming together. • And finally: Tomas is too much of a saint. Where are the messy sluts when you need them? (Vanessa doesn’t count.)
    • Andrew sure has hard nips.
    • I was watching some August 1987 episodes and they brought back so many memories. I had some thoughts: Lisa and Jamie were so dull. Lisa was such a nothing character. It boggles my mind that so much story was centered around her in such a short amount of time. Joanna Going is a talented actress, but the material was just not there.  It was so good to see Wallingford and Mitch again. I know there was talk about Felicia a while back, but these episodes reminded me how integral Felicia was for the show.  Sally Spencer was done so dirty. She is turning in superb performances in an icky storyline. I wish she had stuck around longer. She has chemistry with everyone. The McKinnons should have lasted longer. Spencer had some strong stuff with Stephen Schnetzer and Mary Alexander. AW waster such a talented actress by getting rid of her. Justice for Cheryl too. I also missed Ed Fry when he left. Sandra Ferguson was a star from the moment she came on. She was charismatic and just popped. She had immediate chemistry with RKK and blended in well with Wyndham and Watson. I'd forgotten about the teenage Matthew.  I have no memory of Peggy Lazarus. She must not have lasted long. Was the original plan for John that he was going to turn out to be the twins' real father?      
    • If the new and improved copies that @rsclassicfanforever has uploaded can be manually moved into the "by month, by year" folders, that would be awesome. I personally don't think it's necessary to keep the older versions (which either have Dutch subtitles hard coded on them, or are lesser in picture quality). That's a lot of valuable drive space that could be cleared. Just my view but can appreciate others may feel differently. The structure had been by month by year previously, so I think it would be easier to conform to that, where so much prior work to get it to that format has already been done. Hopefully you can "drag and drop" so the new copies are in the right month/year? Re Clips, I never look at them now we pretty much have the episodes in full. Appreciate others may use, however. Thanks for all your hard work here @BoldRestless!
    • Oh yes defintely, Josh Griffith repeats and repeats the same storylines.
    • Isnt’t this storyline similar to the Cameron Kirsten situation though? Sharon thought she killed him. He ended up being alive and Sharon was being tormented with thinking she was seeing his face everywhere and that’s how we got that iconic scene with her and Nikki in the sewers.   I understand in Mariah’s case this is different circumstances but it does seem like a play on that whole thing. Maybe I’m wrong. I just wish if they were going to make any character follow in Sharon’s foot steps it would be Faith. Mariah wasn’t even raised by her, and her personality is different. I would expect her to take a different path. I understand I could be completely jumping ahead because the storyline hasn’t even played out yet but we’ll see. 
    • Thanks again @Paul Raven Monica was completely without redeeming qualities at this point. I always found the whole Monica = Carly narrative regressive, as I don't think shows comparing characters so heavily is ever a great idea, but she's actually worse than Carly was. Was it the Pollocks who had Leslie have a miscarriage?  Giving her a child, especially by rape, was not a good idea, but a part of me wishes they'd committed to it just to see what story it might have had in later years.
    • @janea4old Your detailed explanation and delving into the psychology and motivations is no doubt the opposite of what we will see onscreeen. As @ranger1rg stated we will get a few scenes and some sketchy explanations. Like the adoption of Aria, most of it will take place off screen.
    • I'm suddenly fearful that DAYS is going to pull a Flowers-for-Algernon stunt and Bo's progress will be reversed.  While @te. is stuck on Abe's tiny bedroom, I can't stop thinking of the size of Bo's huge hospital room.
    • Okay, why are Paulina and Abe sleeping like that?!  I'd take a screen grab if I wasn't lazy, but come on.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy