Jump to content

December 12-16, 2005


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Thanks GL FAN for pointing out the obvious that most others like to ignore. It is nice to see someone bring some common sense to the forefront. I admit, I get taken in to the negative GL bashers that have nothing better to do with themselves.

I can not believe how many people WANT GL to bomb or other shows to take hits becasue they are not happy. What an immature stupid thing to say. We need soaps to maintain viewers if we want soaps on the air. Sure, you want GL gone...fine, it will be SOMEDAY...but don't you think others will follow? Are you that dense to believe that if GL goes then the world of soaps will be better for it?

That is plain stupid. You are not a soap fan if you WISH for low ratings and soaps to be canned.

On the other note, its interesting to see that a soap can bring back all the faves from the past...and their ratings do a roller coaster. GL drops some and gets rid of some and maintains....

Merry Christmas to everyone...even the scrooges

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I agree too Kwing-wishing bad upon any soap (even though I don't watch yours) is wrong to do as a soap fan. There are some shows I hate but I would never wish that on its fans. GL gets this kinda crap the most and I feel bad for it. Passions gets it too understandably but as bad as that has been the last few months I would still not want it gone. Days gets it way too much, especially here, and I don;t get why. Like Gl, it has maintained or showed some slow and steady growth in some numbers and its betting some good buzz from the media of late. The only reason why I can come up with is people are still holding [!@#$%^&*] against JER and Days. I can understand some of it due to all the doom and gloom Days has had the last few years and then you got the rabid supercouple fans complaining but people have to keep open minds and understand that shows change and this genre needs all the help in can get. It doesn't need people holding things agaisnt shows that have happened in the past and people need to start wishing for every couple to be happy (expecially on Days-or we won't have any stories on any show to talk about because there is no conflict. Times change and soaps have to adapt to them which is why so much of what we want can't be done anymore. We can't go back to any soaps golden era because people, shows, characters, writers, etc. all change. We need to enjoy all soaps for what they are and going to be right now because we can;t ask them to go back in time. If you feel so much venom for a show and can;t go back to it or watch it, fine. just don't ruin it for others. Opinions are ok but insulting people who may be enoying something, like some GL fans and Days fans, is not the way to go about sharing opinions. Opinions and discussing them should be done respectfully with the understanding that everyone is different and has different interests. However, hating a show because of things that have happened in the past or recently in the past or hating a show because of a particular writer or producer is lame IMO. As I said, things change and shows change and you never know what you may see if you return to viewing a show you vowed not to watch. Perhaps it isn;t what you thought or as bad as you thought. We just can;t let ill feelings get in the way of watching soaps and enjoying them and watching them try to thrive in what is a instabile genre. Well there is my christmas peace speech :lol: . Happy Holidays!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I see this completely opposite. If anything, recently I've noticed it's the people with negative opinions of certain shows that get jumped on and preached at when they express their opinion about not liking a show that some of the other rather forceful fans love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I understand Oceanview but you missed thet point-their should be no jumping at all either way. Often times I come off as being against anyone who doesn't like my show or has a negative opinion but that is often times because of the way I express myself. All I am saying is that everything should be done respectfully and there should be no wishing cancellation or bad ratings on any show regardless of personal feelings for that show. It doesn;t change anything all it does is further cause problems for soaps and makes it hard to enjoy them. Its ok to not like something but to insult people that do like something or that don;t is wrong and to wish a show to die or nosedive in ratings is wrong too in soaps' current climate. That is my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No one wants GL to die. A healthy GL is a benefit across the board at CBS. But given the economic realities, now that the budget's been slashed to the bone, GL has to start showing some improvement, not just remain steady. And given the current climate, that's going to be hard to accomplish.

Especially if there's continued upheaval behind the scenes. Constant recasting/cast turnover is another discouraging sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, not that I personally wish any cancellations, but imo if other posters do and want to say so shouldn't matter. Do you honestly think that would make one iota of difference to a show's future (an internet poster venting about wanting a show to be cancelled)? I agree about not insulting fellow posters or personally insulting the actors, etc. but I guess I just have a problem with people being told what they can/can't or should/shouldn't say about the other stuff. JMO, not trying to prolong this topic I am just throwing out my observations! And I think I'll bow out of this now :P

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

    • Your use of the word "apparently" would need to include a source. Just your use of the word doesn't make it true or valid. Where would you get the idea that something has happened if you hadn't already received an indication from somewhere else, specifically a valid source (including Tabyana herself)? By using the word "apparently," you are implying this was mentioned somewhere, either in a publication or similar.
    • I think Hotel would have the similar demos as Dynasty W 19-49 would have been strong. St Elsewhere survived b/c it attracted wealthier/urban viewers and The Equalizer was probably stronger with men and younger viewers. So each had their own niche-good counter-programming. As for Aaron Spelling's influence over ABC in terms of scheduling, I don't know if he would have been happy with Charlie's Angels moving to Sunday, The Colbys scheduled on Thursdays or Matt Houston moved to Fridays. I think he just had to roll with the punches.
    • Thank you @Broderick. That information was so helpful. I watched the first episode of the "Mansion of the Damned" storyline. I was extremely confused by Margaret Colin's Paige and her relationship to other characters. Your post helps me understand what's happening. The rest of the show was easy to understand and I'm enjoying it. Hunter's Nola is a good character for me since I know Kim Hunter from other work.  I must have seen clips of Edge of Night before because I remember seeing April. 
    • How is it back tracking when it was in fact the word I originally used? It's not.
    • You know what is a great way to stop these unclear "rumors"?  Just stop posting them and then back tracking with words like "apparently".   Anyhow, I didn't find the Tracy/Lois scenes as good as I hoped.    
    • Jason, in thinking this over, I realize that we look at this space, differently. To me it is a potentially collaborative space. Now that I've realized this, what I should have said, "I'm having a problem because what I'm seeing is not matching up with your descriptions. Maybe these files I just got are misdated. Maybe it's something else. I will keep you posted. Meanwhile this episode, its edit, is ready, even though I might have to issue a corrected date later. But, people can enjoy the performances now. 
    • Thank you for the constructive suggestion. 
    • But how is it "apparent" that she signed a new 3-year contract? Your wording had a voice of authority -- as if you knew it was true. A better way to post about it? Say you read online that she signed a new contract, but have no idea if that's true.
    • This interview actually reminds me a bit of Kim Zimmer’s press during the infamous clone storyline on Guiding Light, or Deidre Hall during the possession story on Days. All three were seasoned daytime veterans who made it clear they valued airtime for their characters, not just being part of a romantic pairing. It seems that idea was part of the pitch behind these bigger-than-life plots. They all took big swings in their performances. When I read Kim Zimmer’s memoir, I thought she captured it best — she wanted to be respected for being willing to take those risks. To paraphrase her, she knew it was ridiculous for Reva to think she was pregnant after menopause, but she still threw herself into those scenes and made them real. That’s what really struck me about Victoria Wyndham’s interview too. She responded like a real person. It felt like she was telling Michael Logan that she knew Justine — and a geriatric pregnancy with twins — was totally preposterous, but that she still deserved credit for trying to keep the show alive and entertain the audience. And honestly, I think that's more than fair. Logan is looking for a reductive answer for who is to blame.  And, she's telling him to accept that they were all well-meaning.  Which is not a defense of bad storytelling.  But, I understand that she's frustrated because she interpreted Logan's critique as a lack of commitment, and she wants him to know that she was committed! (maybe not for the best, but committed).
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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