Jump to content

Peyton Place


Recommended Posts

  • Members

You know, it's too bad no one thought to reboot PP during the recent reboot/revival craze in H'wood.  In the right hands, a PP reboot might have been fun and awesome to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

 

I was surprised it was never even brought up during the Mad Men craze - instead of ABC doing Pan Am, they could've done Peyton Place set in the 50s/60s and had it on after Desperate Housewives.

 

ETA: now that the mouse owns 20th Century, maybe it would be an opportunity to bring it up since they now own Peyton Place?

Edited by te.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

It'd be a PERFECT opportunity, I would think.  But, I would want a PP reboot to be set in the present-day.  I don't think one set in the '50's or '60's would be too niche these days to reach a wide enough audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Yeah, I was mostly talking about when Mad Men was at its height. But a modern Peyton Place could be what ABC needs - it's on brand for them and maybe it could revive their Sunday line-up, or they could put it at Wednesday at 10PM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

"Starring Chad Michael Murray as Elliot Carson, Stephen Amell as Martin Peyton, Colton Haynes as Rodney Harrington, Lucy Hale as Betty Anderson,  Matt Dallas as Al MacKenzie, Katie Cassidy as Constance MacKenzie, Maulik Pancholy as Matthew Swain, David Ramsey as Dr. Michael Rossi, Annette O'Toole as Hannah Cord, Sam Jones as Norman, Rodney's adopted brother, Aaron Ashmore as Stephen Cord, Kristin Kreuk as Claire Morton, Ashleigh Murray as Rita Jacks.....    etc......"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I’ve often thought of a Peyton Place reboot, but I can’t exactly place it. Like y’all have said, I would HATE it on CW, which is ironic because I would take Dark Shadows on CW, but this would be Peyton Place in name only. 
 

I think the best place for it would likely be ABC again or a streaming service. I also think a soap format would work for it again. Even if they just do two weekly half-hour episodes like the original did initially. Thinking back to the AMC/OLTL reboots, I think a smart way to do a new soap would be half hour episodes and max it out at 2-3 episodes per week and do 40 episode seasons. It would likely be more manageable budget wise than keeping it open ended. Plus, if it’s successful you can always add onto it. 
 

A modern PP with two episodes a week, 20 weeks and a multi generational cast with modern storylines could absolutely become a buzz worthy show again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

I just finished the series and am now watching Murder in Peyton Place... what a mess and I'm only a half hour in!

 

Dorothy Malone clearly couldn't be bothered acting sad over Allison dying.

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Oh wow, Murder in Peyton Place is horrible. Why is Norman suddenly married to Jill? Why is Stella Chernak suddenly a super villain kidnapping Jill? And the remade flashbacks where they end up calling Joe Chernak "Joey", which never happened on the original series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Watching The Next Generation and I can see why it failed - the concept of Allison's daughter coming to town isn't a bad concept per se, but it does rely too heavily on people having watched the original series while at the same time changing important details such as Matthew suddenly being a female and named Kelly (which was Jill's baby's name that she tried to pass off as Allison). It's a shame because it seems like Peyton Place would've been ripe for a revival in the 80s (especially with Barbara Parkins as a HBIC), but the execution of this is horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Thanks.  I thought it might be the same square, but wasn't sure.  And since it was a one-time movie, it's possible even the interiors were shot on location in real houses -- rather than building all those sets for one use. So that may be why they didn't resemble the original sets. 

The first season (5 episodes) of Dallas were all shot in real locations around Dallas, even the interiors.  They didn't build the sets in LA until the second season.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • What else? #May4th

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • In my usual account on my most used video hosting site with the video title  DAYS 1-8-15 Will & Paul Sex This is an edit I began when I was first teaching myself to edit & at that time I couldn't make it do what I wanted it to do. I pulled it up & finished it this morning. 
    • Or Megan is shot as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts...while Julie confesses she's the biological mother of Special Guest Star Barry Bostwick's little boy.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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