Jump to content

AMC: SOAPnet interview with Swajeski & Kreizman


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Well I'll admit it all sounds great. Maybe even slightly better than these kind of interviews always do--yet we all know that they ALWAYS sounds like great ideas when they do the initial interviews. (but they do seem more versed in the show than B/E or Pratt did)

I agree.... I am not really sure what to think. The optimist in me wants to say "give them a chance" and the pessimist in me says "just cancel the show already". I am very intrigued about Palmer's death being a springboard for many things. I think that is an excellent starting point. Didn't DK do something very similar to this with Roger's death on GL?

I'd say listen to the optimist! These stories sound great and it seems like D&D understand the characters. I'm willing to cut them some slack for two reasons:

1. GL was Kreizman first headwriting stint so of course he made mistakes. It seems like most ATWT fans thought that showed improved when his name popped up in the credits.

2. He's not the sole headwriter here and Swajeski's work has been critically acclaimed in the past.

For the first time in several years, I'm excited about what's coming up on AMC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
That comment bothers me because it is so similar to what Pratt said when he came aboard. He then preceded to de-spine all the women and turn the men into patronizing apes. I don't see why so many Donna is concerned with strengthening the men when most soaps, inluding AMC, have weakened their female characters.

True. The women on the ABC soaps are very weak, while the men drive almost every story so if the men are any stronger, the women would be the equivalent of roadkill.

Just once I would like to hear on of these headwriters say that they are coming to strengthen the women and make them the focus of stories. Days is the only soap where the stories revolve around the women.

Also, when the headwriters say that Ryan and Greenlee are popular, I have decided that they must mean that they test well in ABC's focus groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Also, when the headwriters say that Ryan and Greenlee are popular, I have decided that they must mean that they test well in ABC's focus groups.

Yep, only explanation. I am taking a research methods course this semester in university and we were talking about focus groups the last couple of weeks. The thing with focus groups is they aren't really a relevant sample to the entire population IMO and the opinion of the text and prof of that course... They can be helpful in forming some base generlizations, but in the grand scheme of things they aren't very useful. Daytime's reliance on focus groups represents perfectly how out of touch with the mainstream audience they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Yep, only explanation. I am taking a research methods course this semester in university and we were talking about focus groups the last couple of weeks. The thing with focus groups is they aren't really a relevant sample to the entire population IMO and the opinion of the text and prof of that course... They can be helpful in forming some base generlizations, but in the grand scheme of things they aren't very useful.

Based on what I've heard ABC often conducts its focus groups by showing them brief clips or clips of one episode and asking their opinion. So the opinions of those in the focus group are often not informed by history or longterm storytelling. And there is also the problem of the pressure to conform that people feel in groups so it may seem like their is more of a consensus about something than their really is. It baffles me that ABCD puts so much importance on their focus groups. So many bad decisions have been made because of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

People in focus groups aren't even people who watch regularly are they? I'll never get why they don't sample the audience that watches when it comes to these kinds of things

That comment bothers me because it is so similar to what Pratt said when he came aboard. He then preceded to de-spine all the women and turn the men into patronizing apes. I don't see why so many Donna is concerned with strengthening the men when most soaps, inluding AMC, have weakened their female characters.

Yeah I remember Pratt's comment. He said something like "Behind every strong woman, there's an even stronger man" ugh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Back in 2003, when I went to SSW I got picked to attend what they called an "Opinion Session". (I basically walked in the gate at California Adventure, and there was an ABC person standing there who asked me some questions...how long I'd been watching, and then questions about the current show...I got them right, and the "Opinion Session" was my gift. Haha.)

Basically, what they did when we were in there was sit us around a big table and then go through a list of questions and characters. They named all the big ones at that time, and asked each one of us what we thought of that character's storyline. Did we like their current pairing? Who did we want them with if not? Things/characters/couples we'd like to have seen more of? What did we like/not like about the show at that time? Those kinds of things. (This was an 18-35 session (I was 19) and I remember them being stunned that we all loved Adam so much. The woman conducting things thought it was strange that such young women loved Adam.)

It was interesting and I got a bunch of free stuff out of it.

I know it was a long time ago, but if that's any indication of how they run focus groups, then maybe Rylee really is popular offline...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep, only explanation. I am taking a research methods course this semester in university and we were talking about focus groups the last couple of weeks. The thing with focus groups is they aren't really a relevant sample to the entire population IMO and the opinion of the text and prof of that course... They can be helpful in forming some base generlizations, but in the grand scheme of things they aren't very useful. Daytime's reliance on focus groups represents perfectly how out of touch with the mainstream audience they are.

You are right that focus group research can be unreliable and should only be used in very carefully defined conditions. Other than a survey of a representative sample of the viewing audience which would cost thousands to conduct is so hard to tell which characters and/or couples are really popular.

I know it was a long time ago, but if that's any indication of how they run focus groups, then maybe Rylee really is popular offline...

Maybe. It is so hard to tell. I think that the network uses focus groups, fan mail, and keeps track of which characters sell soap mags. They probably also keep track the hits on characters and stories on their Web sites.

Frankly, every word that comes out of David and Donna's mouths is a lie. Including "and" and "the" and especially "we love tradition!".

Yep. It is like there is a new headwriter PR guide of common phrases to be repeated in initial interviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm very curious about this beefing up the Cortlandts and pitting them against the Chandlers bit, though I'm cautiously optimistic (i.e., Rauch promising us the return of the black Spauldings, plural). I'm almost certain that it will not involve Nina, but probably a recast Petey because nerdy comedic Petey is no match for J.R. and Scott and they will try to sex it up with him and Colby (not condoning, just imagining how they'll see it). I'm not betting on Ross (though *maybe* Julie?) either so I'm wondering about a deSORASED/frozen in age from last time Bobby and maybe his brother Michael, and of course there is room for new kids from Ross and Nina who we've inexplicably never heard of.

And Soapnet.com REALLY needs to do something about that annoying video [[email protected]#$%^&*] on the side, why does every damn story have to be broken up into 35 pages anyway?? I can scroll for Godsake, stop trying to rack up site hits Perez!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And Soapnet.com REALLY needs to do something about that annoying video [[email protected]#$%^&*] on the side, why does every damn story have to be broken up into 35 pages anyway?? I can scroll for Godsake, stop trying to rack up site hits Perez!

Isn't that so annoying? I turn my speakers off anytime I am reading articles on soapnet. Its so ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yep, only explanation. I am taking a research methods course this semester in university and we were talking about focus groups the last couple of weeks. The thing with focus groups is they aren't really a relevant sample to the entire population IMO and the opinion of the text and prof of that course... They can be helpful in forming some base generlizations, but in the grand scheme of things they aren't very useful. Daytime's reliance on focus groups represents perfectly how out of touch with the mainstream audience they are.

And they aren't even fan related are they? They're just random audience members who have no history with those characters?

Isn't that so annoying? I turn my speakers off anytime I am reading articles on soapnet. Its so ridiculous.

I did the same, and then passed out last night--woke up this morning, turned my speakers on, and the soapnet promos were STILL being rattled away... <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm very curious about this beefing up the Cortlandts and pitting them against the Chandlers bit, though I'm cautiously optimistic (i.e., Rauch promising us the return of the black Spauldings, plural). I'm almost certain that it will not involve Nina, but probably a recast Petey because nerdy comedic Petey is no match for J.R. and Scott and they will try to sex it up with him and Colby (not condoning, just imagining how they'll see it). I'm not betting on Ross (though *maybe* Julie?) either so I'm wondering about a deSORASED/frozen in age from last time Bobby and maybe his brother Michael, and of course there is room for new kids from Ross and Nina who we've inexplicably never heard of.

Even Alfred Vanderpool and Bob Georgia would probably leave what has become of Scott and JR in the dust. I keep hoping they are going to fix these mistakes. Having this sad excuse of JR as "the new Adam", please.

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.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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