Jump to content

February 14-18, 2011


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Luke and Laura made "General Hospital" into a household name. Their brand's been tarnished, etc. but it's still considered THE COOL SOAP - by folks like James Franco, etc. GH itself has very high recognition value.

Ask most folks to name a soap star and Susan Lucci comes first to mind. Ask why soap she's on and the answer isn't so quick. Lucci by herself has far larger recognition value than AMC. Which is why I believe Oprah will grab Lucci for some show on OWN.

Vanessa Marcil has a far higher recognition value than Burton or Benard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

None and that's true vice-versa. Any AMC fans who don't watch OLTL now won't start and OLTL fans who don't watch AMC now won't start. This isn't like ATWT and OLTL where they're competitors. Anybody watching one show who doesn't watch the other, isn't interested.

Also people who think that canceling one will help the other's budget need to understand that isn't the case. The budget for whatever show gets the axe will go to the talk show that replaces it. So if AMC gets canceled, OLTL won't see anymore money. That cash will go to Tori Spelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think you'll still be saying AMC is going, even if this announcement has nothing to do with a soap being canceled. We all know AMC is going and that OLTL is too. They'll both fall like domino, so I don't understand the bickering. OLTL think they're safe, AMC fans think AMC is doomed and everyone is sitting around beating that into the other side. We actually know nothing, despite some people being absolutely positive that they know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Even with the past crappy last few weeks, I still feel the show is more "AMC" than it was under Pratt (I did like his first few weeks, even months though--much to my shock). But Pratt did write BIG moments (that was ALL he wrote), which I think maybe made the viewers tune in? Plus the show was SOOO boring and focused all on those 4 dull characters under B/E (save for the Angie/Jesse stuff), that Pratt was a welcome reprieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

And I think the P&G soap cancelations have proven that at this point, if "your" soap is canceled, you're not gonna bother trying a new one. Part of that is the sorry state of soaps right now, but I think the even more important part is that next to no one tunes into soaps now because they're "a lonely housewife stuck at home looking for a break from their kids and chores" (to use a cliche). Even in primetime, if one show goes people who watched that show won't blindly tune in to what replaced it, or a similar show at the same time--nobody watches tv like that anymore (and primetime still has the advantage, because, at least Mon-Thurs, maybe Sun-Thurs, millions do still have the habit of watching tv to unwind).

Re budgets--the extra money would surely go to the talk show, as you say, and whatever bonus extra money is there will go in ABC's pockets (and there will be extra money...) Sadly, canceling one show will do *nothing* to improve the remaining one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Exactly. And while things have changed, from what I've read about the era when so many soaps moved to an hour, an hour soap costs hardly anything more than a half hour soap (I think one reason they never tried to change Loving to an hour--besides it making no sense for such a loser ratings wise soap--is affiliates wanting the half hour for news). Two half hour soaps, again from what I've read, wouldn't mean significantly less budget wise, except for using less actors than two hour soaps would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

From purely a branding standpoint, and I think that does matter, I could see them dumping their red-headed stepchild, OLTL, giving 1pm to the affiliates or putting a talk show in place, and then moving AMC into OLTL's spot, followed by GH, for a 1-2 punch of their primary "legacy" soaps that they can then cross-promote the hell out of. That just might work for AMC, as it would get it away from being Y&R's competitor, which probably keeps AMC's numbers down. OLTL does get the slightly higher demos, but that's without any real soap competition. I really think both show's numbers come down to their time slots. You could swap their slots now, and I'd bet the farm that OLTL would do AMC's current demo numbers and vice versa. And just based on all the cross-promotion with Oprah, Hot in Cleveland, and Castle, that says to me that ABC is more invested in AMC than in OLTL and that ABC recognizes that it has better brand recognition. I just see ABC sticking with the show that has better recognition and that has the potential to pull in better numbers in a different time slot. Would Frons then move Carlivati over to AMC with the directive to do something no writer has done to that show in years...shake the hell out of it, turn it upside down, and do something innovative that would keep the show going, instead of telling the same stories year after year after year. AMC would really need to get its act together. Of course if that strategy didn't work, AMC would be toast soon after. Having said all of that, I don't think ABC is going to take any action for at least the next year or two. Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

We're friends (LOL I feel like I have to say that) so I mean none of this personally, but it's no secret that you don't like AMC. To be honest, I think OLTL has been int he position to be needed to be saved at least as much as AMC, maybe even more. It being above AMC in the ratings (though they were virtually the same ratings wise for a long time--and IMHO still virtually are) is a very very new thing. I know execs have no sense of history, but I can't help thinking they have some memory of AMC being a top, and even middling, rated soap for a long time.

Oprah's show was a nostalgia fest, full stop. If they had had Vicki and all her alters there, it wouldn't have done anything for OLTL either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

They did budge.

AMC

12/27/10.....6.....1.9.....05.....6) 0.9/05.....6) 2,637,000 (+.1/+279,000) <- Holiday

1/3/11.........5.....1.9.....06.....6) 0.8/05.....5) 2,467,000 (-170,000)

1/10/11.....*5.....2.0.....06...*4) 1.0/05.....5) 2,703,000 (+.2/+236,000) <- Snow

1/17/11.....*5.....1.9.....06...*5) 0.9/05.....2) 2,584,000 (-119,000)

1/31/11.....*4.....2.0.....06.....6) 0.9/05.....6) 2,653,000 (SAME/+148,000) <- Snow

2/7/11.......*5.....1.9.....06...*5) 0.8/05.....6) 2,570,000 (-083,000)

OLTL

12/27/10...*4.....2.0.....06...*3) 1.1/06.....4) 2,845,000 (+.2/+490,000) <- Holiday

1/3/11.........6.....1.8.....06.....5) 0.9/05.....6) 2,371,000 (-474,000)

1/10/11.....*5.....2.0.....06...*4) 1.0/05.....6) 2,681,000 (+.1/+310,000)<- Snow

1/17/11.....*5.....1.9.....06.....4) 1.0/06.....5) 2,643,000 (-38,000)

1/31/11.....*4.....2.0.....06...*4) 1.0/06.....5) 2,850,000 (+.1/+343,000) <- Snow

2/7/11.......*3.....2.0.....06.....4) 1.0/06.....3) 2,692,000 (-158,000)

Is AMC's ability to get 2.7 to 3 million viewers for patches of 3-5 months and OLTL inability to telling, too? Is OLTL's numbers being in the toilet (less than 2.4 million viewers on average) from March through December 2010 and AMC's only from August to December 2010 telling as well?

That.

It's like birds fighting over who gets to eat a corpse. The numbers are not so different here that AMC will long out-live OLTL, or OLTL will long out-live AMC. Even if they suck, I hope both shows get through this season and the next & I think they will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

He's meticulously / systematically dismantled Luke and Laura IMO. Nothing shows me he's using their popularity on the screen you are right though re: promoing marketing the show having their pics on their website and all that but in story he's brutally harshly disseminated their history e.g., Ethan for one.

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

    • The last I remember seeing Ben, he was divorcing Amanda. He came to tell Evie that he still loved her, but was leaving town so that Amanda wouldn't blame Evie for his divorcing her. I'm not exactly sure when, but Evie doesn't leave town until sometime after Nola and Quint's engagement ball. I'm not sure if she leaves before or after Justin leaves in Sept(?) of '83. I grew to like Helena when she became friends with Vanessa, once she's edging her way out of Quint's life.
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • It sure was!  With respect, how does that make sense?  These men are young, I don't see that. 
    • I hope this played better than it sounds, because I'm imagining two separate scenes (the attack by Arnie, and later Charles getting shot). In my mind, it should have been a fluid single sequence. I wonder if or how often "bastard" was uttered in this scene. Fare thee well, Christopher Reeve. I've said it before, but pop culture's gain was daytime's definite loss. Imagine seeing HIM day after day, year after year, decade after decade, conceivably until they stopped producing soaps in NYC.   Well, that answers my "bastard" question. Good lord, the roads of Rosehill are packed with high-strung drivers and/or pedestrians. More sequences that I hope played better than they sound.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I think Ben had already left while under Marland and only returned briefly to reconcile with Eve. The whole thing confuses me as I thought for a long time that Eve left the show to go be with him and that was when they reconciled, but it seems like he returned, they got back together, then he left and maybe they were still together until she left to join him? I have no idea.  It does seem like the interim writers were using some characters like Justin and Helena who were quickly dumped under Kobe/Long, which is a shame. Helena is one of those characters who likely always had a shelf life but Rose Alaio was such a vibrant screen presence, if Kobe/Long had just been patient, she likely would have fit in well in the Reva era.
    • Also, the lawsuit story was not the right story to bring Naomi and Bill into a court battle since those types of lawsuits are usually resolved via settlements.
    • I know that Sara did eventually become Carrie's therapist, but I was curious if the show had her make comments regarding Carrie's stunts of making it seem as though Justin was cheating on Jackie.  Given that Justin cheated on Sara with both Jackie and Brandy, I wondered if it was wise of her to counsel Carrie given the conflict of interest involved. @DRW50I think once Adam/Sara end up married.. Marland didn't see any reason to explore Sara's personal life after the actor playing Adam was released.  I know that Sara lasts until at least Christmas 1982 on the show.. but I don't think she ended up staying on for very long into 1983. The period between Marland quitting and Pam Long starting was the perfect time to clean house on characters that had outgrown their usefulness  (i.e. Ben, Evie, Sara, Jennifer, Morgan).. and tying up stories started by Marland that were too complex (Mona Enright, Mark/Jennifer/Amanda triangle).
    • Unpopular opinion:  The focus on the soap opera tropes over the mysteries and crimes was partly what did the show in.  Also, featuring characters not involved in the legal, police, and criminal elements also hurt the show and took away what made it unique. Featuring characters like Jody, Raven, Sky, etc hurt the show long term.  The show ABCified starting in 1976/1977 and then went through a youthification period starting in 1981.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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