Jump to content

AMC and OLTL Canceled!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Just read this on twitter: Have u heard? The ABC message boards have banned the word "boycott." Who needs a boycott with those poor replacement shows? No 1 will watch!

That's kind of amusingly sick.

AMC has a higher profile than OLTL (even if OLTL is older.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree that the healthiest attitude to take under these circumstances is just to accept the loss(es) and enjoy these shows as much as you can while you still can. Do I think ABC has cut off its nose to spite its face? Yes. Of course. These cancellations (including GH's, which is all but a done deal, AFAIC) will have a ripple effect throughout the rest of daytime and even television itself. Mark my words: within the next 2-3 years, daytime TV as we know it will essentially be no more. Once shows like "The View," "The Talk," "The Chew" and so on fail (not b/c they won't get numbers, but b/c those numbers won't grow year-to-year), the networks will cede that airtime to their respective news divisions in a last-ditch effort to hold onto it before giving up the hours to their affiliates outright. And daytime will be what Gloria Monty fought to get away from: nothing but "talking heads."

The question, though, is whether soaps will return. On the one hand, I'd love to think so (and post-ers such as Vee certainly make a great case for it, too). OTOH, as I've said before, those who want soaps to return have to rethink how we receive them b/c the traditional, five-day-a-week serial just cannot work anymore. The problem is, every alternative to that is just antithetical either to how we are trained to follow stories or to the nature of continuing drama itself.

So...[sigh]...no. Soaps, or continuing dramas, are dead. They're dead in the daytime; and they'll die in the primetime soon, too. In fact, they'll go the way of westerns, Saturday morning cartoons, even traditional sitcoms. And all will be replaced by infotainment (not "news," people, b/c that died a long time ago) and cheap, easy-to-download, easy-to-follow, D.I.Y. shows that essentially turn the cameras back on ourselves. It's everything George Orwell warned us about, and more.

[!@#$%^&*]. I gotta learn how to write novels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I was mortified after I pressed the "Add Reply" button, but hell, it's true. I don't like it, but it's true. If it was just OLTL, random late night losers like Jimmy Fallon would feel more comfortable ridiculing the legacy of soap opera with some short, desperate one-liner about how unimportant a soap's cancellation is. At least with Lucci's name attached, those jerks would feel like assholes for going too far with the jokes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's not so much AMC, but Susan Lucci. She is well known by the non-soap viewing public. She makes news, and thus the cancellation of her show makes news. Add in the Kelly Ripa factor, and I guess the cancellation AMC get a little more exposure. However, in every press release I've read, after the initial "The show that Susan Lucci has called home for 40 years is being cancelled," OLTL has gotten equal press.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I honestl think the TV Guide network should do a soap...I just feel like it would work. Package it between one of those 'Where are the Now' shows and an entertainment show. Maybe the TV Guide network has become slightly irrelevant due to the "Guide" feature on digital cable, but they seem to do well.

They could do a 6 o'clock soap. 5 o'clock, some sort of "special", 6 o'clock: soap, 7 o'clock: E-News style show.

If the soap took off they could do a revamp.

4PM: Ugly Betty

5PM: Entertainment talk show.

530PM: Another talk/entertainment/extra-type show

6PM: Soap Opera

7PM: Soap Opera

8PM: Soap Opera

*these could be half hour too, I suppose*

9-11: Movie of the week, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well he's lied a lot so? Even according to Lynda Hirsch

Brian Frons, the head of ABC Daytime, is a liar.

"Forget that he lied to the press about "All My Children" and "One Life to Live" not being in danger of being canceled. Frons lied to his producers, actors and everyone who works on his shows.

Last week, actors from both shows were assured they had nothing to worry about. They were told speculation that the shows were going to be canceled was merely the press being pessimistic and in need of something to write about. A week later, he axes both of the shows. The actors were not told until after a release was sent to the press."

So just saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Nope I agree with you. I have always felt ONE LIFE has sort of been handled with kid gloves from the get go because of it's rather liberal content...this is a show that featured a multitude of social intrigues surrounding African-Americans, Jewish, Irish-Catholics, and Polish-Americans front and center. I think as much as the network initially appreciated it for its diversity, Americans would have never embraced the show long term unless the introductions of Dorian Lord, Karen Wolek and the advent of the Buchanan family had been made.

Erik

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The show had decent ratings in its first few years, then declined as the country moved away from social issues, and Agnes began moving on. The big reason for the ratings increase was the hiring of Jacquie Courtney and George Reinholt. Then OLTL built on this.

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 remember my late mom express passionate love of the show (being that we're Irish Americans and how Johnny and Maeve Ryan reminded her of her grandfather)... and that she viewed Jillian and Mary as role models. When the show ran on SoapNet years ago, I remember watching the early episodes and having debates with my mom over how strident and militant the show was... especially in regards to feminist issues.  And how I found Mary to be a hypocrite (she's a reporter... yet can't suss out that her father and brother are both toxic and controlling)... and Jillian to not be quite a good role model (yes, she's a lawyer.. but she's happily waiting for Frank to divorce Delia and then after the divorce.. waits for him to win elections as she silently waits on the sidelines). My mom did admit that in retrospect, she did find the show to be a bit strident and explained that it was the 70s and feminism was a huge passion for her and others like her.   And that was when I learned to view soaps without a modern day lens... and eventually I did find enjoyment on the show (and their St Patrick's day celebrations were always a fun tradition).
    • Pink is a good color with her blonde hair 
    •     In a video intetview, it was Richard Backus (Barry) who said Sarah told everyone off at her goodbye party.                                       On the Soapnet forum, it was Sean, the MemoryBook webmaster ( he also posts here)  who told us Sarah had been fired. Everyone on the board was shocked. For some reason noobody recalled that. In more recent years, it's been easier to find old press clippings that show that her dismissal was announced in newspapers and magazines.            Sean also told us that many of Sarah's castmates were not sorry to see her go. One of the columns about her firing in 1980 said that Sarah "raised the ire" of her co-workers.                                    On the SN board, we were told that Sarah would speak negatively about the show to the press. For example, she reportedly criticized the show for dumping the Pat/Nancy interfaith storyline.  The network didn't like Sarah speaking out like that 
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • During Taggert Alan mentions Amanda as his "daughter" while that most likely is a writers slip up, I like to think it was a retcon. They never have Alex, on any of her frequent trips back mention Amanda as my sister, etc. I know they just want to forget it and Amanda was probematic in her marriage to Roger (i.e. MADD's decree that Roger will never be mentioned again..) Again, they could have easily brought her back with a handwave from Alex or Alan saying it was a trick from Brandon.   There is Amanda, AM and ALL the various offspring Phillip created. Plus head of family means head of Spaulding.   I would have thought it interesting if Phillip becomes more like Alan (but in the gray area he always was, not outright cartoon villain RR Alan) and AM comes back with more of his Bauer coming out and wanting to do things on the up and up..maybe AM became a lawyer like his grandfather in the missing years...and Amanda could play both sides against the other.  But also they could have brought someone like Kyle Sampson back to rival Phillip and the Spaulding (maybe Amanda married him) but then, of course there would be ANOTHER man horning after long in the tooth Reva!
    • Those descriptions of Mary Carney-- from Michael Levin --were from a magazine article in the early 1980's. In the book, he did say all three Mary replacements were bad.  
    • ^^ KKL always looks fabulous.  

      Please register in order to view this content

    • Sometimes you don't have friends as much as you have family. I'm trying to remember if Dylan really had a guy  friend. He and Mindy finally became friends after a rough introduction, and he interacts with Hart#1 and A-M#1, but I'm not sure they're really "friends". Maybe David. Whereas with Bridget, because there aren't a lot of Reardons around, gets friends like Kat and David.
    •   Well at least KKL looks fabulous. https://wornontv.net/511536/

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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