Members DRW50 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 I can see why people wouldn't be happy about the news. They've already said goodbye, mentally or emotionally, to these shows, and now it's all back again, in some strange form. I guess if I had more of an emotional attachment to the shows I might have more mixed feelings too, or think this was a bad idea. I mostly just can't see this as bad because I think it's actually a good thing if the shows aren't like what they were. What they were is what got them cancelled. I just wish someone had done this with GL or ATWT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 They kinda were but it wasn't as severe--although by 1959 radio programming had completely given way to TV, and I think Irna and many others realized that which is why they attempted (failed) experiments with TV soaps as far back as the mid 40s, when barely anyone watched TV. (The last four, I believe, radio soaps, including the Guiding Light spin off Right to Happiness aired on the same day in 1959). And no, GL would have the same episode--with minor changes (less of the announcer obviously, etc) both shown live. There are great stories about the cast I believe doing the TV version first and then having a quick break and rushing to a different studio to do the radio version (I may have gotten the order of which was performed first wrong). However, confusingly, other radio/tv soap cross overs DID have often completely different stories going on at the same time. GL actually may hvae been the exception there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 They definitely deserved a chance as well. I think that's a good point. Despite my optimism on here, a friend of mine who is a new soap fan was ecstatic with the news and a bit shocked that I was a bit less so, at least until I hear full concrete details--whereas on the other hand, if I had heard rumblings of this from the get go, I may have been more so. I admit, when some people suggested it could live on in another venue, Susan Lucci, people on here, I just kinda roilled my eyes. I also wonder how immediate plans are for this--if there's a big break, they stand to lose more viewers. It is in one way reassuring that ABC seems to have some vested interest in this--maybe they WILL advertise (online or evenduring the show) that the show is continuing this way, and not pull what the WB did when Buffy moved to the UPN and try their hardest to make fans think it was dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marceline Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 Then allow me to clarify as well. To me, your comment seemed to be condemning Agnes for selling her shows (which made her money) and not foreseeing the clusterfuck they would become. I don't believe that's fair. You and I are not going to agree what makes for kickass woman, a good writer or a decent soap. Fine. Different strokes. But to say "if Agnes hadn't sold the shows we wouldn't be here now" is ridiculous. How far back into the past do you want to go to find the butterfly who flapped its wings and caused this hurricane? I don't think Agnes is a kickass woman because she "fought for the integrity of her shows." Integrity of the shows is a subjective concept that soap "purists" like to smack each other with. You say you're talking about business but if you were, you wouldn't be ranting about Erica Kane. Frankly your comment seemed more about the business aspect before you "clarified" it. That's fine because you're apparently an artist. However, Agnes Nixon is still working her business at 90. Any artist should be so lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LeClerc Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 This is why I can't bring myself to get engaged in all this. If this venture ever does come to pass it most likely won't be available here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 In this case though, if ABC stands to (marginally) profit from it, hy wouldn't they allow the talent to move over? OF course this is ABC we're talking about... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members SFK Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 If this thing really takes off, who knows what old titles might get dusted off to make a buck, if in name only... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 Surely we'll find ways around it? (What would be cool, but never happen, is if one of the Canadian affiliates picked it up somehow--I know they were rumoured to be more upset than many of the American ones to lose the soaps, which get better demos here). Of course I'd feel bad NOT paying (within reasonable prices) for something like this, more so than if I steal a download of an HBO show I missed, just cuz I'd want it to have a financial chance, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 If only it could happen. I would pay money to see Lucinda Walsh unleashed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan Chamberlain Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 You would think so. But, who knows. He might go his own way. I think he should have been picked up for sitcom work years ago. The man's a mother *shut yo mouth* enigma. But, here's to hoping for AMC's sake he does stay on and they do stay in L.A. OLTL going to L.A. would lose alot of actors too. But, it's a quality show most of the time anyways (when the teens aren't around) And, has more of a rounded cast. Without MEK. AMC would be farther down the toilet. Well, without him and Vincent Irizarry. "Get off me, you idiot!" Someone please make a GIF out of that. I cannot find the scene anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CouchTomato Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 I completely disagree. Slezak is just as key to drawing the OLTL audience. That's why TPTB always use her during sweeps. Right now, Lucci being frontburner on AMC doesn't seem to be a selling point but I agree, she's definitely AMC's "name." Both are must-haves IMO. Slezak already has said she would've moved with OLTL to LA if that had been necessary. If ABC/Disney sold the rights to Prospect Park, would ABCD have any say-so on anything to do with OLTL/AMC (casting, writing, production) after the sale? Doesn't this sale prevent blood-sucking scum like Frons and Sweeney from having any control over online "multi-platform" soaps? I would expect the Prospect Park execs to be in charge but I'm just guessing. I didn't see any mention of content or creative control being retained by ABCD. How long could PP's AMC and OLTL remain "cancer-free" if the original tumor that killed them wasn't removed completely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 I don't thinkit's fair either (I'm sure R Sinclair is rolling his eyes that I'm supporting Agnes). She has made it very clear, in that book whose title I'm not allowed to mention, in her 3 hour youtube interview, and in a more recent one, the reasons she did sell her shows. Her husband always did the business stuff and he found it hard going, she never was very good at it, and she was always careful to sell them when she felt they were in a great place. Sure, hindsight is 20/20 and I bet she regrets this now, but... AMC certainly had many very good years after she sold it. It's telling that she never did sell Loving/The City, precisely I think because it never did feel like it was in a "safe" spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 I wonder about this too. If it were me, I would start filming some material to air right after the finales. How about a day or two after? Bring back old favorites who may not be in the finale, or only appear briefly. What if Nina and Bobby and her other kid and Sam appear briefly in the finale, and then they have a heavy role in the first episode of the websoap. Then over time, they could phase the established AMC characters in, as the actors are more available to film or contracts are settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryan Chamberlain Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 Same here! Luciiiiiiinda! Come back! The look on her face is priceless here. It's like she's saying. "Ya damn right I'll be back!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Carolyn1980 Posted July 7, 2011 Members Share Posted July 7, 2011 This is an interesting development. I do think it's not going to be as "pared down" as some here are making it out to be. The ultimate goal is to have all TV's capable of streaming HD-quality shows through them, much like you can do with Netflix compatible devices now. In fact, Netflix actually out-bid every other broadcast and cable network for a full season (26 episodes, in this instance) of a David Fincher-directed, Kevin Spacey-starring show called "House of Cards." It was a hot property, and yet it will only be available online, or streamed to your TV through the internet. (Prospect Park could even make deals with cable/satellite systems to offer through OnDemand, who knows). So this is not necessarily a death sentence like when Passions limped along on DirectTV. It's about a whole reinvention and transformation of how we receive TV shows. The broadcast model is dying, and these two saved soaps may very well lead the charge for the future. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.