Jump to content

Terraces "A Vertical Peyton Place"


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Anyone heard of this? Apparently it was meant to be the pilot for a primetime soap? It almost looks inspired by the hit, scandalous Aussie 70s soap Number 96, but I know that was remade, and a flop in the US in 1980.

(Go to the one minute mark, although there is a cute promo for theflop variety comedy show 3 Girls 3 with Debbie Allen, Ellen Foley and Mimi Kennedy).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=uTIQriI0Owc&NR=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 6
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

It's great to read your post, I didn't know if you still posted here.

"First time on TV" makes me wonder if this was some cheapie film or a TV movie.

"Kind of a vertical Peyton Place" is an awful tag.

I'd never heard of 3 Girls 3. NBC was trying a lot of off the track stuff at this time...unfortunately none of it worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It's on Netflix. I've been sitting in my queue for a while now, so I might watch it soon now that I've seen the promo for it.

This is what Netflix says:

It seems to me to be sorta like a soapy dramatic version of Three's Company (not in premise but in setting), and I'm totally down with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

To quote Sondheim, I'm still here--don't worry Carl, it'll take more to get rid of me ;) Just been very boring the past couple of weeks.

Thanks everyone. It does look obviously like a primetime pilot. Having a gay lead role would still be pretty groundbreaking, wouldn't it? And it is a terrible tagline though not an awful concept.

3 Girls 3 lasted four episodes--I was talking to a theatre fan who was going on about how much he loved Ellen Foley (it came up a round about way--how pre Bernadette Peters she was the original Witch in Into the Woods when it had its pre-Broadway workshop in San Diego and he got to meet her) and he mentioned how much he loved 3 Girls 3 as a teen. It actually doesn't look awful, albeit an odd mix of serious and comedy--there are a few skits online--good cast anyway: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HPclyh2AuE

Thanks! Great site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I watched it last night and yes, this was very clearly inspired by "Number 96." The whacky older couple, the sex-starved plain Jane, the sophisticated career woman, the sexpot, the well-liked gay. All of these characters were on Number 96.

Generally, though, I liked it. The only other thing I've ever seen Kit McDonough in is the first episode of Three's Company, where her character was supposed to be annoying as hell. I didn't realize that that was just her personality shining through, because she was annoying as hell here, too. LMAO at her sleeping with her ex-roommate's husband, though. Skank. The storyline, if you could even call it that, with the old man being upset about the new fashions in his store was lame, IMO. What exactly was the story there? He let his rage at the new clothes get the best of him, and it led to the death of his dog? Stupid. I liked that the gay storyline had a happy ending, but it was kind of boring, and I thought it was over-the-top to have the guy attempt suicide because Cecil Colby was going to leave him. Julie Newmar should have had tons more to do, because her character was easily the most entertaining.

This should have been a mini-series, to be honest. I feel like they could have developed the stories much better that way and given the whole cast more to do.

Oh, and the Peyton Place comparison makes no sense to me at all. First, the "vertical" aspect is irrelevant since all the characters live on the same floor, and second, this wasn't very Peyton Place at all. They should have just called it Number 96 US, to be honest. Even the theme music was obviously based on the Number 96 theme.

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

    • If the show was interested in tying in one of the three prime time specials in the 90s, the smarter choice probably would have been Night Sins from 1993. Night Sins was the ushering in of Titan Publishing, the first mentions of Kate Roberts coming in to run it, plus it had involved Jack retyping a manuscript he had found in the new house he and Jen moved into... which ended up being a thinly veiled story written by Kate about her dalliance with Bill Horton that produced Lucas. However, I doubt the writers were even thinking about the prime time episodes when deciding to name the manuscript One Stormy Night.  I also don't see Stephanie being the one that would be writing it.  The current actress playing Stephanie seems to play a more passive version of Stephanie vs the previous takes by Shayna and Shelley..imho. Javi is cute... much too good for Leo.  He can do so much better.
    • I might've gone after someone like Jed Allan, or even Donald May. Though they're very different.
    • Same.   Looking forward to seeing what I missed later.
    • Question for all: Who would have made a good Mike recast after Stewart departed?
    • I think they did. Again, it is not an either/or proposition for most of the audience so far. Most don't feel the need to stan one or reject the other.
    • KKL on Bold Live on May 1st. Details here  
    • I do wonder if the show realized that fans would take to Silk Press and Eva as much as we have?    To me, I think the core four was mostly used to get eyes on the show since all four were familiar performers in both daytime and primetime.   Of the four, I think Nicole is used most effectively where it doesn't look as though she's hogging airtime.  She works as a lead and as a talk to. Anita has been the most under utilized of the four, but I do have a feeling that might be changing once the Ted/Nicole/Eva/Silk Press Story goes back to support status. Of the four, I think Dani has been over-used.. but I do still see potential for the character.  I know some people think she's the modern day Erica Kane, but I don't see that.  Erica was a Have Not that became a Have while Dani is a Have by birth and has done nothing to have earned being a Have. Good cliffhanger.
    • LOL now this sells it for me!  I can't wait to watch later tonight!
    • I think this is a great observation.  I do wonder if some of that was down to how Nixon had started writing story and plot outlines.  By this point (maybe even by the mid 70s) many have discussed how she *didn't* write detailed story outlines anymore--the focus more was on a mood or theme and ABC simply allowed that because they trusted her at this stage (in her "memoir" I think even Megan McTavish talks about Nixon's writing in this way in the 90s and she basically seems to admit that it worked for Nixon.  But if Nixon wasn't in charge of the daily execution of these ideas...)
    • Ooooooo that was a soap reveal!!!   And we even got a brief Kat vs Eva fight.   OOoooo cliffhanger!!! Oh, yeah, I remember they had a cover story, but I find it interesting that it was just mentioned again today. I wonder could it be foreshadowing another twist coming up. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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