Jump to content
Email System Update

HOLIDAY MIRACLE: Prospect Park Back On Track To Revive AMC and OLTL

Marco Dane

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
EricMontreal22 Contributor

EricMontreal22

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Ha, Lysistrata was one of the few things from Rayfield/Cascio I liked! But I liked Carmen too--she disappeared as soon as Pratt came in (I think she was last seen working at Casa Chandler and agreeing to a date with Jack).

But yeah AMC the past ten--I guess fifteen year had a lot of quirky characters who were never played out. I dunno if it was someones half-hearted to bring back more quirky or different characters like AMC was known for, and then someone else just gave up, or what.I think OLTL had it's share of similar situations though (I can't speak for many other soaps).

I could have seen that--though it may have led to some lame story about Opal thinking she was a voodoo priestess (then again, Pratt practically made her one with her visions of blood pouring out of windows, etc, anyway).

The first half of that episode looks like someone told AMC to have more sex scenes--one between Tad and Liza and Pierce and Brooke within minutes of each other?

Offence TAKEN! :P Seriously, I agree (although I'm not sure if trailer trash Opal would have been all that picky--especially if she was still drinking), it's a weird case of retconning where Larsen's Opalmade it work, but then you had to forget the history of the character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
Khan Grand Master

Khan

Posted
  • Members
Posted

When it came to quirky characters, AMC's writers had two things working against them: the fact that quirky characters are rarely portrayed by sexy and attractive actors, and the fact that quirky characters hardly ever make an electrifying first impression. If an actor didn't look like Cameron Mathison or Rebecca Budig, or if they didn't spark major talk on message boards and such, they were gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
EricMontreal22 Contributor

EricMontreal22

Posted
  • Members
Posted

Yeah, I kinda could too... Which was my point.

Watching that 1996 episode, after watching several 1994 episodes, one other thing that's evident is--for whatever reason, the tone of the show is way more all over the map in 1996. From scene to scene, it's like a different show (one thing Schemering claimed some hated about AMC in the 70s and 80s, so maybe that in a way is more true to how the show was--albeit with more MTV editing like when Janet thinks of seeing the Pierce sex and looks at the axe), whereas the late McTavish/Behr era in '94 was, if anything, a bit too similar in tone from scene to scene but feels a bit more coherent.

I completely forgot about that!

Larsen just said on FB she's about to release a video message... maybe someone should ask her...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Members
allmc2008 Rising Star

allmc2008

Posted
  • Members
Posted

I hate watching soapnet these days for reasons related to your post. For example, I hate how they have this "Peck-Tackular" campaign going. I know during the 80s and before they never hired Model-turned-actor types but hired real actors. This may be an unpopular opinion but I don't think the current soaps fit that stupid soapnet campaign unless each one followed Franklin and Ronald's OLTL idea and have male characters only appear in speedos (which I don't see on the remaining 4 soaps).

So the point I am trying to make is....

Why does SoapNet generalize all soaps and believe they are all fluff and have the same theme. Even though they are nothing compared to there former selves they are all still pretty unique!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • 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

  I accept