*sigh* not this again. PP is as much at faut as well. They are not as innocent as some want to make them out to be. They let ABC use the characters, they should have put a time limit on it. They let ABC put these actors on a long term contract, They should have stepped up and said "no wait, not long term, maybe 6 months and go from there"

I was reading something the other day where one of the actors who signed on the first time said they never thought PP would revive these shows. That speaks volumes, if the actors who signed on had given up hope, then why should ABC be expected to be mind readers and think PP would get their asses in gear.

The Actors are on the creative side of things for the most part. There job is to ACT. Granted, you have actresses like Cady and Robin who know A LOT about soaps. Regardless, few actors are a part of the business side of the production.

You post contradicts itself. You say nobody expected PP to revive these shows, so why would ABC have considered them when negotiating the contracts? I think it's pretty obvious that ABC didn't expect this to ever happen, so they did their own thing, which is fine. However, when PP *did* make it happen it was obviously going to be a fight. I personally don't think either are at fault. It's a unique situation that nobody predicted. I understand why GH wants to keep the characters and I understand why PP wants them, but only to an extent. I think PP should've gone into it wanting guest appearances and nothing more. These roles are valuable because of the proven popularity of the actors who play them. By trying to force the actors to do the PP shows, it probably soured what interest they may have had in it. I don't think these characters are make or break for the new show either. They need smaller casts and there are SO MANY legacy characters and types of new characters that could serve the same purpose on a full-time basis.

hate PP, what they are doing to the actors is awful

These actors get to sit home for a little while and collect a check. At my workplace those are called "vacation days." They get to sleep in, watch House of Cards on Netflix and maybe fix that leaky faucet or try a new restaurant. Oh the humanity.

By trying to force the actors to do the PP shows, it probably soured what interest they may have had in it. I don't think these characters are make or break for the new show either. They need smaller casts and there are SO MANY legacy characters and types of new characters that could serve the same purpose on a full-time basis.

I don't see anybody being "forced." PP took back their property. The actors can join the productions or not. The choice is theirs.

Edited February 9, 201312 yr by marceline

PP wants the actors as well, which they've made clear. However, they never negotiated with the actors. They said they wanted tgem full time or ABC couldn't use the characters which is kinda like forcing the actors to do OLTL or possibly lose their jobd.

PP wants the actors as well, which they've made clear. However, they never negotiated with the actors. They said they wanted tgem full time or ABC couldn't use the characters which is kinda like forcing the actors to do OLTL or possibly lose their jobd.

Then I guess they'll have to start auditioning for other jobs. Like every other actor in the business.

That isn't the point though. On their end they have contracts and they live across country. Nobody predicted this would happen which is why I don't think ABC or PP is at fault. However, I do think both sides are handling it poorly with their initial all or nothing stance.

That isn't the point though. On their end they have contracts and they live across country.

Help me out here. Since they have contracts these actors still get paid whether they appear or not, correct?

I will attempt to put this blame game to rest once and for all!

 

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hFWngq2L99o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Help me out here. Since they have contracts these actors still get paid whether they appear or not, correct?

For now, but they could be dropped at the end of their contract cycle. I still stand by my opinion that the best thing for both shows would be to figure out what the actors want and go from there. Todd, for example, is useless as a recast. It's easier to recast Starr and John, but since people would know there was a possibility the actors they loved could've continued in the roles, the probably wouldn't be well received.

Any actor on a soap can be dropped every 13 weeks and soap actors know this. I hope they come to a compromise and llet them do both shows

I will attempt to put this blame game to rest once and for all!

Stand still Jonathan, because I'm about to hug you. Hard.

Then I'm going to slap you for putting that song in my head.

Edited February 9, 201312 yr by marceline

Stand still Jonathan, because I'm going to slap you for putting that song in my head.

I thought that's what this said when I scrolled by on my phone, LOL!

Has anyone bought/read the new AMC casting sides on Showfax for "Chelsea"? I don't have the heart to spend $7 on what probably will be another young character!

Has anyone bought/read the new AMC casting sides on Showfax for "Chelsea"? I don't have the heart to spend $7 on what probably will be another young character!

That's the Cassandra Foster recast

Thanks alexis! Hopefully they'll find a really good actress to represent the younger Hubbards, since it appears Frankie won't be there.