Jump to content

AMC: The Prospect Park Era (old production thread)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

The claim for awhile has been that oh, if only ABC had kept the rights we'd have summer series or something for OLTL and AMC right now, with the existing team at GH shepherding that process. Yeah, that's a nice thought, but first of all I'll believe that when I see it, and secondly, as things stand at GH - and just in general, really - I would never want one unilateral voice stamped on all of these shows, no matter who it was, especially now when that GH team is not at all what it once was. It's not healthy for soaps, it's not the future of soaps to have them all go back to the same network which cancelled them and then have them churned out by the same old hacks, and by that I mean a lot of different people who keep floating around daytime, including Jean Passanante, etc. She may be a great breakdown person but as HW she has always stunk on toast.

And the fact is ABC has no real loyalty to the soap opera anymore. None. They are biding their time. It doesn't matter which executive is in place giving happy talk, the bottom line is that they want to push that cost out the door. And they can't entirely be blamed for that. I don't mind ABC working with the soaps in the future, but licensing them out to people who actually give a [!@#$%^&*] (PP or otherwise), who are outside the existing soap bubble and want to do something new with the product seems like the way to ensure something of quality again, something contemporary. By contrast, watching the soap press cheerlead for ABC to take back the rights under lock and key - or potentially push out future product produced by the same old team that is already busy with one soap opera - seems like self-immolation to me. But again, it's what they know and are comfortable with. And yeah, most of it has to do with OLTL and that team, which is silly because I know for a fact that some of those loudest voices hadn't watched that show for even a decade. Teams come and go, and Ron and Frank are not without their skills but the show is the more important thing. And these shows are not going to be serviced by having a couple guys spread out across two or three different shows when they're barely keeping their heads above water at GH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do to. They realized that you can be more successful by staying true to the core of the soaps by telling compelling character-driven stories composed of characters that are believable.

They never would have allowed characters like Jane and Heather to fly yet they are the most popular. They also wouldn't have brought in those vets from the past and give them REAL storylines because they werent in the target demo's yet the fans responded really well.

That said, I doubt they will produce them but I do think they will gain exclusive broadcasting rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I should too. And you're right--much of the reaction I read is either "Arrgh they should have left me with the network finales which I was more than happy with!!" (As if they were FORCED to watch these things.) Or else "Good, now ABCDaytime which, due to GH being SOOO fabulous right now, now loves soaps, can bring them back!!" ummmm

Nope. Not a single chance in hell. If they really did, it actually would have been relatively cheap for ABC to simply get PP to continue, and pay to air them as an hour block--cheaper than doing it themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Help me out here. Is there some change in the way ABC is treating GH to make people think that? Are they advertising GH more? Are they doing something on the ABC website or something? I know that they had half the cast of the show on The Chew but that's nothing new. They've always cross promoted because it doesn't cost them anything. Has ABC given some indication that they have a renewed commitment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I actually do.

  1. They explored Loving/The City/RH. not saying they are bribing those back but it could be a sign of a renewed interest.
  2. They are actually bragging about ratings again.
  3. They held a 50 hour marathon on SoapNet
  4. They had GH on the talk show circuit for the 50th anniversary
  5. They actually did a prime time special for GH (the Katie Couric thing. I think it was 20/20.)
  6. Even though Nurses Ball and the return of Several GH vets including Bobbie and Leslie were not exactly successful it still happened.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The new head exec or whoever, who I think replaced Frons, is a woman who's been very complimentary and supportive of GH and its place in the line-up, at least publicly. She's also gone out of her way to court the soap press and make them feel important.

I do believe she is a fan of GH and watched the show when she was younger, as she's said. But ABCD's bottom line is still their bottom line, and ABC wants out of soaps. They're praising it now because they have nothing ready to take it out yet; their commitment, IMO, is no different than before. They might have potentially resurrected AMC and OLTL on a short-term basis, sure, if they have poor summer programming options - I was hearing that even before PP ever came back from the dead - but the prescription, namely summer series with the existing GH team supposedly helping to mastermind that resurgence, just sounded to me like even more of an cheapo assembly line than before. And again, any talent you have in that team is going to be extraordinarily diluted if it's spread across all that work for three shows, even if they're only consulting or whatever, especially considering that their GH is not exactly a flawless masterwork. It's just not a way to service or modernize soaps for the next generation.

And what's more, there's so many stories, actors, moments and nuances from the new AMC and OLTL that would never have made it past ABC or that team onto TV. I'm thinking of actors like Eric Nelsen, or the depth in the material given to Kelley Missal, or Erika Slezak and Jerry verDorn sans their kids, or a black leading male, or Debbi Morgan and the abortion story. Or the fact that AMC frontburnered Julia Barr, Jill Larson and Michael Nader. That's why I think it's a much forward-thinking idea for ABC, if it wants to air the shows in any available slots, to simply keep licensing them out. The talent well is dry at ABCD. Or when it's not, it's all the same folks. The handful of relative new blood are all career GH staff under Ron and Frank, and they've got a reliable gig there (for now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

No. But GH ratings are UP! (barely.) And The Revolution was canceled! (a year ago.) And GH is now in a new GOLDEN AGE! (...)

I admit this isn't great news by any stretch, but if they were waiting to make an announcement--pro or con, they would NOT, when asked to comment in advance, say anything but no comment. Did they also not deny that AMC wasn't scrapped?

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 read that, but my interpretation was that she is uncredited because it is in a non-production capacity.  In others words, she's not secretly producing, as some had speculated prior to the confirmation.  I assume we agree on this?
    • Errol already confirmed she is back at Y&R and in a non-producing role; this alludes to she is not credited for the role she has.
    • I don't think Lisa served a purpose after the serial killer storyline. The writers never gave her anything to do but be Vicky's nemesis. Joanna Going deserved better. Another example of a character taking over the show and then the writers not having a longterm plan for the character.  Exhibit B: Sally Spencer. Such a missed opportunity. It really angers me how they misused her. She could sing and act and they just threw her away in that sexist nonsense storyline. Once the story was over, they wrote her off. The McKinnons should have lasted for years. I will give the show credit for how they introduced Sandra Ferguson as Amanda. I thought it was expertly done. She comes in and she immediately connected to RKK's Sam. She has chemistry with Matthew and she has realistic conversations with MAc and Rachel. That's how it is done. 
    • Great points, and it has not completely vanished. Leslie on Beyond the Gates fits the trope (she's still not over that Ted lovin' two decades later), though I will say there does seem to be an effort to make her more complex.
    • I understand why people speculate, but I have to say it doesn’t sound very plausible that Jill Farren Phelps would be working at Y&R in any uncredited role. CBS daytime shows are tightly bound by union contracts and corporate oversight, and that kind of informal arrangement would be a major liability in 2025. Before the mergers of SAG-AFTRA and the two WGA branches, it may have been easier to hire someone quietly or off the books. But those days are behind us. With digital payroll, tighter pension tracking, and increased scrutiny from legal and compliance departments, it’s just not the kind of thing anyone can get away with anymore. Most union members, especially producers nearing retirement, would not risk their eligibility or benefits to take an uncredited role. The Producers Guild of America is also very clear about crediting. To even receive the PGA mark, a producer has to be verified through a formal review process. According to their credit certification guidelines (source), "only individuals who performed a majority of the producing functions on a motion picture or television production" are eligible for credit, and those credits must be official and recorded. If someone is functioning in that capacity, they are not supposed to be uncredited. Studios that are union signatories, like CBS and Sony, know better than to skirt those rules. If anyone has a legitimate, primary source confirming that CBS is hiring someone like Phelps in an uncredited production role, I’d honestly be curious to read it. But without that, this just feels like rumor—not reality.
    • I keep thinking about the persistent trend of eroticizing mental illness on Guiding Light. Sonni and Annie were never more compelling, or more attractive to the show, than when they were manic. It played into a recurring theme: strong women undone by their unhinged reaction to sex. The writers were likely inspired by Basic Instinct and the broader wave of neo-noir films in the late '80s and early '90s, where female sexuality was often equated with instability. The result was a crude portrayal, not just of mental illness, but of womanhood itself. Both Sonni and Annie were introduced as sharp, capable women, brought in specifically as formidable antagonists to Reva. They were logical and composed, standing in contrast to Reva’s emotional volatility. That difference made them threatening, but not especially “sexy”—until desire became their undoing. In a very male fantasy, their strength unraveled the moment they slept with Joshua. As soon as they got a taste of Lewis lovin’, they spiraled into scheming lunatics, willing to torch everything to hold on to him. It was part of a larger trend in the culture. Fatal Attraction, Single White Female, and The Hand That Rocks the Cradle all traded on the idea that female desire was dangerous, barely held in check, and always teetering on the edge of madness. Looking back, it's a pretty grim trope. And while it's not completely vanished, I'm grateful we don't see it quite as often today.
    • Elements of it were silly, but it was a small price to pay to get Zas back. I should say there's a difference between in town and out of town returns. It's understandable for Roger to skulk around town in a bad wig and clown suit when he's in Springfield and running the risk of bumping in to people he knows.  Taking us out of town to find someone always has a short shelf life. Then it usually becomes about another character knowing X is alive but determined to keep them out of Springfield. Like Alan discovering Amish Reva. I don't know how long it went on, but it was probably twice as long as necessary.
    • Elizabeth Dennehy complained on the Locher Room about how ridiculous so much of the writing was for Roger's return. She laughed at so much of Roger's antics and how it was hard for her to take them seriously. Probably another reason she was fired as she didn't play the game.  
    • Only thing I enjoyed was Abby / Olivia, etc., and the addiction storyline. Otherwise, I could do without the season.
    • Right? Vanessa had a ball gown for every occasion.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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