Jump to content

AMC: The Prospect Park Era (old production thread)


Recommended Posts

  • Members

It's nice to hear they'd planned to make the whole CorTech/David medical tech plotline go somewhere important. They had a lot of balls in the air and the show was really excellent. OLTL was also drawing some of the various plot strands together but it'd had a rockier road getting to where it was by the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I don't know for sure that's where they'd intended to go, but it made sense as Kendall was apparently sick - we saw her in a bed looking ill as Bianca gave her some medication - and David had a heart-related device he was testing. I mean, unless Oliver or someone else was going to develop a heart condition, Kendall was the most logical choice. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Damn, damn, damn that they couldn't get the funding to continue! I would've loved to have seen Miranda's paternity play out along with David & Cara fighting for custody of Oliver.

So was I.

ICAM! There were several intertwined stories going and for the first time in ages, it felt like classic AMC again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I will freely admit that there were a lot of things I didn't like about nuAMC, but I thought it had potential and that they were setting up some good stuff with David/Pete, David/Cara/Oliver/JR, Miranda/AJ, etc. I'm still disappointed it didn't work out better for PP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This is an interesting article in the NYT about the online shows being shut out of the Primetime Emmys. I had a similar feeling when the PP online soaps first debuted, that perhaps Daytime network dramas (who were less than welcoming) might have felt a bit threatened by the newcomers. Notice a similar pattern: won some Creative Emmys while totally shut out of the Main Emmy awards.

Of course PP did not exactly endear themselves or engender goodwill in how they did, pretty much everything. They did however, produce two good online shows.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/arts/television/explaining-status-quo-at-emmy-awards.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I got an email from Hulu with some updates to the site and one of the things they talked about was how great the response to their original programming has been. It makes me want to punch sad clowns because I think that the PP shows would be fairly successful by now if they'd just had the chance to build an audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think they were doing reasonably well on Hulu under the circumstances, or so I recall from the numbers. The real issue was not those numbers IMO or the audience, which was growing more and more, it was that PP simply could not sustain the production, audience or not. They had an insane expectation for how fast the shows would turn a profit.

You had these speedballing L.A. guys who had no concept of how to maintain a soap production schedule, who had bet the house (and a lot of other people's money) on these things taking off like they were Scandal overnight, and even Scandal didn't necessarily do that. And those shows are on network television. PP seemed to expect a massive return on investment immediately from the online soaps which would make them whole, so they neglected to pay just about anyone on time. They produced amazing-looking soaps (with real music, etc.) for a fraction of the network cost, but they did end up going overbudget to some extent. (And while I think real, good music is important to soaps, like all the really excellent EDM they played at Shelter - and I still remember them playing Lorde before she was really Lorde last summer for Pete and Celia in NYC - I still can't get over them using Sonny and Cher and the Rolling Stones on OLTL for thirty seconds for no good reason. Talk about a waste of money.) And while I think it is incredibly laudable that they apparently brought both(?) shows in for 30 million or close to it - which is somewhere in the neighborhood of GH's current budget - I don't think we have no idea how overbudget they really were or would have been if they had actually paid people.

You had a boutique Hollywood sensibility being applied to a daytime product, which was wonderful to see for the first time in however many years - because you had people coming in from outside who wanted to use real music, who wanted to do new stories and use new ideas that were outside the usual daytime curve, not unlike a Linda Gottlieb. But Linda Gottlieb had had the massive ABC apparatus and money behind her. These guys just had venture capital and a lot of gambling. So they put out great product, but on borrowed time and cash. It was a wonderful ethos, but the way they handled it in execution BTS was, IMO, a disgrace. They treated the people well, yes, they meant well, yes, and that's all very important. But the way they ended it, and they way they failed to pay just about anyone was beyond unacceptable.

The only way it could have worked out would have been for someone else - Disney, ABC, whoever - to come in and backstop it financially. And that was not going to happen, thanks to all the strife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I said the same thing in the Corday "net soaps" thread that I had hoped that they had planned ahead at least 2-3 years and prepared to take a loss and not earn money immediately. In theory, soaps moving to the web is the next logical step, just how they went from radio to tv all those years ago, especially now that people don't have the time to sit down daily at the same to watch them and in theory new viewers could easily catch up with old episodes if they wanted to. Sadly, I think because PP was running against a deadline to launch these before the rights went back to ABC, it all went tits up.

Perhaps we'll see the true potential of a web based soap once NBC dumps Days, then again, perhaps not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

PP screwed up in 3 ways as I see it

1) Allowing GH to use OLTL characters

2) Not hiring a pR firm that understood daytime dramas & its fan base

3) Paying a lisence fee. Every year they owed. 4 Mil for oLTL & 4.5 Mil for AMC and that was annually

I would have negoiated that ABC recieve profit participation and thats it. A certain percentage

By doing the lisence fees, PP was shooting themselves having to PAY ABC Money and being in the whhole. They could have used that money to continue production

Plus maybe if ABC were only paid a percentage they would have been more willing to work with PP snce that way the shws being a success would have meant more dollars in ABC's pockets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

How does this show get better every time I watch it? How?

I am back at the tail end of Pete and Celia's New York trip, which plays a lot better now knowing they leveled off on the story later on (Jordan Lane Price also is a lot better in smaller doses, with the vets and Brooke Newton to play off of). I wish we could've gotten a straight answer on the Celia SL. I know they cut a lot of the original material, where Billy Clyde was apparently revealed to be her father, presumably for rewrites. I had found some of the cutting with her and Dimitri to be a little too convenient, and began to suspect she was related to Gillian or the Maricks, which would have been a nice swerve - I believe Agnes was always very fond of Gillian.

I remember that I had originally mistook the picture in Celia's locket for an ancient picture of Francesca James, but it apparently wasn't her. I'd like to believe they would have eventually tied Evelyn back to Kitty and Kelly, though.

I know Jared Kaplan used to lurk on the board and I was very tempted to bug him on plot details for these shows a while back. But I'm not a big bugger.

(And yes, I am trying to update my sig.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

There are two story bibles I would kill to get at: Lisa Connor and Agnes' bible for "season 2" of AMC Online (I'm just going to assume Chip Hayes sat by himself in the corner watching old eps of Melrose Place while LC and Aggie worked) and Kay Alden's bible for AMC in 2007.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I believe Frons turned her down. She made no secret of the fact that she wanted the HW spot in a speech she gave in early May 2007. A few weeks later Esensten & Brown were named HW.

All she has said about her bible (as far as I know) is that she felt the show had had way too many "events" (kidnappings, murders, stabbings etc etc) such that they had no impact anymore. So she wrote a bible that included none of those things and which repositioned the canvas so that it was ready to take off come November sweeps 2007.

Meanwhile Esensten & Brown submitted their "Crash" story projection, with a car going off a cliff, a deaf baby, a premature birth, psychopath Richie etc.

With Frons making the decision Alden's approach never stood a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not convinced there were any bibles whatsoever.

I was initially down on Chip Hayes given some of his background on my Spelling soaps when he started, but was later informed that he was actually apparently one of the more solid writers on AMC in the 2000s. Same with Jessica Klein - they came from a turbulent era in the Spelling soaps, but they took the good with the bad in those days, like most soap writers, and I think I was more quick to judge due to what Chuck Pratt had done to AMC. As it happened, I noticed no major difference once each took over at AMC and OLTL.

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

    • OMG! Yes!! Best of the episode and double so after my rewatch. She got Anita ALL...THE...WAY...TOGETHER. I can't wait to get caught up and see Sharon.   Now you.  re: Samantha.   Same. I was so annoyed with Month 2 for stalling on Martin's Secret, but in hindsight...that was perfect because I got used to their characters and their lives so NOW I feel so much more invested when the Secret comes out. And how it's been done as a slow burn during May Sweeps with Bill toying with them keeps Bill in villain mode while giving organic conflict for Martin and Smitty due to what's been written for them building up to this month. Bonus...it's clear the actors are soooo much more comfortable with each other.    The one thing that I looove about Vernon is that while that is very much true what you said...when need be...he shows very brief moments of an edge. CHOOSE SILENCE...like BE STILL...lives rent free in my head. lol. I can't wait to use that on someone. 
    • The last thing I want on a new soap -- or on any soap -- is an actor thinking she's a kid in a candy store. I know Cady has plenty of fans, but I'm just not fond at all of all these accents (and accent changes) and tics. The show should INSIST she settle on a consistent character for Pamela -- now. The idea that these established soap actors get to play around like it's a game is bizarre. I don't like what she's doing at all, and the fact that I can't tell you what she's doing makes it even worse.   The hour does fly by, and I do enjoy the show. I'm no longer on a high with the show and screaming "I love this show!" though. That's not a bad thing. We can't forget we're still in the first 6 months and every soap had to deal with first-year struggles and changes. I'm willing to give GATES time on all of it. In the meantime, though, I have to call out the stuff that isn't working. Yo're exactly right about the editing. Those "sudden drop offs to commercial"? I hate them. I think they're awful and poorly executed in all phases -- the timing, the music, the fade itself. I have no idea what they're doing. I've said this before: I think it's intentional. It's not just one director, and it's clearly a production choice. I think they want to be "the different soap." Sorry, this ain't the place to do that. They have not only ruined scene endings galore with these fades, but they have ruined cliffhangers. Ending a show with something dramatic followed by an "Oh, well" fade makes no sense to me.
    • I'll say this much...for the most part...soaps WERE giving this Sweeps...LOL. I'm looking at you, BTG, DAYS, and YES GH.

      Please register in order to view this content

          But knowing that, I really want to know...especially since I'm behind on at least two of those soaps lol due to work and faulty technology...how would you all grade May Sweeps this time?   A     B     C     D     F       To paraphrase Dani Dupree...the hottest level of Hades...?   How did you like Sweeps?    
    • 5-26   My system went down, but thankfully is back up. It's a shame that if I missed something, I just don't care. So May Sleeps indeed. smh.    That said...I found this episode intriguing. Yeah, it had a LOT of the characters that I didn't care about. And I know @slick jones probably glared seeing his man around that girl,

      Please register in order to view this content

       but I will give credit where it's due.    It must be a sign there is about to FINALLY be story movement when we start to get artistic camera angles again...something that has been absent for a while. The overhead sweeping into the scene at the start of the episode? LOVE. Good to see Ed Scott is still around somewhere. And I loved what Phyllis had on and Amanda in the red. Claire continued to have her own style and Holden continued to look hot. And I continue to be in awe that the designer is trying her darnest to get Kyle from looking so stuffy but still keep him suited.    Everything Audra continued to intrigue. And I continue to feel that Kyle is totally going to fall into her trap because he is much too cocky. Holden is a great wild card, but I don't like him hinting that perhaps Audra actually have feelings for Kyle. THAT boat has sailed and would have been better used when Summer was around. Besides I love Audra with Nate.   Phyllis vs Sally will always be awesome. And they were both giving great lines.    I could care less for Billy. 
    • invitations received during May 30 US (May 29 CDN) episode

      Please register in order to view this content

      You are cordially invited to join ARISTOTLE  DUMAS for an extended stay at his summer home in NICE, FRANCE Departure June 13, 2025 Travel details to follow
    • -- I agree that the vibes are there, but I can also make the case that it's a pale imitation. That Neil Winters Lounge is already a pretty classy place, but the decor make it look tackier. Those Happy Birthday signs are tragic in design and color. The tablecloths look like they've been chosen by Helen Keller. Where is Claire? We hear stupid reasons for her lateness, but we all know it's because this show is too cheap to pay for too many actors in any one episode. It makes NO sense that Victoria has that toast to Nikki without Claire's presence. And where is Cole? Off coughing somewhere? -- The rest of the show was watching people open their black invitations from Alexander Dumas -- for a party on June 13...TWO WEEKS AWAY. So we got through the entire sweeps and still no Dumas? The big sweeps reveal is a party in France in 2 weeks??? Why anyone thinks this is good soap is beyond me.  
    • Chandler Massey smirked in EVERY scene in which he appeared. He's not a good actor. He cannot get into character, ever, and plays every scene like he's Chandler running into an old friend on the street. I hate it because actors should take their work seriously and respect it and everyone around them.   It's all so real, to the point where there's no sense trying to separate Drake from his character. I snarked a lot over the years about Drake Hogestyn's acting -- very arch, lots of tics, over-the-top at times -- but I also think he was a great soap star. There was so much humanity in everything he did, and he was always a comforting and stabilizing force on screen. Flashbacks on soaps are almost always special and fun, but does anyone come across as more loving and filled with humanity than John? I don't think so. DAYS has suffered a lot of loss in the past few years. For me, this one hits the hardest.
    • “I’m not a lifelong soap fan, but I sure am now,” Wolf tells PEOPLE about creating the documentary Soaps, which includes deep dives into the biggest and most successful soap operas in the industry, with a strong focus on The Bold and the Beautiful. “It reflects, in a broader way, the cultural significance of soap operas and the incredible task involved in bringing these stories to the screen every day.”
    • I have this for the 4th act on 11/9/88, which per my files, is the first time John and Stefano are in a scene together: Limo (Roman, Diana, Stefano, Milo) Then their second time together is 11/17/88 in the second-to-last act: ON LOCATION: Beach & Cliff (Diana, Roman, Stefano) I'd have to check the 2016 logs, so I don't know who shares scenes as easily in this year, but these are the last 4 episodes that John and Stefano were both in together: 1/8/16, 1/11/16, 3/1/16, 3/2/16.
    • I'm going to respond to you about this show. I've been accused of hating on it for some reason or another. But as a 53-year-old black man I do not hate this show at all. It heavily represents people like me, but I want it to be treated well and not just pushed with half-assedness, which is what I feel has happened on several occasions so far. Bad editing, bad cliffhangers, or no cliffhangers at all, disappearing characters with dropped storylines, etc. I can understand shows no longer wanting certain characters or  storylines, but why the "Judy Winslow" effect? I'm really finding it weird that Jacob doesn't mention his father or his detective partner. Jacob was smack dab in the middle of them both.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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