OLTL Shelved

[John]

ML did say he wasnt drinking the Kool aid I saw that tweett with my own eyes

[Vee]

I think Michael Logan is a more reputable journalist than a lot of the others. But I also think that, like a lot of the soap press, he has a comfort zone. And when he comes out and said "oh, I never drank the Kool-Aid" that implies that he never truly bothered with the shows, or to acknowledge their validity, to begin with. And I think that's bullshit. But it's something a lot of the soap press did - they only grudgingly accepted that AMC and especially OLTL would return stripped of the existing system and people they were comfortable with.

As for some stupid war, I think I can like and root for both shows.

[John]

Right Vee

It seems ML lost his credability after the 90's came to a close

[~bl~]

I don't think he is a member of that clique. That being said I can understand his skepticism. My issue with the lawsuit is they can take forever to go to civil court.

[John]

I bet this ends in settement or mediation which both would be final

[katie_9918]

They can sugarcoat it all they want.

AMC simply assembled a better BTS team than OLTL did.

Remember that OLTL was the show people were most looking forward to returning, had the better ratings leading up to the network finales (for very good reasons, as AMC was a HOT MESS and made NO improvements), and as far as I know was expected to perform much better online.

AMC defied those odds with writers who knew the show, knew what would work, and trimmed away some of the stuff that they found out didn't.

That Shelter bullcrap? Clint going completely bad again? Wasting both RH and TSJ?

OLTL has no one to blame but themselves for this setback. Not ABC, not PP. It was whoever was producing/writing this show who should be taking all the heat.

OLTL was the favored child going into the PP reboot.

[Winchester91]

Yeah, the first few OLTL episodes of PP were fantastic, but lost steam quickly. Too much Michelle, TnB having the same exact conversation in every episode (to be fair, I hated much of 2010 when Victor and Téa had repetitive scenes that led to nothing), Shelter crap I didn't care about. not enough Natalie and her boobies, and too much David Vickers.

Meanwhile, AMC started slow but kicked it up with Colby and her antics, Cassandra's abortion, the Jesse v. David v. Bible-throwin' Angie wars, and Miranda getting some screentime separate from AJ.





....and of course, Hunter (as if that even was a doubt ).

[Vee]

I liked Clint's meltdown, as I think did most people. I also liked the backdrop of Shelter - it was past time soaps had a legit club atmosphere, and a club that played actual club music - and the idea of the Triskelion story. But it took forever to develop - there was very little movement on it til the end of Season 1, which was a big mistake. You could do that on a show running four or five days a week for six months to a year, not one running two days for a couple months.

They also had Trevor for very little time, and then they sidelined Roger Howarth in that hotel room for way too long. And then character vignettes as opposed to story dominated the middle of the season. While that was refreshing, it also got too slow and at times, repetitious. Shelter was a concept you had to ease people into, not immerse them in constantly, but again they were facing budget issues in terms of sets and locales (see also: Jane's Addiction on AMC, but Jane's is not as intense an environment).

I think there are nuances to the problems, and I do think it was a very uneven show. But I don't think it was bad, either.

[KMan101]

Vee summed it up for (almost like always) me. I enjoyed OLTL right off the bat, moreso a bit than AMC, but like everyone else really, that shifted. AMC was definitely improving steadily and I think is in a very solid place right now.

OLTL is in the place ... well, it felt like. A hot mess for most of the season. It was uneven but not bad. Looking back they probably should have taken a few different directions. The young actors are good but they were on way too much. I personally could go quite a while without Dani or Matthew and I really really like them. I understand the restrictions for Roger and Trevor, but like with David Canary or Eden Riegel it's like they just threw them in and had no real plan. It's clear they all taped their episodes together, and were spread out, which, I'm sorry, unless done well enough, doesn't really work. Especially with the way these shows are running. The casts were small enough.

I thought Clint's metldown was fine. The show finally picked up a bit towards the end but it definitely lost momentum along the way and really didn't recover it.

That being said, I don't claim to know [!@#$%^&*] about lawsuits and I usually avoid these threads (it's always the same. Every thread.) but wanted to post something.

I feel so bad for the actors but the fact is, that's showbusiness. Shows come and go and while we aren't used to that really, with soaps ... it happens. I don't think the show's done personally but right now PP is reminding me of last time when they bailed and months later said something. Even though they said they are continuing with AMC.

I also agree a lot with Chris B. PP had a really shitty way of revealing what they were doing. IMO, they should have just had a plan from the get go. All this changing makes them look bad, regardless of this being a new venture. They're businessmen. If all of us can sit here and figure something out, I'm sure they could have. And looking back, they really haven't done [!@#$%^&*] to make me think they have one iota of a clue what they're doing (which I get, it's new, but at the same time ....)

And I think this needs to be said because I see it forgotten, IMO, if someone likes AMC or OLTL I don't see how that has anything to do with a person drinking the "kool-aid". I we're all bright enough to separate it. And why anyone cares what a reporter says? Michael Logan has LONG LONG LONG played favorites. I like some of his articles and interviews but his attitude towards some soaps is NOTHING new, IMO. Not saying he's wrong, OR right, so we'll see. TBH though, you all know how info in real life is passed along so why wouldn't any news for television be fraught with half-truths, maybes, ifs, or the story gets exaggerated one way or another.

However, I did notice SOD and TVGuide DID run articles in their magazine. Initially. I will be the first to say that I've commented several times on lack of ads. I noticed SO many TV ads to begin with and then I saw none. Same for magazine ads. PP failed in a lot of places. I support them because I appreciated what I saw of OLTL and AMC but frankly, they are going to really have to have a set game plan. Period. I'm tired of every month (hell it felt like every week!) there being this mess, everyone freaks out, and then a month later, it's fine.

Phew.

[John]

IMO I dont believe that it would have been a nightmare for @GeneralHospital and @OnelifetoLive to share characters. These shows have Co-ordanating producers for this reason. They handle all the scheduling and it would have been great to see these two bonded and even with AMC as well.

Jen Pepperman said someone high up at ABC doesnt like crossovers so this was killed. But this could have been a win win win for AMC OLTL and GH. I mean ABC/Disney stands to make good money from this deal with @Prospectpk. I don't the aversion to doing this. Business sense it makes perfect sense to me to share these characters.

Its time to stop the egos and do what is best for the shows

[ChitHappens]

Sharing the characters would have been a nightmare! Both parties had particular love interests for each character, and that was not going to work. Todd pledging his heart to Carly in PC and then doing the same to Blair in LV? Same with John and Starr. I refuse to believe there was some grand story in place where coordination would benefit both shows. PP just wanted to get their hands on the "actors" while they dictated what the characters would be doing on GH. Bad ideal all around, and recasts should have been the plan all along!

[ellabelle]

I agree with everything except the recast part. If PP had said, "sure, you keep them on your show, and we'll just cast new actors to play the same characters on our show," it would have been a huge mess. Todd is in PC with Carly, but then you flip on another show, and another guy with his name is living a different life in Llanview with Blair? How is that not confusing, especially to people who watch both shows? That never would have worked. If GH wanted the actors, they could have written new parts for them. Heck, they could have made the new characters remarkable similar to the old ones as a bit of a nod to the audience who watched OLTL as well.

It's clear with hindsight that sharing the characters was a bad idea. I'm guessing PP thought that this was a way to keep interest in OLTL alive while they tried to figure out how to resurrect the show, and I'm guessing GH/ABC were operating under the assumption that a reboot would never happen so they could do whatever they wanted with the characters. Whether ABC did anything that amounts to actual sabotage has yet to be proved, but refusing to turn over the shows' URLs and refusing to air advertising for which PP had already paid certainly looks suspicious to me.

[ChitHappens]

But it wouldn't be Todd in PC with Carly because PP would have their characters back and GH would wait and create new characters, which is what they did.

PP should have asked GH to change the direction of the characters at least a month before they left and then recast and gradually introduce Todd, Starr and John separately. They chose to poorly utilize their time and energy, so whatever they had to re-write is on them.

[~bl~]

If this was science fiction it would be not have been a big deal having two characters with the same names doing different things on different series. The viewers would just take it as being in different universes and be done with it.

[John]

In Hindsight If I were PP and had to do this over, I would have:

1) filmed 100 episodes of each AMC & OLTL & 50 of More AMC & OLTL (A combined show) Have AMC & OLTL each film for 20 weeks. aklternating every 5 weeks. Filming a show a day for a total of 25 per filming cycle.

2) Every monday for 50 weeks, I would release two episodes of both AMC & OLTL & an episode of MORE

3) would have worked out crossovers between GH, AMC & OLTL. Let Todd Starr and John stay on Gh but visit OLTL when necessary

I do feel if this model would have been done we could have avoided a lot of the headaches