Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
On 5/8/2021 at 8:54 PM, Paul Raven said:

Bryan must be thanking his lucky stars that the decision was made to not only bring Lucas back but give him more airtime.

Remember a few years back when he was told that was pretty much it for Lucas?

 

Yes he is thanking his lucky stars.  Sadly, his wife has breast cancer, so he's grateful for the health insurance, per interview here:
https://www.soapoperadigest.com/content/best-in-show-bryan-r-dattilo/

Edited by janea4old
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 5/8/2021 at 8:54 PM, Paul Raven said:

Bryan must be thanking his lucky stars that the decision was made to not only bring Lucas back but give him more airtime.

 

Remember a few years back when he was told that was pretty much it for Lucas?


He was told that *several times* and still hung in there and stayed a true team player whenever they offered to have him back for a while.

It is testament that Lucas is a likeable character, BD not a diva and that the audience has stayed faithful that he is still around despite the fact he has almost never been given a proper story that made sense and was compelling. But goddamnit I like him and I am glad he is around.

Outside of Sami, the only woman he has ever had awesome chemistry with was Kate, which you know, not romance. But hey you can build a LOT from chemistry with those two core characters so I am not mad at it. 
But that's why I am irritated that 

That is so unneeded and the current dynamic is so enjoyable.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, FrenchBug82 said:

He was told that *several times* and still hung in there and stayed a true team player whenever they offered to have him back for a while.

It is testament that Lucas is a likeable character, BD not a diva and that the audience has stayed faithful that he is still around despite the fact he has almost never been given a proper story that made sense and was compelling. But goddamnit I like him and I am glad he is around.

You're right. It is a testament to BD and his acting. 

 

Back in the day, I hated Lucas lol I thought he was the meanest little bastard I ever saw. But overtime, he really grew as a character and pretty much transitioned into the good man that he is today. And I do think that's all due to BD's acting.

 

He's one of my favorite characters now.

Edited by AbcNbc247
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AbcNbc247 said:

Back in the day, I hated Lucas lol I thought he was the meanest little bastard I ever saw. But overtime, he really grew as a character and pretty much transitioned into the good man that he is today.

I have always thought - and granted that seems to be more thought than successive writers put into the character, sadly - that his trajectory to good guy made a LOT more sense than Sami's (others have discussed above how much Sami does not work as a heroine and I agree)

Lucas was raised almost as an only child and he was very close to his mother so he had spoiled brat syndrom. Add to that the "shameful" story of how he came to be and it made sense for him to be as a teenager/youngster a bit of a brat throwing tantrums and going along Sami's schemes to get what they want just because they want it.

But both of them found a genuine friendship in each other which, even if it wasn't overtly written at the time, gave each of them a first taste of having someone actually like you for who you are, even if at that time who they were were selfish schemers. From there you can see the growth, in particular with his remorse when Sami was convincted of Franco's murder and from there his alcoolism and his tough breaks and it makes sense that he would have now matured into a good normal guy. He experienced stuff that Kate's overprotectiveness had not shown him when he was growing up and he learned.

Otoh Sami's trajectory never could be properly explained. AS was popular so they made her central and simply started writing her as a more classic lead. But there was nothing story-wise, to me at least, that explained why she suddenly dropped her usual ways for lengthy periods of time other than it was convenient to the writers. And it keeps going back and forth which does not quite trend with something like "she is more mature now". It was never consistent.
Lucas had less writer attention so ironically that gave BD more liberty to finesse the character into something more linear and coherent than AS who was hemmed in by all the stuff that was written for her.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

At risk of repeating myself, I just ran some numbers on the cancelled soap thread that were interesting.  Santa Barbara debuted with an estimated production cost of $30 million for the 110 episodes produced in 1984 (it debuted in August).  Which is the equivalent of $76 million in 2021 with inflation.  DAYS entire production budget for 2020 was $26 million, meaning that they tried to produce almost 188 shows at 1/3 of the cost of SB in its first year (equal to how much SB spent only on sets).  It is no wonder it is so dark in Horton Square, they can only afford to put on 33% of the lights.

Edited by j swift
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, j swift said:

At risk of repeating myself, I just ran some numbers on the cancelled soap thread that were interesting.  Santa Barbara debuted with an estimated production cost of $30 million for the 110 episodes produced in 1984 (it debuted in August).  Which is the equivalent of $76 million in 2021 with inflation.  DAYS entire production budget for 2020 was $26 million, meaning that they tried to produce almost 188 shows at 1/3 of the cost of SB in its first year (equal to how much SB spent only on sets).  It is no wonder it is so dark in Horton Square, they can only afford to put on 33% of the lights.

 

In all fairness, the first year budget of a soap involves a lot of upfront costs - building sets, etc. Now as discussed in the SB thread, the Dobsons completely miscalculated and invested WAY too much but still, it is not an exact apples-to-apples comparison since the $26 million technically only has to involve the day-to-day running of the show (of course they redid the DiMera set on that budget so clearly they feel they have money leftover).

I would love, too, to compare the actor pay from now to then. Do we think actors are paid more or less - comparatively speaking and excluding inflation - than they were in the 80s?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, FrenchBug82 said:

I would love, too, to compare the actor pay from now to then. Do we think actors are paid more or less - comparatively speaking and excluding inflation - than they were in the 80s?

It is undoubtedly less, because current budgets also have to account for licensing fees to Sony.  By contrast, NBC paid New World to license SB at 30% of the rate that Sony gets today.  So, the networks used to make more money through ad revenue then they do today because (just as a gross example) they used have a 30/70 split with New World (in NBC's favor because of the relative demand for distribution), versus a 60/40 split in Sony's favor today, because growing means of distribution through streaming has reduced the power of the networks. 

 

Last year's Dateline articles about the DAYS renewal cited the licensing fee as one of the largest budgetary items for the production, and Sony's willingness not to seek an increased fee was one of the main reasons it got renewed.  Sony has very little risk because they get 100% of the money they spend on production back, up front, from NBC.  The licensing fee is on top of the production fee.  Whereas NBC has to depend on the market value of ad sales to cover the expenses paid to Sony and try to make a profit.  So, Sony gets the first dollar, and everything else has to pay for actors, lighting, sets etc.  The cost of labor goes up every year, but NBC is only willing to pay a certain number to Sony.  So, DAYS has to produce the show for less money each year to account for how much Sony takes upfront.

 

Note: they didn't reduce the fee, despite NBC taking in less ad revenue during a downturn in the economy, they were just willing not to increase the fee in a year when Sony booked $600 million in profits from TV production alone, not counting movie and video gaming revenue.

Edited by j swift
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KMan101 said:

 

I definitely get it, but at the same time, people their age aren't doing the 'labels'. It's actually fitting. But I get it.


And I get your point, too. My biggest problem with that scene is that it was all shock value and only for shock value.

 

You want to say “no labels” and have a previously-thought of straight person go bi or gay? I’ll buy it. I’ll accept it. But don’t feed me a cliffhanger gay kiss that’s seen by someone else and then make it clear two days later that it was not only no big deal, but it was really nothing. 
 

We ended up with a scene that actually makes no sense, since Allie has no romantic or sexual interest in Chanel. Carlivati wrote that scene for titters, and that bothers me. 
 

 

2 hours ago, FrenchBug82 said:

 

In all fairness, the first year budget of a soap involves a lot of upfront costs - building sets, etc. Now as discussed in the SB thread, the Dobsons completely miscalculated and invested WAY too much but still, it is not an exact apples-to-apples comparison since the $26 million technically only has to involve the day-to-day running of the show (of course they redid the DiMera set on that budget so clearly they feel they have money leftover).

I would love, too, to compare the actor pay from now to then. Do we think actors are paid more or less - comparatively speaking and excluding inflation - than they were in the 80s?


The low DAYS budget really showed today in those ER scenes with Kayla using the paddles on Brady. The lame hospital set was barely lit — probably to hide how fake it looked — and watching Kayla work on Brady by herself was laughable. 
 

I wonder about soap actors’ salaries, too. Can they make it only by doing other tie-ins, Cameos, etc.? How do these actors pay a mortgage? Especially on DAYS, where they’re hired for 6 months and then disappear for 6 until they’re brought back? I just think it’s a lousy way to treat cast members.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Kristen/Susan storyline would have been so much better had it not solely been built around hi tech masks and dopplegangers. There was no need for a Sarah mask or a Kate mask. Overall, I liked it but those two elements really messed it up. Sami/Lucas/Brady/Chloe/Kate really were the saving grace of the whole story. I'm looking forward to the aftermath of it. 

 

And what the hell was that song during the Jake/Gabi sex scene 

 

 

Edited by AbcNbc247
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, AbcNbc247 said:

And what the hell was that song during the Jake/Gabi sex scene 

A mess. Although they went for it. Miss Gabi was spread eagle, as Jill Zarin would say…

Edited by Faulkner
Link to post
Share on other sites

While $26 million is not a lot for 200+ episodes in a year they could certainly do better at lighting and background in 2021. Half the cast looks better in pictures and less flattering onscreen. People make a living online with no money. 

 

With that said they have gotten better in recent years with fall 2015 being the best lighting in at least 12 years IMO. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AbcNbc247 said:

And what the hell was that song during the Jake/Gabi sex scene 

 

I can't believe that some music person at DAYS was like, "I know the perfect song for a love scene," and THAT is what we ended up with. WTF?

 

For once I didn't love Gabi's outfit. Not that Camila could ever look bad, but I wasn't feeling that top or those boots. I also thought it was kind of funny how Kristen does not look good in Kate's clothes. Only Lauren Koslow can pull those outfits off!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AlexElizabeth said:

For once I didn't love Gabi's outfit. Not that Camila could ever look bad, but I wasn't feeling that top or those boots. I also thought it was kind of funny how Kristen does not look good in Kate's clothes. Only Lauren Koslow can pull those outfits off!

It's also the fact that the clothes are clearly in Lauren Koslow's size and I doubt they have the budget to buy another pair to specifically fit Stacey Haiduk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord, I can’t with Ron trying to justify his bad storytelling (as an aside, that news story is wild):

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm so over the whole mask thing...it's cheap and easy without really having to delve deep into character to motivate things.

 

What's next? Kristian wears a Julie mask and tries to seduce Brady???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Community Activity

    1. 79

      Anybody Ever Write their own Soap?

    2. 165

      GH June 2021 Discussion

    3. 165

      GH June 2021 Discussion

    4. 165

      GH June 2021 Discussion

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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