Jump to content

Days: June 2023 Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 325
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Webmaster

Where did this Dena Higley stuff come from? I'm not talking about her, and what I'm talking about hasn't been discussed before. So, it's 0% related to anything discussed in this thread or externally.

I said something similar to Albert and Mike, the CFO taking over as "PR" on Monday. In my email, I commented on the PR move and the messy way Peacock has handled things with the sudden move to streaming only, based on the lack of discussion online about the show since the move and how certain popular DAYS destinations are dead or dying, or awaiting their "burial space."

Two snippets I wrote:

"It tells me your show is barely hanging itself together and that you’re just riding the most recent renewal until everything collapses."

"I don’t know what else to think but that the show is veering towards its end."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do. Especially a regime that would write for a streaming-only soap opera.  But so long as Ken Corday, Albert Alarr and Ron Carlivati are involved, I don't see hope.  I look at how Greg Meng handled the DOOL App exclusives and thought they were executed ten times better than Beyond Salem and even what we're getting on the main serial now.  Meng is needed back, first and foremost.

Snaps to you, Eroll, for having the balls to say that.  I feel like [most] soap press would've stepped back and kept their mouth shut.  It's refreshing to see someone in soap press still have the actual gumption to not kiss the backsides of others. 

Please register in order to view this content

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If Ellen Wheeler's creepy Mormon version of GL taught us anything, it's that...

Please register in order to view this content

 

Frankly, @AMCOLTLLover, I don't feel the same sense of futility about DAYS that I felt about GL toward the end of that show's run.  I think a new HW'ing and/or EP regime could save DAYS - even a DAYS that's been relegated to a third-rate streaming service and has had to rely for the longest time on found objects on the sides of streets for its' costumes and scenery - if they would re-commit themselves to telling smaller, simpler, character-driven stories that matter.  Like Bill Bell once said, all you need are a man, a woman and a waterfall, "and who in the hell needs the waterfall?!".

IOW, the "disaster" you've referred to, @Errol, is something that will play out on-screen down the road?

Edited by Khan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not BTS fluent. To me, it is like hearing other people's office gossip. Who cares?

But, I was curious about Albert Alarr, so I read his wiki.  I think it may have been either edited by an AI bot. 

Please register in order to view this content

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Alarr

Is ChatGBT the next headwriter at DAYS?  Did I solve @Errol's riddle?

Edited by j swift
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As I've said, I think DAYS could be salvaged if TPTB would do away with the camp and the gimmicks and re-commit themselves to pure and honest storytelling.  Unfortunately, even if Corday/NBC/Sony were to score a new EP like Shelley Curtis or Wendy Riche, or a new HW like Nancy Curlee or Pam Long, the fact that DAYS continues to tape its' episodes 17 years ahead would ultimately work against them. 

If the show's ratings or view counts or whatever magically went up on Peacock, then TPTB would pressure the new regime to give viewers more of the same; and if they inched downward, then they would likely panic and mandate that the show has to get even wilder or else risk being dumped from the platform.  Either way, if a better production regime were to take the reins, it would be MONTHS before we'd get to see the results, and who knows what could happen, both on- and off-screen, in the meantime?

In a perfect world, I guess, DAYS would hire a new EP and HW pronto, dump the appropriate number of episodes already in the can, allow the new team's stuff to air or stream as quickly as possible, and simply eat whatever production costs they have incurred on the "lost" episodes.  However, as @Vee puts it in another thread, the studios and streamers are in panic mode.  They're crashing, slashing and burning (or burning down).  They're stripping whatever properties they can and selling them for parts.  No one, especially NBCUniversal/Peacock or Sony, is gonna be interested in simply scratching months' worth of (shitty) episodes and starting fresh.

Honestly, @j swift, I feel like AI bots have been writing DAYS since at least 2000, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree with you about Errol.

It is so great to see someone in the soap press who's so honest and upfront about what's wring with a show or the industry in general. Almost every soap journalist gives softball interviews and fluff coverage to every show. I don't think there's a more dishonest arm in journalism than the soap press, who seem to be afraid their arms will be cut off if they're critical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Haha Well you could say that too, indeed. I don't really watch to show anymore, but I still hang around here and read what's happening and it saddens me what this show has become. 

You said it well. I hope they take notice, although I don't think the show is salvageable. It is airing one of the smallest streaming platforms. Who knows how long this platform even has, let alone a 60+ year old soap opera which is in such terrible condition, that writes 324 years in advance and cannot course-correct even if they wanted it to. Even if they improve, I don't think enough audience watches Peacock or watches DAYS on Peacock to make the positive word of mouth spread. So best case scenario, they keep the numbers they have now, but I doubt this would keep the budget from getting slashed, because if your numbers are stale and costs keep growing (due to inflation or otherwise), the budget will go down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Gotta tell ya, I really hate when they do that few hours later time jump crap. If you want things to happen at a later time, just do it in another episode. Especially if you’re gonna have only one day in Salem time span multiple episodes.

Now that Rafe and Jada are officially together, I just wonder how long it’s gonna be before Rafe cheats

Please register in order to view this content

And do y’all think there gonna go there with Kate and Harris? I’ve been wondering. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Unfortunately, @Manny, I feel the same way.  From a creative standpoint, DAYS isn't "dead" the way I thought GL was.  The characters and storylines need help, and under better circumstances, they could be helped, too!  However, in DAYS's case, there are just too many, overwhelming obstacles - like you said, @Manny, the fact that Peacock is one of the smaller (and, from what I understand, less successful) streaming platforms; the fact that DAYS writes and tapes so far ahead that a course correction, if even possible, would happen so far down the road that viewers might just throw in the towel; the fact that inflation and such, along with the soft numbers, will continue to play a major part in determining the show's budget - for this show to overcome.  That's why I have resigned myself (more or less) to the fact that DAYS cannot be fixed and just to accept the show as it is for however much longer it's on the air.

Let me guess: DAYS is so cash-strapped now that every scene of every episode will take place in the (in)famous Blue Room of Boredom, lol.

Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.



  • Recent Posts

    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
    • Interesting.  It seems to allude to that statement that Warren Burton made around that time about some AW actors getting special treatment.  I wonder who was resentful about not getting to go. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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