Jump to content

YR: show gets 4 year renewal


dragonflies

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Diminished ratings are still ratings and there are only so many talk shows (talk shows no longer have the type of buzz and popularity that they once had during their heydays) and game shows that they can fill up time slots with. To replace a 50+ year old show with just another game show or talk show, the backlash that would ensue…it just wouldn’t be worth it.

Now that another 4 years are slotted, it will be very interesting to see whether the execs decide that what they are doing now is adequate and they’re going to ride the wave or if they feel confident enough to attempt to make some actual changes, bearing in mind that change is not always for the better, especially the way these shows have been known to make them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It makes me wonder how much note they're taking of whatever spurred the creative change at GH, assuming for the moment that is not all a run-up to cancellation a la Lorraine Broderick going back to AMC. (And I don't think it is for GH, but who knows.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

How, and I do mean HOW did they get this?! Because there is no way, under Josh Griffith's ultimate control, that this soap continues to earn multi-year renewals. Granted, I'm happy because it shows there is commitment to the genre and hopefully it goes well for others to continue on, but damn....

According to SON on Twitter, they are expected to receive an exercise for a one-year extension on their current deal expiring soon.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As others have stated, I’m happy to see Y&R get another multi year renewal as there was actually part of me that thought this was the Y&R might be a goner, or just get a one year renewal or get moved to Paramount+. 
 

But of course, does this also mean four more years of Josh Griffith?

Please register in order to view this content

Unless this renewal puts JG in a good mood and ignites a long forgotten spark, it’s wayyyy past time for JG to have left the building. 

Hoping this renewal does bring some good changes sooner than later. Not expecting miracles, but this is something positive for a show that still has so much untapped potential. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That’s the current speculation:

https://tvline.com/news/young-and-the-restless-renewed-4-years-season-51-1235174734/

To quote:

A CBS insider tells TVLine that B&B‘s current renewal pact — which, like Y&R, expires this May — includes an additional option year. The source adds that said option will be exercised, thus cementing B&B‘s existence through the 2024-25 TV season.

Edited by soapfan770
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

JG was never a strong headwriter...his strength was in character driven scenes and making others creative ideas work within a soap opera format.

At the same time, who else would want the job?  Anyone that would have been good has either retired or passed away.

Still...4 more years will ensure the genre survives well into the late 2020s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

GOOD. What would CBS have replaced it with, an NBC News Daily/ GMA 3 copycat? 

Local affiliate schedules are already news heavy. The crazy part is despite affiliates relying more heavily on journalists for ad revenue, TV news reporters remain some of the lowest paid degree holders while sales teams take home most of the bank.

Current executive thinking is that the audeince is isn't watching one station all day. They supposedly tune for quick hits, so it doesn't matter if a TV station schedule is all news. But I miss the days when you could keep your TV on one station for hours because there was an array of diverse and quality programming.

That being said, Y&R is in rough shape. I can't believe it's still #1. Josh Griffith needs to go.

Edited by Planet Soap
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

    • Yes. I don't know if Lenore was ever asked. Then it became a nun. Thanks. I didn't realize it was in 1987. That timeline doesn't make a lot of sense even if she would have had Ed to interact with. If they didn't ask her back in 1989 and she was willing, what a stupid error. The attempts at these feuds, or even the whole families tied together stuff like Maryanne Carruthers, never had any real impact because of how depleted the Bauers felt even by the mid '80s. And instead of expanding them, which would have been common sense, various producers were just too lazy, or too ashamed, and kept bringing on other families, or bringing in too many people at one time and not knowing how to write for them (the Spauldings in the McTavish era - as SOD said at the time, everyone in the family had the same personality).
    • Wasn't there talk of them bringing back Rita as Gus' mother at one point? Or something?
    • I think they are a part of the same family, although Carla was never really scheming for the same reasons, and once her double life was exposed, she stopped. 
    • Rachel/Ada, Mona/Erica, a mother/daughter at LOVING, these are all examples of the Agnes Nixon "troublesome daughter/put upon mother" trope. Are Carla/Sadie by any chance one of the pairs that make up this trope? Another thing that these 2 shows might have in common. OLTL had a very strong thematic approach to socioeconomic differences between groups of people. Class differences. AW at an earlier point had this too but to be clear it was not as much as OLTL. So that is a similarity but marginal.  Besides that, I see no other comparable things. Paul Rauch was a very different EP at different shows. Oh, I've thought of one more thing. Using actors from the Broadway stage.  But, realistically that was something all of the NY shows had in common. So I don't think it has any uniqueness between AW & OLTL.  
    • When you look at the period between Sweeps, it's as if they tried to maintain a kind of pace where they had a lot of plates spinning in the air & on their fingertips & the whole goal was nothing but to not drop any of those plates. A version of spinning one's wheels. They're not getting anywhere but they give the appearance of a whole lot of activity. I believe it's all about this appearance. At moments they accidentally hit a chord & something resonates but it is a false event.
    • He found the hidden camera and removed the card 
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • I’m not speculating anything, but I admit, I’m getting a little worried about James Reynolds. 
    • I feel like this is what they're doing by creating lots of storylines but their biggest weakness for years is the inability to properly pace these stories and give resolution. A good example now would be the Gio story which has been simmering for months with very little movement. I went from not caring to being invested to not caring again because of how long it's taking for the secret to be revealed. One story like that would be fine but it seems like everything moves at this snails pace on GH. They need to do a better job of rotating the stories so everything isn't in that same treading water phase.
    • However, those of us who watch DAYS have been spoiled. On Peacock there are no preemptions. Not for anything & not in or about any show.  I read somewhere that we Baby Boomers in a way invented instant gratification but then we realized that it was not fast enough.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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