Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Members
Posted

Even though The Gates is being developed for CBS, I wouldnt be shocked if it just went streaming on Paramount Plus. I feel streaming is the future for daily soaps.

  • Replies 6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Webmaster
Posted

I'm just going to say this. Personally, streaming is NOT the future of soaps. It's an element of where soaps can be watched. As evidenced by the recent streaming failures across the industry, there isn't truly any shows that will survive long-term on a streaming service. Some of the most watched shows don't even go beyond five or six seasons, if they are lucky, and they only get 6-10 episodes a season.

Yes, of course, it'll be available on Paramount+, or whatever that eventually evolves into by the time the show (hopefully) reaches the air. That's not in question.

I think what bothers me about today's announcement, and this has nothing to do whatsoever with your post or you, John, in particular, but people can't seem to read. I can't tell you how many people asked when is it going to air or where is it going to air when it is clearly stated it's for CBS. Countless people on social are asking if this is going to Paramount+ and I'm like...not even in the PR about it was Paramount+ even mentioned.

  • Members
Posted

Paramount Plus is likely being merged with Peacock, so yeah that's probably not even remotely what would happen

Errol this does NOT shock me at all. Especially from soap fans who barely pay attention to what's happening on screen already lol. 

  • Members
Posted

Right

A lot of variables here

How long will development take. Passions took over two years. So Im thinking Earliest I could see it on CBS is fall 2025.

  • Members
Posted

Am I dreaming? Soap opera are here to live and breathe. This is a day to remember. Thank you, God.

  • Members
Posted

I wonder what the production model will be like for this show - will it be shot like a traditional soap, or more like primetime/film? It’s clear they aren’t interested in doing things the way they’ve been done before. 

  • Members
Posted

I take your point, but the problem is I don't think broadcast/network as is has a long-term future track either. I think the best we can hope for (for both the networks and for shows' extended longevity) is a kind of hybrid model for certain shows, where they may be both on network and straight to stream.

Meanwhile:

 

Posted (edited)

It does not bother me & the reason is that people are wildly speculative about something new. So many details & they are so impatient for information that is  unavailable & will not be available for at least months. But underlying the impatience is extreme interest & I take that away from it as the good part of it. 

I would add that I have auto-posted "in development, no pilot, no order to series, no greenlight," an amazing number of times. The one poster who came back that according to the way they read it those things had happened, yes, that did annoy me. 

 

Edited by Contessa Donatella
  • Members
Posted

Oh lord. Don't even put that in the Universe. PP is currently merged into my system now and I cannot say I dislike having it. Peacock not so much.

 

I do hope that since we appear to be on the same page in terms of timeslots or how the shows should be placed...that CBS see it the same way as the rest of us. 

  • Members
Posted

I feel like any new game show revival would have to be host-heavy, to go along with TPIR and LMAD. Maybe a new run of Millionaire?

Gosh, if they cut The Talk and put in this new soap plus a new game show, CBS would have three soaps and three game shows, which...once again, never in a million years did I think we'd ever be back here.

  • Members
Posted

Only on this forum would folks be going down the list of old game shows like Joker's Wild or Tic-Tac-Dough. That's not a diss. God bless.

  • Webmaster
Posted

Agreed. A hybrid model is the way to go, and is even more evident now that studios that own TV networks are seeing the potential in airing originally ordered as streaming exclusive series and placing them on their broadcast networks months later. ABC did it with Hulu's "Only Murders in the Building," CBS is doing it this summer with Paramount+'s "Tulsa King," and NBC has done it with several shows on Peacock, along with Disney+ shows on ABC. A hybrid model is the way of the future. Not exclusively broadcast or streaming. That's where I see things going.

TV networks will NEVER go away in the sense that CBS will be canceled in five years. Despite reduced eye balls, only on CBS can 120+ million people watch the Super Bowl without a glitch all at once. You can't even dare think to do that (with current technology) on a streamer. Even Netflix is not immune to performance glitches for their live shows. The worst they'll have to deal with is in 2025 when they have live WWE programming from "Monday Night RAW."

  • Members
Posted

I do wonder what will become of broadcast networks in five or more years. How will they evolve? SVU, NCIS, and Grey's Anatomy can only go for so long, and I think the reason shows such as those are still on the air is that the networks would rather keep something known with a smaller audience that risk something entirely new. Hopefully, if The Gates happens, it will result in networks taking risks again.

  • Members
Posted (edited)

So, apparently, P&G started to throw their hat back in the ring again for scripted content in 2020/2021. Of course, the goal is to push their brands in a subliminal/less obvious way.

They also have their hand in producing films, documentaries, and streaming content.

———————————————————


With Fewer Ads on Streaming, Brands Make More Movies


Imagine is also working with the consumer goods giant Procter & Gamble. The company, which effectively created soap operas when it began to sponsor serial radio dramas in the 1930s to help promote its soap products, is cofinancing a feature-length film with Imagine called “Mars 2080.” It will be directed by Eliza McNitt and begin production later this year. The film, which is scheduled to be released theatrically by IMAX in 2022 before moving to a streaming service, focuses on a family resettling on Mars.

It grew out of a breakfast in New York in 2019, where Mr. Wilkes, Mr. Howard and Marc Pritchard, Procter & Gamble’s chief brand officer, discussed technology in the pipeline. The Imagine team later toured Procter & Gamble’s research labs in Cincinnati, seeing examples of its “home of the future” products and meeting its scientists.

Kimberly Doebereiner, the vice president of Procter & Gamble’s future of advertising division, said the company hoped to do more long-form storytelling, like “The Cost of Winning,” the four-part sports documentary its shaving brand Gillette helped produce. It debuted on HBO in November.

“We want to be more interesting so consumers are leaning into our experiences and we’re creating content that they want to see as opposed to messages that are annoying to them,” she said. “Finding a way to have content that is in places where ads don’t exist is definitely one of the reasons why we’re leaning into this.”

It’s all part of a deliberate shift by brands to try to integrate themselves more fully into consumers’ lives, the way companies like Apple and Amazon have, said Dipanjan Chatterjee, an analyst with Forrester. And they want to do so without commercials, which, he said, have “zero credibility” with consumers.

“If the right story has the right ingredients and it becomes worthwhile for sharing, it doesn’t come across as an intrusive bit of advertising,” Mr. Chatterjee said. “It feels much more like a natural part of our lives.”

———————————————————

Edited by BetterForgotten

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

    • Please register in order to view this content

      I went back to see how teen Sami even figured out how to sell a baby in 1993, and the recap is unintentionally hilarious. The exposition is so blunt it feels like the writers drafted it between bites of lunch. Suddenly there’s a teen mom named Karen who sold her baby through a shady lawyer, and somehow Sami just… knows this man and pays him with hospital volunteer money. You can tell they were trying to make the whole thing “plausible” enough, but also knew the baby wouldn’t be gone long enough to justify a real subplot.  I know one thing, if Karen had confided in Jamie, Sami would've never met Steve Miller. Jamie knew that snitches get stitches. Not to be confused with the horrific Stephen Miller, who was 8 in 1993.
    • I can’t help but to get drawn in by Dani and Andre but it just angers me that it’s so obvious that they’re not endgame.
    • John and Marlena may have committed adultery, but they weren't going to be smug creeps about it. "Roman, how do you feel about the name Isabella Titania Brady?"
    • -- It's always amazing to me that these "terrible breakdowns" (by writers so bad they shall not be named) are saved by incredible script writers. Every time 

      Please register in order to view this content

      -- Kat is a "spoilt bitch" while Eva isn't??? -- Does Kat go too far with her mouth? Absolutely. But I get it. Eva has done some terrible things and continues to enable her criminal mother while Kat's family and boyfriend DEFEND her and show her love. -- Eva's complaints about Leslie are meaningless, because they're never backed up with anything. I'll take "spoilt bitch" any day before I take "criminal enabling hoe." -- It's nice that Martin accepts Eva, but the way he's handling it is eye-rolling. Eva gets hugs and smiles and full acceptance while Kat is trashed -- to Eva's face. -- Martin is STILL obsessing over the Kat conversation about sex that Samantha heard. Are you kidding me with this? And now Eva offers to speak to Kat. Yeah, very cute that the sister who screwed the other sister's boyfriend is the one with relationship advice. -- The food at Uptown looked pretty good today. Orphey Gene's food has yet to impress me, and I think it's clear that the country club chef is an alcoholic who cannot control his kitchen.
    • At this point, Marlena, John, and Roman all thought Roman was Belle's father. Sami had switched the initial blood tests. When it was time for another round of tests (because Belle was jaundiced), Sami panicked and kidnapped the baby.  Up until January 1994, Sami was the only one who knew that John was Belle's father. Next up were Stefano and Peter, once Stefano read Sami's diary (he figured it would reveal what was going on between John & Marlena). Stefano revealed the truth of Belle's parentage to Roman AFTER Marlena revealed her tryst with John (about two weeks later, to be exact). Marlena and John were the last ones to find out (during February sweeps, naturally). The John Black name was revived in September 1991.
    • The show has been getting better and better. Dani and Andre solidly "coupling" has been amazing. Genie Francis says soaps don't do couples anymore...maybe Dani/Andre can prove her wrong. To me they are the best couple on the show.  Eva vs Kat is always great. The show continues to find ways to keep it going and I'm all for it. Kat annoys me so bad. She is such a spoiled princess and acts it. I agree the comment about wishing Eva had been aborted was low. If that were the case, then why is she constantly getting in Eva's face? Why doesn't Kat just stay away and ignore her completely like she doesn't exist? I know. I know. It wouldn't be soaping.  This Hayley plot to kill Bill now taking a detour onto Izaiah has me curious. Does Hayley even know what she wants? I can't wait to see the fallout for Hayley and Randy....but not too soon.  I am tired of hearing about Winterfest already though. Can we get to it? lol
    • Great rundown of Long's second stint. Now you got me wondering...and again, thinking how real life impacted the direction of the show. We were talking about how practically the minute Long landed back on GL, she wrecked Ross and Vanessa and threw Alan and Reva together. Soon after, Alan started pursuing Vanessa again (because he was SO afraid of the "real" feelings he was having for Reva for the first time in his life, LOL). It's like she was determined to do an Alan/Vanessa/Somebody triangle at some point. She started one with Billy as the third side (well, actually, Alan was the third side) back in late 83/early 84 before Bernau exited GL the first time. So she had to drop it. But since Billy was gone this time, she seemed to decide, hey, I'll do it, only with Reva as the missing side of the triangle. Then Maeve left, messing that up! So I wonder, would she have had Alan and Vanessa marry? Maybe not, but I doubt Vanessa would have taken kindly to being overthrown for Reva. Could have been done in a really humiliating way, like after the invitations went out or even at the wedding. Maybe she would have helped Phillip with his plot to dethrone Alan. Lots of interesting possiblities.  I did like the way this story was handled. Chelsea was clearly more in love with Phillip than he was with her. Even "dead," no one could compete with Beth. So it was always doomed, but they showed how Phillip lost his way because he was obsessed with getting back at his dad. I also thought the relationship between Alan and Chelsea was a little...strange. He was very much in favor of their relationship, even though she came from an even lower background than Beth's. She also always fiercely defended Alan. Which has made me wonder if--ick--one of the many writing teams was thinking about putting them together romantically. (Of course, in my headcanon, where Alan has a youthful romance with the never seen Reardon sister, his fondness for Chelsea then makes perfect sense.) I always wondered why they never thought of putting Chelsea with Rick, especially after they butted heads over the death of her fiance. Seemed like a no-brainer.
    • Aubrey's Marina was great...but they wasted her...she could have been a new Nola (since she was living in the BH I would have had her find the N.R. + K.N. thing Nola carved in her bedroom...."I don't know who this girl was but she seems to be as unhappy as I am stuck here.") And have her set her cap for a good recast Shayne and take on the Old Bag Reva when she tries to interfere.."Oh please, I heard she was back in Oklahamo giving blow jobs behind the gas station, and she acts like she is Mother of the Year...God I hate her."  When they recast with that boring Kit girl and then...cutesy Mandy it was done. I love the idea of Billy and Van bonding over hell on wheels Peter. and kicking **** to the curb.Billy went to prison to protect him from Roger but that was never mentioned when Billy returned. Peter and Aubrey's Marina would raise Hell together..do a Nolaredux  in that he bangs her, she gets preggers, passes that off as Shayne's with Ole Bag Reva suspicious...I could see Marina ringing a bell to get the Ole Bag to bring her some ice cream...."But Grandma...oh you hate that I am sorry, okay, Grammy, you know I can't be stressed and oh, Shayne would be mad if I lost the baby..."ah what could have been.
    • Please register in order to view this content

      Yeah, that's I mentioned the christening, when the truth comes out Reading October and November 1993, what is actually nuts is how much story they went through in a month. Because John's not even interested in Marlena at the time of Belle's birth.  He is rebound lusting for Kristen, who delivered Belle (funny mention in SOD about Marlena being unable to service at the Horton cabin on her "cellular" phone, I assume there was heightened vigilance to the exposition covering the tech of the time).   And, of course, since it was Kristen helping Marlena give birth during a stormy night, they both looked glossy, windswept, and gorgeous.    Justice for Jamie, I bet she's still holding Sami's secrets wherever she is.
    • You know what's crazy? Even though JFP ultimately has been a disaster at many soaps, and even though all the negatives about her are true, I'd still prefer her over Josh Griffith at Y&R. She can take over for him anytime, and I will applaud.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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