I don't recall any word of Rena doing PC. She left GH the year before. AFAIK Ned and Lois were only ever associated with Labine's planned spinoff Heart and Soul, which got dumped for PC.

Edited yesterday at 06:34 PM1 day by Vee

I agree with most of what was said about PC. @Soaplovers was right on the money that it was two disjointed shows slapped together: Lucy/Kevin/Scott and Debbie Morgan babysitting a bunch of newbies.

A solution for melding the show together better could have been if DM's character was involved with Scott at the start of the show. I bailed pretty quickly, did she ever get to interact much with the boomers before she bolted? Morgan & Herring might have been good foils for each other.

The writing was bad, but the directing was even worse. Everything was so low energy, even Karen stripping to #1 Crush to distract a gunman in the pilot.

If ABC went this route, they might as well have gone all-in and made it an ABC super-spinoff, using characters from AMC & OLTL too. That said, it was a success in the ratings. It immediately improved the timeslot when the rest of ABC was falling. Shortly after its first year it started to regularly beat AW in the demos, despite lower clearance.

As for hypothetical HWs to start the show, Shonda Rhimes is probably the pick, however unrealistic.

13 minutes ago, Vee said:

I don't recall any word of Rena doing PC. She left GH the year before. AFAIK Ned and Lois were only ever associated with Labine's planned spinoff Heart and Soul, which got dumped for PC.

That's what I always heard as well. It was the Labine proposed spin off. Ned/Lois would be such an odd fit for PC.

7 hours ago, Vee said:

As someone who was part of an abortive project many years ago covering DS Year One in depth, what I would say is that the trade-off ultimately was how much character depth, layerings, etc. the show really lost after that first year or two. Roger, Vicki, Burke, Sam, Carolyn, Liz, etc. are all much more rich and nuanced characters in '66 than they ever were later, where many of them became largely foils and fools for Barnabas, Julia, Angelique, etc. Especially Burke Devlin, who as originally presented with Mitch Ryan (who didn't help himself with his alcohol issues BTS) was a charismatic and powerful force on the canvas too big to be duped by a vampire. It's night and day re: who most of them are in that first year vs. who they were left as later. The intensity of the show in that year was all much more not just about the gothic atmosphere and vibes but in the oppressive focus on the characters and their inner lives and contradictions. It was only the talented actors and the thumbnail sketch of who the characters started out as that gave most of them life and spark in DS' later years.

And I do think the show fundamentally erred in shifting too much focus away from Vicki (any Vicki) as opposed to letting it be both Vicki and Barnabas.

I would agree with you on the trade offs hurting the show in the long run.

I think the depth and character development was still pretty good for the characters even when Barnabas was on at first. When the show realized Barnabas was super popular and had to figure out a way to keep him on is the start of the decline of the focus on the other characters.

I think the split focus between Barnabas and Victoria starts to erode after the 1795 story after she returns from the past. After a promising brief arc where she's under his spell, her character loses focus.

Her last few episodes with Moltke playing Victoria is often remarked by fans as a brief return to form to the original concept with heavy focus on her. She has a heart to heart with Liz, remarks on how the Collins family is her chosen family, has her wedding called off, still feels after effects to almost dying in 1795 with a well done dream sequence, declares her love for Jeff/Peter, and promises to support him after they find Eve's dead body.

Had the show done this consistently after 1795 with all the other characters.. it would have been able to thrive long term. I think Vicki was the least ruined of all the early characters in the long run.

5 hours ago, Soaplovers said:

I would agree with you on the trade offs hurting the show in the long run.

I think the depth and character development was still pretty good for the characters even when Barnabas was on at first. When the show realized Barnabas was super popular and had to figure out a way to keep him on is the start of the decline of the focus on the other characters.

I think the split focus between Barnabas and Victoria starts to erode after the 1795 story after she returns from the past. After a promising brief arc where she's under his spell, her character loses focus.

Her last few episodes with Moltke playing Victoria is often remarked by fans as a brief return to form to the original concept with heavy focus on her. She has a heart to heart with Liz, remarks on how the Collins family is her chosen family, has her wedding called off, still feels after effects to almost dying in 1795 with a well done dream sequence, declares her love for Jeff/Peter, and promises to support him after they find Eve's dead body.

Had the show done this consistently after 1795 with all the other characters.. it would have been able to thrive long term. I think Vicki was the least ruined of all the early characters in the long run.

All true. I think a lot of '67 is very strong. I don't hate the rest of the show at all, I love a lot of it - it just fundamentally moves away from spotlighting most of the original characters.