Thursday, June 14, 2012

Rumored Peter Reckell last tape day

Share


According to about.days, Peter Reckell's last tape day is July 22nd. The 22nd is a Sunday, so that will probably be revised.

Please keep the comments here on topic. There's no reason to post about Matt Ashford here.

24 comments:

  1. I think they meant JUNE 22, which is a Friday. That date makes more sense when you consider the studio is probably dark the week of June 25.

    Hopefully with Peter leaving, the budget will be freed up to bring back some fan faves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Forget fan faves, more newbies.

      Delete
    2. NO MORE NEWBIES! They all suck and make the show unrecognizable. Fire waste-of-space screenhogs like Abby, Chad, Gabi, and Cameron and bring back Carrie, Austin, Jack and Kristen/Susan.

      We want VETS. We want SUPERCOUPLES. We don't want newbies!

      Delete
    3. The show is already unrecognizable even with vets on the show now with nothing to do. What do DAYS have to lose with newbies when the show is already on borrow time? If y&r can be revamp in the 80's when they were on cancellation watch, why can't DAYS?

      It's better to have Bo gone then to have Jack back, at least they are written better off screen.

      Delete
    4. What does Days have to lost? Me, for one! I am a long-time fan, but I'm also part of the beloved 18-49 demographic. I stopped watching Days in 2009 when they stupidly axed John and Marlena, and I only started watching again because they brought them back along with Carrie, Austin, and Jack. Now, I will not be watching Days anymore once Carrie and Austin leave in July.

      Days needs to keep its vets and hire better writers. Firing MarDar was a step in the right direction, but replacing them with two idiots like Tomlin and Whitesell (two-thirds of the reason Days needed a reboot in the first place!) is just insane. I think Days wants to kill itself.

      Delete
    5. Being part of "The beloved 18-49 demographic" won't matter if you don't have a rating box or dairy, without them your rating view don't count.

      And, just watching a soap for only vets and quit watching if they are not on is just being a naive fan and why these soaps can't evolve, staying within the status quo is not helping in the long run for marketability of soaps.

      The reboot proves that even vets being the focus that they can't carry the show anymore and that the show needs to create new blood to rejuvenate this soap again; in front of the camera and behind the camera. Vets and replacing bad writers with good writers doesn't always equal good business for ratings.

      Delete
    6. I don't want soaps to "evolve". They are fine the way they are. I like the status quo.

      New blood on screen is NOT needed. Soaps are going into their twilight years. Days won't be on in 3 years. Instead of wasting this precious time with newbies we don't give a damn about, focus on the veterans who made Days what it is.

      Sorry, Anonymous, but I will never see things your way. Your outlook on soaps is so antithetical to what I, as a fan, want.

      If Days isn't going to show me the vets I want to see, there is no point in watching. I'm saying goodbye to Days at the end of July. They know what they need to do if they want me back.

      Delete
    7. Really? Happy that DAYS is "the way they are" with a 1.9-1.8 with the vets?

      I guess some fanboys/fangirls will never change. LOL!

      Delete
    8. I don't care about the ratings just so long as my faves are front and centre. Face it, soaps aren't going to be around in 5 years. In fact, I don't expect Days to still be on in two years! I'd rather spend that time with characters I know and love. The show shouldn't continue if it's just going to focus on new, unrecognizable faces that we just don't give a **** about.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous, do you post at Soap Opera Network? You'd fit right in with that lot. LOL!

      Delete
    10. No, I don't post on SON but I do look there often. I just don't like the atmosphere over there as it is too elite and grochy to post there.

      But, the thing is ratings should matter to you and any fan who wants these vets on the air; without it, the network and the production company (with Sony losing millions and billions of dollars at the moment and over the past couple of years) have no reason to keep the show on the air or keep any of the cast and crew on the show, including your precious veteran actors and crew who have high price tags (even under budget-tighten soaps.) Why should NBC and Sony spend money on a show that is making the same ratings as many of the non-soap programs who have less budgets. Don't take my word for it, Broadcasting and Cable show the syndication ratings every week to prove this point.

      Sure the firings of vets from the reboot is due to politics, but at the end of the day, the ratings don't justify the budget to keep Peter, Matt, Patrick, and many vets on the show.

      I'm all for taking a soap into the next generation than keeping a rinky-dink model that is pushing this genre off the air.

      If you want your vets, the DAYS have to invest in the now and in the future.

      Delete
    11. I don't care about a "next generation". I want my soap to stay the same. I passionately hate change.

      The fact is, James E. Reilly is dead, so there's no way Days will ever be as good as it once was. I have accepted that Days won't be on much longer, so just give me my vets and don't tamper with the formula!

      Delete
    12. JER fan, eh. 'Nuff said. LOL!

      Delete
    13. Think about this, what if, heaven forbidden, that one of your favorite current vet on DAYS were to passes away? Are you going quit watching the show if they are not on anymore after their death or continue watching the soap? Would you want the soap to stay on the air and make creative and casting changes after your favorite actor passed on to deal with the loss?

      I'm just being a realist, I don't watch or quit just for the actors because that just make me less of a fan of this genre and doing a huge disservice to the show itself; actors and crew come and go all the time but the show itself will always be there (when they can.) I'm for supporting this genre and the show and not allowing the actors to dictate when I should be a fan or not or when should I watch a show or quit, I don't want any actor having that kind of power over me and neither should the fans as well.

      I'm not saying that people should stay with the show when its in the toilet, people should watch or quit a soap more than just an actor whether they're a veteran or newbie.

      I feel that Peter has more of a chance to move into primetime instead of staying in daytime at the moment.

      Delete
    14. Excuse me, Anonymous, but where do you get off telling people what to do? We can stop watching for whatever reason we want. Many of us tune in for our favourite actors/characters. When they leave, that's a perfectly valid reason for us to tune out.

      Days has been crap since JER left in 2006, and I honestly don't care about soaps anymore ever since my favourite, Passions, ended in 2008. I would just like to see Days resemble the amazing show it was in from 1993 to 1997 before going off the air for good.

      Delete
    15. I don't know if I am dealing with 2 Anonymouses here (get REAL user names, for God's sake), but this is directed at the JER hater: bite me! JER is the single best headwriter in the history of Days of Our Lives. The show has been awful since he left because none of the headwriters have been the creative genius Jim was. I wish they would air episodes from 1993-97 rather than the new stuff they keep showing.

      Delete
  2. These writers can't write for newbies and they don't know how to cast good actors, the only tolerable solution would be to bring back some young characters/actors tied to core characters like Belle, Shawn, Philip and other Chelsea, Max ect...and still they will not fill the hole to characters like Bo or Jack...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Belle, Shawn, Philip, Chloe, etc. worked as teens but the 2007-2011 stints of Philip and Chloe, plus Beemer and Madison as Shawn and Belle, proved those characters don't work as adults.

      Delete
    2. They will work better than some new characters like Rafe and his dull family ect.. (characters which were created by this Tomlin crew who is AGAIN in charge) and the problem remain the same : good storytelling has to be there. But without somebody like Bo Brady..well there always will be a problem..same for the lack of Jack who was one of the few really interesting, dynamic characters from all these years on Dool.

      Delete
  3. i am just so sad to see him leave once again. he is going to be missed

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anon, the VETS ARE NOT on, hence the 1.8 ratings. All we have on are the idiot twenty-somethingers, plus GG, JS and AS on all the time. Read Jason47's monthly rankings for months. Matthew Ashford, and Missy Reeves are not even on once a week, barely bi-weekly, and when they are, they are pretty much background. Do Drake and Dee really have anything, Drake had the idiocy of Alamainia, which alienated folks, but Dee had nothing, except for the same dialog with Chandler's Will -- she even lost the therapy sessions with Matt's Jack. Peter and Kristian have nothing. And we know that he and Matt are not going to be on the show. Matt out right fired, and Peter strong armed into not renewing his contract, but being forced to take another massive paycut.

    Their newbie young people are not working. The only ones Freddie and Chandler cannot save the show. And though there is a potential for a couple and though it is a good thing to have a gay couple on DAYS, Meng is right you cannot just have a gay storyline, you will alienate viewers who also want to see other romances. And there is none. All are either insta-romances, which includes J/J's off screen and unromantic reunion.

    But I disagree about those teens you mentioned Alistair, the ratings crashed in the summer of 2002 because of the summer of hell. And that brought in Dena the first time. Since then the show has spiraled rapidly downward. I also remember reading an interview by Frances Reid in 2002 -- though it could have been 2001 -- and she bashed the actors playing those characters, saying that the young actors on the show were not talented or experienced as they used to be. And I agreed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By 2002, the "teens" were no longer teens. They had graduated from high school and were heading into university. The high point of their story was their introduction in 1999 through to about Summer 2001 (climaxing with the Opera Girl nude photos/cyberbullying scandal).

      When the show tried to transition them out of Salem High, it didn't work. The Last Blast crew worked best when they were in high school. That's when they had their best storylines and were are their most interesting. I don't see the point in bringing them back as adults.

      Delete
    2. *were AT their most interesting.

      Delete
    3. You are so biased CalAggie87 it is not even funny, AS has certainly not more storylines than DH, her storyline is about Will right now nothing more nothing less.
      Of course you don't talk about AZ storylines who are not needed but are here despite being some dud..Same can be said about the Austin and Carrie stories..
      As for the vets in general, i quite like them and think they are needed on the show but it doesn't change they had storylines these past months and yep it was boring and ridiculous for the most part..so try to be at least just a little more objective..maybe blame the writing but not some other characters..it is ludicrous.
      p.s: i don't count Jack of course, they clearly butcher his potential stories but he is the only one.

      Delete