Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IT'S SO PATHETICALLY BAD THAT IT'S HYSTERICALLY FUNNY
New York Post ^ | 11/05/03 | ADAM BUCKMAN

Posted on 11/05/2003 12:29:13 AM PST by kattracks

Edited on 05/26/2004 5:17:18 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

November 5, 2003 -- IT WAS one of the funniest tapes I had ever received from a TV network.

It was a special promo reel sent over early last month for "The Reagans," a miniseries about Ronald and Nancy Reagan - the very same miniseries that became so embroiled in controversy that CBS finally dumped it yesterday.


(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: thereagans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: duckman
The Reagans" has become the TV industries "Gigli".

ROTFLMCO.........great zinger. Ben and J-Lo will not be pleased. LOL.

21 posted on 11/05/2003 4:57:53 AM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: aardvark1
Muffler commercials, I believe.
22 posted on 11/05/2003 5:00:07 AM PST by Pan_Yans Wife (You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: aardvark1
they spent about $29.95

Actually it's closer to $10,000,0000. CBS probably has to book about $300,000,000 in advertising revenues to realize $10,000,000 profit. Since it will result in $0.0 ad revenues it's pretty much a total loss. From a business prespective, a lot of heads should roll. Like really firing someone.

Since this turkey was aimed at sweeps week, it was probably a loss-leader anyway. They never expected to recover production costs from first run ad revenues, if ever. (A lot of network products only begin to turn a profit in syndication and foreign distribution.)

Right now CBS is carrying this on their books as an asset. Someone is going to have to eat a $10,000,000 loss. High ranking executives, like the head of ShowTime, make most of their compensation on performance based incentives. I doubt Sumner Redstone expects him to swallow a $10,000,000 loss. More than likely, CBS will "sell" this turkey to ShowTime for like $500,000 (or whatever they can internally negotiate) and Moonves will have to eat a $9,500,000 loss meaning his bonus this year will be like, $0. There is some justice in this world.

23 posted on 11/05/2003 5:21:39 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Uday and Qusay and Idi-ay are ead-day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
Well, keep boycotting Hallmark. They are on the NRA "bad guys" list.
24 posted on 11/05/2003 5:34:36 AM PST by I still care
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
In the role of Nancy Reagan, Judy Davis was seen barreling comically through the White House screaming at the top of her lungs at everyone who crossed her path.

Sounds more like a portrayal of Hillary than Nancy.

25 posted on 11/05/2003 6:10:06 AM PST by disclaimer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Hallmark still plans on distributing it overseas, where there will be no one to set the record straight or raise the questions on the truthfulness of the movie.
26 posted on 11/05/2003 6:18:52 AM PST by MontanaBeth (Democrats-the how low can you go party-they won't let a little thing like hell stop them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Can't wait to watch it flop on Showtime, assuming it even airs. Amazing that CBS found sponsors for it. Maybe they gave them a discount.

Movie channels don't usually have sponsors do they?

27 posted on 11/05/2003 6:22:20 AM PST by N. Theknow (Be a glowworm, a glowworm's never glum, cuz how can you be grumpy when the sun shines out your bum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Hmmmmmm.
CBS may have a hit on their hands.

Why not just change the title to The Clintons?

From the description here it sounds closer to real life.

28 posted on 11/05/2003 6:34:13 AM PST by Publius6961 (40% of Californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aardvark1
has he done anything since the Marcus Welby series?

Believe it or not he played Clark Gable in "Gable and Lombard" opposite Jill Clayburgh. The movie was a box office disaster thanks to Brolin's wooden, talentless performance. I had the misfortune to see that film and it was awful. It nearly killed his career.

29 posted on 11/05/2003 6:38:10 AM PST by jalisco555 (Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: aardvark1
Of course, an actor of Brolin's credentials and talen don't come cheap. (/sarcasm) BTW, has he done anything since the Marcus Welby series?

I remember that he was in a 1970s movie called "Trapped." No, it had nothing to do with his current marital status. Rather, he played a man who was accidentally locked in a department store building after closing, and was trying to escape attack dogs that were patrolling the store.

www.imdb.com/title/tt0070828/

30 posted on 11/05/2003 6:51:24 AM PST by calvin sun ("Mr. Gorbachev, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Bump.
31 posted on 11/05/2003 7:01:05 AM PST by DoctorMichael (Thats my story, and I'm sticking to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555
has he done anything since the Marcus Welby series?

He's in a piece of scifi I like, Crichton's Westworld. Though he should have played on of the robots.

32 posted on 11/05/2003 7:09:41 AM PST by Snake65 (Osama Bin Decomposing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Snake65
I think he was also in a made-for-TV movie about an earthquake a while back. He may have played a piece of rubble.
33 posted on 11/05/2003 7:12:11 AM PST by jalisco555 (Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: aardvark1
Don't slam Brolin. He's not too bad. Up until Barbra, he was a pretty good guy, keeping a low profile. I still contend he married Barbra to get him out of dire financial straights. I read where he was in deep trouble, and she bailed him out when they married. He's probably contractually obligated to stay with her for a certain amount of time. I don't know that for sure, but I just can't imagine anyone living with an ego like hers.
34 posted on 11/05/2003 7:13:14 AM PST by Hildy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555
Plus he plays a military guy on that syndicated show: Pensacola something or other. I JUST now saw an episode. He is a good looking man. Barbra finally got her gorgeous goyshe guy, if you know what I'm referring to!
35 posted on 11/05/2003 7:14:27 AM PST by Hildy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
He is a good looking man. Barbra finally got her gorgeous goyshe guy, if you know what I'm referring to!

LOL. I know what you mean. He did age better than Elliot Gould, I'll admit that.

36 posted on 11/05/2003 7:17:03 AM PST by jalisco555 (Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
I'm guessing especially threatening to boycott Hallmark during the holiday season.

From what I understand, Hallmark was never a sponsor of the show per se. The Hallmark Entertainment Division bought rights from CBS to distribute the mini-series in overseas markets. I don't know that that's changed even though CBS won't be airing it domestically.

37 posted on 11/05/2003 7:20:10 AM PST by TheRightGuy (ERROR CODE 018974523: Random Tagline Compiler Failure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
"I can only guess that having large numbers of Christians not buying Christmas cards from you is NOT part of Hallmark's business plan."

Dry, terse, witty, perfect. I like your style.

Michael

38 posted on 11/05/2003 7:25:46 AM PST by Wright is right! (Never get excited about ANYTHING by the way it looks from behind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
"Since this turkey was aimed at sweeps week, it was probably a loss-leader anyway. They never expected to recover production costs from first run ad revenues, if ever. (A lot of network products only begin to turn a profit in syndication and foreign distribution.)"

Precisely. It was to run at a loss as a vehicle to run tons a promos for other shows they hoped to upwardly spike. Each two-hour installment would contain 82 minutes of actual program, 24 minutes of advertiser spots, and a whopping 14 minutes of promos or various lengths. SeeBS is prone to the multi-promo - three quick 10-second show promos, then a 20-second promo, then another 5-second promo (then a 5-second station ID). The amount of promo clutter they planned to cram into this miniseries was the real reason they had it scheduled.

And, yes, it will doubtless affect Les Moonbeam's year-end bonus.

Michael

39 posted on 11/05/2003 7:32:00 AM PST by Wright is right! (Never get excited about ANYTHING by the way it looks from behind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TheRightGuy
"From what I understand, Hallmark was never a sponsor of the show per se. The Hallmark Entertainment Division bought rights from CBS to distribute the mini-series in overseas markets."

That's what I hear, too. Plus, it is entirely possible that it may not air at all in foreign markets, or if it does air, changes may be made to it. If I'm Hallmark Entertainment, I'm thinking that perhaps I've got hotter assets in the can than this turkey, and maybe I'd better push them instead.

Michael

40 posted on 11/05/2003 7:35:13 AM PST by Wright is right! (Never get excited about ANYTHING by the way it looks from behind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson