A place to chat about our 'fight' for Gilmore Girls    FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in  Log in to check your private messages    Melissa McCarthy on s8/movie from 8-29-07 Auseillo Goto page 1, 2  Next          ~Save the Lorelais~ Forum Index -> News View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message ShutUpRob Site Admin Joined: 05 Jul 2007 Posts: 62 Location: In reality, Missouri; in my mind, Stars Hollow, CT. Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 8:40 pm    Post subject: Melissa McCarthy on s8/movie from 8-29-07 Auseillo From: http://www.tvguide.com/ask-ausiello Question: I feel like you're hiding some Gilmore Girls movie news from us. Release the scooplets!- Stephanie Ausiello: Curses, foiled again! It's true: I have a little scoopbit I've been sitting on and the secret's been eating up my insides! Melissa McCarthy (aka Sookie) told me way back during the July press tour that she's open to the idea of a Gilmore Girls reunion movie, although she conceded, "I'm always a little sketchy about the whole reunion-movie thing. But Amy's such a good writer that she could write something and I'll be like, "I'll be damned, it's really good!" McCarthy acknowledged that the series finale felt a smidge rushed. "I don't think they ended it how they would've ended it [had they been given more time]. There was a lot of talk about an eighth season. But I think the writers did a great job considering it was so last-minute. I thought it was really good that it ended with [Lorelai and Rory] reconnecting. I think that's what people wanted. I would've hated to see the show go out on a sad note." Interesting factoid: Had the show returned for an eighth season, Sookie would've been MIA - save for a possible guest appearance or two. Unlike the rest of the cast, most of whom were onboard for Season 8, McCarthy had already committed to Samantha Who? on ABC. I assumed, as I think everyone else did, that Samantha was in "second position" behind Gilmore, but that was not the case. This tidbit cut-and-pasted for you by: -- Rob And sponsored by the letter "M." ------------------- Season 8: Because I would have written Sookie out, too, just for that very reason. Back to top LinaLoN Joined: 27 Jul 2007 Posts: 87 Location: NH Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:22 am    Post subject: Here's MA once again leading people on with stuff that doesn't really help anything. First with his thing about the GG which has nothing really to do with the production of the GG movie but more stuff on S8 that fell through. I'm glad Melissa was able to give her opinion that matches everyone else's feelings on it and I had a feeling if there was an 8th season made in the Fall she would've HAD TO guest star because of Samatha Who? Not to mention taking care of her new baby. She must be receiving more air time on the show now that GG is cancelled. Second by his vagueness with Bones. Did you read that one? I wanted to kick MA in the... well you know where! His statement was shorter than an essay on Physics from Bush. Great another one of his stupid puzzles of teasing! BTW- Aliens in America has been signed for 13 episodes so that's good for Scott. It'll still be WAY less air time then compared to GG but at least he has some sort of security for a little bit and it's only a half hour show so he'll have time if something GG comes his way. _________________ Season 8; because we've waited and held onto it... for eight years Back to top potatojungle Joined: 01 Aug 2007 Posts: 62 Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:38 pm    Post subject: At some point you have to wonder, even if we do get a S8, which actors will still be left and want to do 8 or 13 episdoes? The way it is going on now, we might not see Luke or Sookie much if the show returns, not to mention Rory making a few appearances here and there. S8 will basically become Lorelai petting and feeding paul Anka, while looking forlornly out of her window, wondering how her life has changed since the tragic Jeep incident. It's almost like be careful what you wished for because S8 could turn out to be crappola now that most actors of the show have moved on. Back to top go_clo Joined: 15 Jul 2007 Posts: 78 Location: Canada, Alberta Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 10:02 pm    Post subject: If we get an S8, Alexis will be on full time cause Lauren won't do the show without her even if Alexis agrees to just do a few guest appearences. For Lauren, it's either full time Alexis or nothing and I support that decision! Scott's new show is only a half hour long and he isn't even the star so he would have plenty of time to do both GG and AiA. Plus we aren't even sure how well AiA will go. If the show comes back, I think the only person that would be gone alot is Melissa McCarthy and we don't see her much at all as it is. Also, I think if we do get the show back, it will be great cause the cast won't return if they don't like the storyline of the show. It either has to be great or nothing at all. I for one can enjoy GG no matter what, I'd probably enjoy whatever they do with the show as long as both AB and LG are the stars and they keep Rorys and Lorelais relationship the main storyline (which for the past year and a half, hasn't been the main storyline but the relationship is still there so I'm ok with it). I will enjoy it even more now cause I will just be so incredibly thankful it's back at all. I think that applies to most GG fans right now so I'm not worried about it having the potential to suck. _________________ Keep The Faith For Season 8! Cause 8 Is Fate! Back to top potatojungle Joined: 01 Aug 2007 Posts: 62 Posted: Fri Aug 31, 2007 4:15 am    Post subject: Here is the Catch 22: For the principal actors to want to come back, they have to feel that there is still enough stories to tell and the writers have to convinced them of that. But it is very difficult for the writers to write the stories when they aren't sure which actors want to return and should be included in the stories. It's very easy to for us to say "if you write it, they will come" but this is seldom true. A few actors will choose not to return, not to mention the writers who are familiar with the show. Back to top ShutUpRob Site Admin Joined: 05 Jul 2007 Posts: 62 Location: In reality, Missouri; in my mind, Stars Hollow, CT. Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 9:06 pm    Post subject: potatojungle wrote: Here is the Catch 22: For the principal actors to want to come back, they have to feel that there is still enough stories to tell and the writers have to convinced them of that. But it is very difficult for the writers to write the stories when they aren't sure which actors want to return and should be included in the stories. It's very easy to for us to say "if you write it, they will come" but this is seldom true. A few actors will choose not to return, not to mention the writers who are familiar with the show. You raise some good points, some of which have already been answered by the people themselves: 1) When ASP voiced interest in the movie to Ausiello, Ausiello proceeded to interview the heavy hitters in the cast (LG, SP, EH, KB and AB) and all but AB showed enthusiasm for a movie and even with her ambivalent response, AB refused to rule it out. 2) LG actively solicited responses from the audience of her chat at GoldDerby.com on June 12th about why they want to see a Gg movie and what they'd like to see in it. And she was flooded with answers. She also responded that she talks a lot with ASP whenever she's in NYC and would take along some of those answers. IMO, LG, the lynchpin, is *already* engaged in the possibility of a revival. 3) Speculating about the writing, as you do above, is at this point far more premature than speculating about whether or not the actors want to do it -- and they've all gone on record as wanting to do it pending whatever the script will be. ASP wants to do a 2-hour movie, so writers are a moot point, a totally non-issue for a 2-hour movie. If we succeed in getting any longer committment than that -- 8 hours is IMO the most likely of those alternatives, then it's easier to speculate that ASP and DP would each write more than one episode, so for an 8-hour block, half of them would likely be taken care of. Four more scripts? Easy to find writers to do those. Staff writers are often able to/allowed to write a script (note: A script) for another show. And there are more than enough freelancers at any given time to go around. If they were to agree to more than 8 episodes, then it's just business as usual -- assemble a writing stable that could be a combination of staff writers and freelancers. Just like Season 1. Really finding writers is and would not ever be a big deal. Except in terms of what money the Palladinos might get out of it. 4) AiA has only a 13-episode committment. And let's put it this way: the Monday night sitcom block on The CW has been a ratings failure, flatlining at only about 2 million viewers in the ratings on average last year, or 80% of VM's ratings for the worst-rated of VM's new episodes and less than half of Gg's ratings for most new episodes this past year. Even if AiA turns out to be good (and IMO, critics are generallly wrong about the shows that they hard-sell at the beginning of the seasons), that probably *won't* help the network out at all because it won't be enough to increase the ratings on Monday nights. Essentially, IMO, The CW is blocked by CBS's success in the sitcom format on that night hand instead needs to cultivate a new set of one-hour dramedies along the lines of Gg and Everwood as the true programming alternative on that night. 5) Of *course* any sort of movie or miniseries revival (I think we'll get either 2 hours or 8 hours) will be conditional on the schedules of the actors. It's a bit easier to work schedules around movies than around anything longer, but here are a few things to keep in mind that run the gamut -- ALL of these factors will probably come into play and none of them either sepratealy or together should be considered even remotely things that inherently break deals. They're just factors to take into consideration. They're all value-neutral and have the equal chance of having positive and negative outcomes -- ie: none of them are reasons for pessimism or skepticism. They're just part of the calculus: a) Lauren is taking mostly small roles in indie movies and small-budget studio films (ie: the Wife World Tour). Due to the nature of the size of these parts, she isn't going to be on the sets even remotely as often as every single day. So by her nature as an actress who wants to keep working even on her workdays off from a movie gig, she's going to fill those days with other gigs -- voiceover work (for Special K), other movie gigs, perhaps a cameo or guest shot on a TV series. Whatever she can fit into her schedule. With the unforgivably small roles that she's getting (because the studios, casting agents and directors are generally small-minded about female actors in general, even when they've headlined their own series for seven years), at the very *least* a Gg movie can be one of those gigs. The same for other actors now with gigs -- SP, EH, Sean Gunn, etc. b) To go more in-depth: TV movies are generally done during hiatuses from the current shows. Not just during the summer, but other times of the year -- especially the Nov-Dec. time period, where they have some time off. Moreover, when the actor has a sitcom gig, even a larger part, it's often easy to borrow an actor at the start of a sitcom's production week (sitcoms film once a week with various phases of rehearsal in the days leading up to the taping with the first day -- the table-read day, often being a half-day.) c) The high failure rate of new shows makes the fates of both AiA and MM's comedy Samantha Who? very arguable by nature. It would not be unusual for one or both to get cancelled. It would be unusual for both series starring actors from the same previous show to become hits during the same season. I'm not hoping that the shows will fail, but at the same time, the odds are against both shows regardless of quality. First and second-year shows are essentially auditioning to survive to season 5 and you don't get most of the things you audition for. d) As for the "If you write it, they [the actors] will come." factor. Again, so totally a non-issue. The actors have stipulated that they are willing to do it. Period. Your point has been answered and concerns disregarded by the actors themselves by the very existence of their positive answers to ASP's plan. But to delve deeper into the topic: Precedents have been made regarding this, most famously with Farscape. The actors -- Browder, Black, Edgley, etc. -- made an unofficial agreement among themselves and the show producers that they wouldn't take any longer-term gigs for as long as they possibly could in order to keep the window for a revival or conclusion of that show open for as long as possible. The result: The Peacekeeper Wars miniseries that ended the series with a proper conclusion (or concluded the series with a proper ending, depending on your perspective. ) Now, I'm not saying that there's any sort of informal agreement along those lines in Gg-land -- *except,* perhaps, between LG and ASP themselves (and even then, I'm speculating). But I'll give you a hint about actor mentality: Most actors, while they have to compartmentalize and treat their gigs as jobs that they have to be prepared to lose at any time, are fans of the shows that they do (unless the show is a complete disaster and then you can see the disdain they have for the movie or show through the spin). Most of the actors on Gg are fans of the show and/or ASP and have stated that they would not hesitate for a second to work with her again. Do the math: stipulating the condition that a script or scripts were ready and/or just plain greenlit, an agreement to do any sort of a Gg revival, whether a movie or a miniseries would involve little more working out a schedule to get them all back. The show worked around the schedules of the recurring, non-contract actors (Struthers, Winters, Torres, etc.) anyway, so they aren't an issue, it's just business as usual regarding getting them. For the main-credits actors, their availability is more a case of planning ahead, saying, "keep such and such a month open." Of *course* no actor is going to be able to drop everything at the drop of a hat -- even non-A-listers are generally booked 2-6 months in advance, the bigger the actor, the more advance notice. (A-List movie stars, which not even one of the actors from the show are even though LG should be, are most often booked a year to two years in advance. For other movies. TV stars, it's 2-6 months at the most.) Since Amy has stipulated that she wants to write it and the actors have stipulated that they're willing to do it, the only two issues are then getting it greenlit and assembling the actors into a schedule a reasonable-enough time in advance. IMO, the harder part is going to be getting it greenlit. But heck, I think that if The CW makes the mistake of passing that Warner Studio would go ahead and do it anyway as it would make a great direct-to-dvd project (whether 2-hour movie or miniseries) that would add immense value to the property by (likely) ending the show on its own creative terms rather than ending it with LG and DSR's well-meaning, retroactively jerry-rigged but creatively disastrous season finale. -- Rob ------------------------ Season 8: Because there are too many forensic procedurals and reality shows on TV, so the schedule is pretty darn grim in more ways than one. Back to top LinaLoN Joined: 27 Jul 2007 Posts: 87 Location: NH Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 5:47 am    Post subject: I think hitting Amy for something a little more than 2 hours would be the wisest move at this point. I thought perhaps a summer season would be okay for an 8th season but there are too many complications in that. I too was thinking about Amy converting her 2-hr mini movie into a four episode thing. Only two hours means she would have to cut a lot of things out and she would have to squish alot of other things together to show what we have been waiting years to see. Aside from Melissa most of the other actors/actresses have flexible schedules... Lauren and Aelxis will once their main movies are done. Scott while it looks like AiA might be a hit with the CW... it is up against Heros which is Golith-sized besides, that Scott's role is very small with very short taping sessions AND Vancover isn't too far from California. As for Melissa....I think the Samatha Who isn't going to be as big a hit as everyone is thinking. Yeah I like Christina Applegate too but the concept of the show is a little thin and Melissa's role can't be too big if I haven't seen one image of her in the commercials. What is taking up most of her time otherwise is motherhood. By the time the Summer season comes closer the show will most likely either be cancelled or finishing the season so Melissa could be available if a GG gets started in the summer. Alexis will have the big vacation she wanted so I don't see why Amy won't be able to get her on board... Amy can be very pursuasive (sp?). All we really need is a little something more. _________________ Season 8; because we've waited and held onto it... for eight years Back to top ShutUpRob Site Admin Joined: 05 Jul 2007 Posts: 62 Location: In reality, Missouri; in my mind, Stars Hollow, CT. Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 6:47 pm    Post subject: BTW, one more thing I wanted to add at the present time that I've mentioned before is the impending, likely-to-happen writers' strike. Their contract ends on October 31st (note when our deadline for the peitition is: Roughly Nov.8 or so, in time to print it out and send it to DO, LG, AB, ASP in time for the Nov. 13th release of the DVD sets. If the strike happens -- and at this point, it's a 90% certainty, then actors and other members of various unions won't cross the picket lines due to solidarity with the WGA. In that case, all filming for all series comes to a screeching halt until new agreements are made and there'd be no telling when that would be. IMO, that likely wouldn't bode well for new series that would be struggling *before* the strike commences. But it also means that our own timing might have to be adjusted, which might just possibly be to our advantage. -- Rob -------------------- Season 8: Because while I'm now a fan of Weeds thanks to the DVDs, I prefer my Lorelai without Pot. Back to top LinaLoN Joined: 27 Jul 2007 Posts: 87 Location: NH Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 3:30 am    Post subject: Yeah on TV.com in the Bones forum they were talking about it. I guess the contracts end in October however, nothing will go into effect until after June 8th or something like that. However, there is always the possibility that they will strike right away before June 8th. I figure if they really want results fast and find themselves back at work quickly then they would take action as soon as they could. _________________ Season 8; because we've waited and held onto it... for eight years Back to top GilmoresRock5 Joined: 21 Jul 2007 Posts: 74 Location: MA Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 7:14 pm    Post subject: Rob- You're outlook makes a lot of sense. I love when you give us these insights into the actors/writers/tv-series world. It is definitely info I would never see anywhere else and I find it soooo fascinating! Plus, you always manage to make it sound like our goal of a GG resurrection has a good chance of happening. I really hope you are right! I've seen you be correct other predictions so I think you could be right with this too! I am tired of seeing all the negativity other GG fans bring to the forum. We all need to think positively! We need to see it happen in our minds before it happens in reality! _________________ Luke: Rory's not here yet. Lorelai: Then you'll have to entertain me until she arrives. Okay Burger boy, dance. Luke: Will you marry me? [Lorelai is taken aback] Luke: Just looking for something to shut you up. Back to top ShutUpRob Site Admin Joined: 05 Jul 2007 Posts: 62 Location: In reality, Missouri; in my mind, Stars Hollow, CT. Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 3:11 am    Post subject: LinaLoN wrote: Yeah on TV.com in the Bones forum they were talking about it. I guess the contracts end in October however, nothing will go into effect until after June 8th or something like that. However, there is always the possibility that they will strike right away before June 8th. I figure if they really want results fast and find themselves back at work quickly then they would take action as soon as they could. Okay, I was anticipating that there's going to be a LOT of confusion about this not just here on the STL boards, but on MBs and TV fandom in general. The collective bargaining contracts for three major guilds (unions) -- the WGA (Writers' Guild), DGA (Directors' Guild) and SAG (Screen Actors' Guild) -- all come up for renewal over the next year and all signs lead to all of the negotiations being contentions. None of the guilds' contracts come up for renegotiating at the same time. These contracts are for the stuff that is standard in all contracts for the given guild -- health benefits, set safety issues, arbitration for onscreen credit for your work (this is particular to writers), minimum per-episode salaries, especially for non-contracted roles (day players, recurring actors not on contract, the dude to the left with one line, etc.), residuals from various revenue sources (syndication, DVDs, etc.) and a lot of other standard contract requirements that escape me now. These contracts are *far* more about protecting the rights of the rank-and-file members of these guilds -- the literally 99% of the members of these guilds who make anywhere from lower class to upper-middle-class salaries on a good day. It's not to protect the stars or hotshots in any of these guilds, but those stars were once the rank-and-file of these guilds, remember what it was like when they weren't working often and how their guild benefits kept them in the business long enough for them to win big in the series lottery. So they're sure as heck going to strike in solidarity for the 99% (I'm literally not exaggerating) of their coworkers who earn very little. * The contracts for the WGA, which is the weakest of the three guilds, expire on October 31st. It is somewhere around 90% likely that the WGA is going to strike due to issues both specific to their concerns (credit arbitration when a movie has multiple writers and getting the studios to have fewer writers rewrite any given script) and common to all the guilds (DVD residuals, DVD residuals and DVD residuals.) If/when they vote to strike -- and it may be a few days past the October 31st deadline if negotiators on both sides agree to stay at the table (and that's only if the rank-and-file of the guild agree) -- if/when they vote to strike, *all* work on TV series, TV movies/miniseries and theatrical movies will cease. * The DGA and Screen Actors' Guilds' contracts aren't up for renegotiation until next year, in different months. I think the DGA's is in March and SAG's is at the top of June and the technical start of the next TV season, hence the confusion about June 8th of next year. Among these major guilds' issues is also DVD residuals. * Back in the last round of negotiations about 3-4 years ago, with the threat of the guilds striking in the same order, TV-on-DVD was still a new, experimental format. Because it wasn't a proven source of revenue back then, the WGA caved on the subject of such residuals (they had pro-studio leadership at that time), severely weakening the other two guilds' chances the next year. Any idiot could see at the time that TV-on-DVD was going to be a hit with consumers and thereby cut into the guildmembers' residuals, thus inflicting a significant pay cut for them akin to a cut in their pensions. The problem was, to use a metaphor, while you could see the iceberg up ahead, you hadn't actually hit it yet. To use another metaphor: the other two guilds use the WGA's negotiations as the canary in the coal mine for their own chances. Doesn't mean that they'll go the way that the WGA does, but whatever the WGA does or gets out of the studios is information that they'll use in their own separate negotiations next year. But wait, there's more! * Why will all production cease when the writers go on strike? Don't they have backlogs of scripts to film? Well, answering the second question will illuminate the first: Yes, the studios have backlogs of scripts of both movies and TV that they've bought in preparation for the strike. The problem is that they have to film them before the strike happens. So there's all this activity to make as many movies and put as many TV episodes in the can before the strike as they can. Hence, for example, Lauren going on her "Wife World Tour" in movie roles and NBC having started up production of Las Vegas waaaay last March-April so that the entire season could be in the can by the strike deadline. Other series, such as the Law & Orders have schedules that naturally start earlier because New York's climate forces them to shut down longer during the mostly snow-bound winters. So over the next month and a half, movie production will be slowing down. A Roman Polanski period piece has already been canceled due to having budget problems so close to the strike deadline that it's unlikely that the issues would be resolved in time, for instance. TV shows, which are, of course, on a much shorter production schedule than movies are, will be able to keep producing new episodes closer to the strike deadline. Bionic Woman is having creative issues that are putting it severely behind schedule already, which may wreak havoc with its chances of success if/when the strike happens. What'll happen is that if/when the WGA votes to strike, movies close enough to finishing, like a week or two, will be allowed to wrap and the current episode of each TV series will be allowed to wrap -- it's not, like, boom! Everything comes to a screeching halt at the stroke of midnight, there'll just be a quick transition out. Unless one or the other side is particularly spiteful (a possibility that can't be ruled out), it's in both the guilds' and the studios' best interests due to production costs (and continuity issues) already invested in shows not in the can exactly at the deadline to let whatever's close to finishing production finish production as soon as possible after the strike deadline has passed. The reason that they do this is because even though they could technically film scripts of movies and/or TV shows during such a strike, they would only be able to shoot them as is -- absolutely no changes whatsoever. Not by an actor, not by a director -- the guild contracts forbid anyone but the contracted writer(s) to make any changes to the scripts, so god forbid that a movie or show films *during* a strike and they discover a major plot hole that could be resolved by rewriting one or two pages on the spot, it just can't be done because there's no writer there to do it or to supervise it. (And writer-director and actor-director hyphenates, as members of the WGA, would be striking anyway.) So out of necessity, the production machinery has to stop. Furthermore, related unions in a given field generally have reciprocity agreements. Depending on if these three unions have reciprocity agreements (and IIRC, they do), then neither SAG nor the DGA would cross the WGA's picket lines during a strike anyway. Such reciprocity agreements (you strike, we won't cross your picket lines and vice-versa) make it essentially impossible for the studios to use scabs. The unions learned that lesson during a long writers' strike in the 80's when one of the networks decided to remake Mission: Impossible in Australia using scripts from the original series. Original M:I star Peter Graves still played Mister Phelps and was joined by other US actors. While I forget which side actually won that one (I *think* it was the writers, who got Home Video -- VHS only -- residuals), even then, the scab-work of that incarnation of Mission: Impossible made that strike nastier than it had to be and it hasn't been tried again since, even though there's always scuttlebutt leading up to every strike talks that one or another of the networks will try it again, but even the most loyal unionists don't think that the networks will ever be crazy enough to try that again. Hence, the talks of a more ethical solution, which would be to repeat basic cable shows already filmed, such as The Closer, Monk, Burn Notice, etc. on the networks. So, anyway, the deadline for the WGA strike is October 31st. If the writers' strike is long and nasty, it could extend past the DGA's strike deadline early next year and even into the SAG strike deadline in the middle of next year. It's also possible that the WGA's strike could be resolved and the DGA still strikes over its issues or the the WGA finishes its strike, the DGA and the studios sign a new contract without a strike and SAG *still* strikes. Conversely, it's very possible that if the WGA strike is very nasty and ultimately results in the WGA getting what it wants, especially on the subject of DVD residuals, that the studios/networks would then be forced to give into the DGA and SAG's demands on DVD residuals, averting further strikes. The consensus is that everyone knows that the studios/networks know that they're going to have to give in on the issue of DVD residuals due to the severe cut that the guilds' members have suffered from the decline of syndication residuals (For one, the rerun residuals on cable, even for a show that was originally aired on one of the five broadcast networks, are substantially lower than if they were rerun on individual broadcast channels. And that's for all the guilds. I know, it's arcane.) But the question isn't whether or not the corporations are going to give in, it's just how hard they're going to fight what's going to be a losing battle. The more they dig in their heels and force the guilds to dig in their heels, the longer the strike will last, of course. But fortunately, the increased competition for ad dollars among all of the broadcast and basic cable networks has made the broadcast networks desperate to continue the flow of what they do best: produce twice as many episodes of any given TV high quality, expensive series than any basic cable channel can afford to do for their cheaper-budgeted shows. Hold onto your hats, guys, things are about to get interesting. -- Rob --------------------- Season 8: Because, well, Gg still did well in repeats over the summer, too. Back to top linda Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Posts: 10 Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:12 am    Post subject: http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-News-Blog/Todays-News/Wb-Gilmore-Girls/800035174 The WB Is Back, with Gilmore Girls and More! Back to top linda Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Posts: 10 Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 3:13 am    Post subject: linda wrote: http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-News-Blog/Todays-News/Wb-Gilmore-Girls/800035174 The WB Is Back, with Gilmore Girls and More! Two years after signing off the airwaves, the WB is returning with new programming — as well as some of its most memorable series — but not on TV. According to an article in the Hollywood Reporter, the Warner Bros. Television Group is reviving the network as a website, where viewers will be able to watch free streaming episodes of Gilmore Girls, What I Like About You and Everwood, as well as all other WB-produced shows. (The site's "working title," wb.com, currently jumps to a general Warner Bros. Studios roundup of movies, TV, DVDs, etc.) The WB, which merged with UPN in 2006 to become the bastion of twentysomething programming that is the CW, aired a string of fan-favorite shows in its 10-year existence, including Dawson's Creek, Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. It's not clear yet whether non-Warner Bros. shows will be available on the site, but new Web-minisodes are reportedly in the works, with series aimed at the WB's core audience. Warner Bros. hasn't confirmed the details, but the Reporter's sources say that wb.com will have a preliminary launch next month and a "major rollout" in the fall. Whether or not anyone will be watching Jack & Bobby still remains a mystery. What's your take? Which now-defunct WB series do you most hope ends up streaming on this new site? — Nina Hämmerling Smith Leave a Comment Back to top potatojungle Joined: 01 Aug 2007 Posts: 62 Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:54 am    Post subject: linda wrote: http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-News-Blog/Todays-News/Wb-Gilmore-Girls/800035174 The WB Is Back, with Gilmore Girls and More! I guess this spells the end of GG reruns on ABC Family. Back to top linda Joined: 16 Apr 2008 Posts: 10 Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:16 pm    Post subject: potatojungle wrote: linda wrote: http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-News-Blog/Todays-News/Wb-Gilmore-Girls/800035174 The WB Is Back, with Gilmore Girls and More! I guess this spells the end of GG reruns on ABC Family. ABC Family has a whole pages for G.G, all that work can't be for nothing. I'm still hoping for a season 8 or as the on-line gossip goes a 2 hour movie,..ahh the tease! On U-tube someone is "making-up" an 8th season,..lol..G.G fans really did get a raw deal out of this. The on-line petition has over 12,000 signatures and still growing. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         ~Save the Lorelais~ Forum Index -> News All times are GMT + 2 Hours Goto page 1, 2  Next Page 1 of 2   Jump to: Select a forum Save the Lorelais----------------CampaignsNewsSTL.orgOff-TopicReasons for season 8  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group Igloo Theme Version 1.0 :: Created By: Andrew Charron