Forums
New posts
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Awards
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The forum is about to undergo some crucial server updates
There may be a little downtime, but we'll be back online as soon as possible.
Watch this thread for updates
Forums
Global Telly Talk
Classic US TV
Appreciating Charlie's Angels
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ClassyCo" data-source="post: 366237" data-attributes="member: 7"><p>Well, Spelling and Goldberg apparently wanted to go a new direction for the fifth season. I've heard both of them use the word "ethnic" to describe what they wanted to do when bringing in yet another actress to play yet another new Angel. </p><p></p><p>They created the Julie Rogers character to be grungier and edgier, a reformed-Angel-of-sorts that would hopefully revive the show and introduce a new dynamic to an increasingly stale police procedural. </p><p></p><p>Shari Belafonte was apparently the first actress they had in mind. I've even heard that Julie was written with Shari in mind for the part. Contrary to what's commonly stated, Shari was not considered as a replacement for Kate Jackson, but instead a replacement for Shelley Hack. </p><p></p><p>The network didn't want Shari, though, or Spelling backed out. I'm not sure what happened. Some producer politics probably. As we know, Shari rebounded -- I guess you could say -- and ended up HOTEL, another Spelling drama. </p><p></p><p>But Spelling and Goldberg still wanted an "ethnic" Angel to be incorporated into the fledgling CHARLIE'S ANGELS in 1980. Black actress Jayne Kennedy and Indian actress Susie Coelho were also considered for Julie, but they weren't cast. </p><p></p><p>The producers eventually settled on former dance instructor Tanya Roberts. Goldberg described Roberts as being "very sexy" and as providing "something different" in terms of angelic personality. </p><p></p><p>But what they basically used Tanya for was bikini photo-ops, even though I'd admit that they introduced her better than they did Shelley the year before. </p><p></p><p>Spelling failed to realize, though, or probably didn't realize or care to be more specific, that CHARLIE'S ANGELS had frankly ran out of stem. It probably wouldn't have mattered who they cast in 1979 or 1980. The show was novelty and mostly a throwaway piece of pop culture bubblegum -- in terms of the scripts and acting, that is -- that had just out-worn its welcome. </p><p></p><p>Part of the reason the turnover of Farrah into Cheryl Ladd for the second season was so successful was because audiences were still entranced with the newness of the show itself. The ratings decline for the fourth and fifth seasons shouldn't really be blamed on Shelley Hack or Tanya Roberts, but instead on the failure of the show runners to give CHARLIE'S ANGELS some life, some room to breathe so they show could "evolve" into something a little more substantial. </p><p></p><p>But, alas, it's CHARLIE'S ANGELS we're talking about. </p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]46507[/ATTACH]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ClassyCo, post: 366237, member: 7"] Well, Spelling and Goldberg apparently wanted to go a new direction for the fifth season. I've heard both of them use the word "ethnic" to describe what they wanted to do when bringing in yet another actress to play yet another new Angel. They created the Julie Rogers character to be grungier and edgier, a reformed-Angel-of-sorts that would hopefully revive the show and introduce a new dynamic to an increasingly stale police procedural. Shari Belafonte was apparently the first actress they had in mind. I've even heard that Julie was written with Shari in mind for the part. Contrary to what's commonly stated, Shari was not considered as a replacement for Kate Jackson, but instead a replacement for Shelley Hack. The network didn't want Shari, though, or Spelling backed out. I'm not sure what happened. Some producer politics probably. As we know, Shari rebounded -- I guess you could say -- and ended up HOTEL, another Spelling drama. But Spelling and Goldberg still wanted an "ethnic" Angel to be incorporated into the fledgling CHARLIE'S ANGELS in 1980. Black actress Jayne Kennedy and Indian actress Susie Coelho were also considered for Julie, but they weren't cast. The producers eventually settled on former dance instructor Tanya Roberts. Goldberg described Roberts as being "very sexy" and as providing "something different" in terms of angelic personality. But what they basically used Tanya for was bikini photo-ops, even though I'd admit that they introduced her better than they did Shelley the year before. Spelling failed to realize, though, or probably didn't realize or care to be more specific, that CHARLIE'S ANGELS had frankly ran out of stem. It probably wouldn't have mattered who they cast in 1979 or 1980. The show was novelty and mostly a throwaway piece of pop culture bubblegum -- in terms of the scripts and acting, that is -- that had just out-worn its welcome. Part of the reason the turnover of Farrah into Cheryl Ladd for the second season was so successful was because audiences were still entranced with the newness of the show itself. The ratings decline for the fourth and fifth seasons shouldn't really be blamed on Shelley Hack or Tanya Roberts, but instead on the failure of the show runners to give CHARLIE'S ANGELS some life, some room to breathe so they show could "evolve" into something a little more substantial. But, alas, it's CHARLIE'S ANGELS we're talking about. [ATTACH type="full"]46507[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Who played JR Ewing?
Post reply
Forums
Global Telly Talk
Classic US TV
Appreciating Charlie's Angels
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
