# Pan Am OAD 09/26/2011 Pilot



## cj9788 (May 14, 2003)

Loved the music, the clothes, the whole feel of the show, I think this is my new favorite show. Sorry for the wrong date I recorded it on West Coast feed and my guide had 09/26/2011 as OAD. MOD please feel free to change date to 09/25/2011 in thread title.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Was I ever surprised, favorably, when we watched it tonight. Somehow I missed the memo that this show was going to have a "cold war spy" element.

For a pilot the writing was good and the story was introduced without overdoing it. The feel of the show was more or less true to the early 1960's. The period songs were fine, but the occasional epic film background music was a bit much. The acting was solid, the primary characters being better designed than the new "Charlie's Angels."

In the next two weeks, ABC should promo the espionage element to draw audience.


----------



## olguy (Jan 9, 2006)

We enjoyed it. I never thought I would think of anytime in my life as the time for a "period piece". :lol: And it brought back a few pleasant memories of tales my late baby sister told. She was a Continental stewardess from 1961 - 1966 when she married the B-57 driver she met in the O club at Clark AFB while ferrying troops in and out of Viet Nam.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

olguy said:


> We enjoyed it. I never thought I would think of anytime in my life as the time for a "period piece". :lol: And it brought back a few pleasant memories of tales my late baby sister told. She was a Continental stewardess from 1961 - 1966 when she married the B-57 driver she met in the O club at Clark AFB while ferrying troops in and out of Viet Nam.


I really was impressed by the premier. The Bay of Pigs thing was really unexpected as an intro to that mysterious ex-stewardess.

About being a "period piece," I was a skeptic when I read this quote at EW about comparing it to "Mad Men":


> "Is The Good Wife comparable to House because they take place in this decade?" asks creator Jack Orman. "I don't think so." Adds Ricci, "The only thing similar is the time period, and the fact that both shows are shot in very cinematic ways."


There was a lot of critical comment in advance about the $10 million spent on the pilot. But some of that money was wll spent on thoughtful, complex writing creating what could continue to be complex characters.


----------



## olguy (Jan 9, 2006)

The only thing that bothered me at all was the apparent youth of the pilot. Many commercial pilots in the 60's were WWII vets. Sis flew with several of them.

I am looking forward to the series. Wonder if we will see Bridget later?


----------



## njblackberry (Dec 29, 2007)

I enjoyed the pilot a lot more than I expected to. Great historical references, music and scenery. Looking forward to next week's episode!


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

You know, some big critics lumped this in with the Playboy Club which is a huge turkey, but I think they're being unfair to Pan Am. It's not great, but it's definitely got something going on.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

phrelin said:


> Was I ever surprised, favorably, when we watched it tonight. Somehow I missed the memo that this show was going to have a "cold war spy" element.


Yep, this one took me completely by surprise, it was nothing like I was expecting. I wonder if they can keep up the production values - that may be tough for an internationally-set period piece. If they do a "very special" episode where everyone's locked in the luggage compartment for the whole show, you'll know it's because of the budget.

The one thing that confused me a bit was headliner Christina Ricci's relatively small part in the first episode. Granted, they needed to establish the spy storyline, but I'm wondering if Ricci's character will be more of a supporting one rather than the lead.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

mreposter said:


> ...The one thing that confused me a bit was headliner Christina Ricci's relatively small part in the first episode. Granted, they needed to establish the spy storyline, but I'm wondering if Ricci's character will be more of a supporting one rather than the lead.


Based on her past experience playing 'jailbait' roles, perhaps the Ricci credit is being used as bait for the show. If that _is_ the case, then it works for me! :sure:


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Ricci's huge scary sunken eyes make her look like an escapee from the Adams family, and she was clearly the odd man out looks-wise on the show. And role-wise, she had nothing to do once the plane took off.

But the rest were very well cast, a very attractive and fresh ensemble. Really well done show, which is not surprising since Tommy Schlamme was directing (West Wing/Sports Night).

Looking forward to next week's show.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Enjoyed episode 2. It appears that the CIA - MI6 Cold War subplot is significant and will continue. It's nice to find something with possible mystery that isn't about bodies and computerized forensics.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Wow the Berlin ep was amazing. Some heavy stuff in there. Props to the writers for making it all work. Kind of a "West Wing" vibe with the mix of romance, light comedy and serious drama. A keeper.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Yeah, this is a well written and produced show. Unfortunately, ABC needed to introduce it in January instead of against Sunday Night Football.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> Wow the Berlin ep was amazing. Some heavy stuff in there. Props to the writers for making it all work. Kind of a "West Wing" vibe with the mix of romance, light comedy and serious drama. A keeper.


I felt quite the opposite. The Berlin episode is the one that convinced me the show isn't worth it and I canceled my series link.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> I felt quite the opposite. The Berlin episode is the one that convinced me the show isn't worth it and I canceled my series link.


What about the show made you feel that way?

Having lived through that time, it seemed very real to me, in a fictional drama way. But I wondered if it was too much focusing all of an episode on three historical elements that represented intense but accurate emotions of the time:

An otherwise reasonably intelligent young adult behaving like a groupie about Kennedy.
An accurate portrayal of the pain caused to a victim of German occupation when Kennedy chose to offer forgiveness to Germans.
A bit of a stretch, but the complexity of a young American stewardess functioning as a volunteer CIA courier (yes, they did this) facing up to the real risks taken by those trapped on the other side of the Cold War.
I'm curious.

Also, for those who don't know this, when jets began to replace prop planes in the airline industry there was a generational thing going on in the pilot ranks. WWII pilots flew prop planes. Korean War pilots were the first to fly jets. Airlines frequently put the younger pilots with jet experience in the captain's chair first.


----------



## pablo (Oct 11, 2007)

I'm loving Pan Am, I hope it's around a few seasons at least.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

phrelin said:


> What about the show made you feel that way?
> 
> Having lived through that time, it seemed very real to me, in a fictional drama way. But I wondered if it was too much focusing all of an episode on three historical elements that represented intense but accurate emotions of the time:
> 
> ...


Well the biggest thing for me is that they stage this in Terminal 6 which wasn't built until 1970 and they are in 1963... The CGI of the planes is just plain bad, no pun intended.

I know that stewardesses were popular back then but they weren't rock stars that could just walk into any party that they wanted.

They seem to just fly anywhere and are always together when you don't always fly with the same "team" let alone the same pilots. You also have assigned areas and don't just randomly fly anywhere in the world on a given day.

The story lines are just blah...

I will give them credit though for pointing out JFK said he was a jelly doughnut which everyone else seems to overlook.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I agree with RunnerFL. Really sub-par production design. The CGI looks like Microsoft Flight Simulator, the costumes look inauthentic and the entire thing has the look of a set, not the look of real life in 1963.

It's very hard, when looking at the production design, not to mention the hair. The men's hair is for the most part completely wrong. And, for all the attention paid to the idea that women were supposed to wear girdles, I don't think they were. The girdles of the day would have given the women a much more constrained posture that I don't see there.

The plots may improve, and that may rescue this show from its poor attention to set design and detail, much like you really didn't care that _The Wonder Years_ didn't look particularly '60s or _Happy Days_ didn't look particularly 50s.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Well, they did have to decide on how to split the budget between the cost of production design (sets, CGI, etc.), location expenses, and people (actors, directors, writers, etc.) and while I like Christina Ricci (probably the most expensive actor on the show) as noted in this article she isn't the ideal actress for the look.

By the way the article does reflect what I know about girdles of the time period, that they were becoming more flexible and less movement restraining:


> It quickly becomes apparent that Jack Orman is not the man to ask about the tensile strength of the Van Raalte Parisian pink Power Net girdle, circa 1963, nor its magical Lycra properties. "Puts everything about you in its place," promised the Van Raalte advertisements of the day, along with the rather discomfiting ad line: "Opens the door to a world of nice things."


It's an interesting article and offers this picture from The Pan Am Historical Foundation:








On the foundations web site they note:


> ABC has introduced a new series, Pan Am, in their Fall 2011 lineup. Brainchild of former Pan American World Airways flight attendant Nancy Hult Gannis, the show stars Christina Ricci and is put together with meticulous attention to the detail that distinguished the "world's most experienced airline."


They haven't offered any post premier critique.

I hope that now we have the relevant backstory, the episode story arcs will improve though the article causes me some concern that the next few episodes are going to become a 1960's travelogue:


> ...[Jack] Orman puts down any notion that the...series Pan Am, of which he is creator and executive producer, is a small-screen derivative of the highly sexed, and sexist, _Coffee, Tea or Me?_ take on Swinging Sixties stewardesses.
> 
> ...It's just that Pan Am the show, just like the once glorious airline, is historically rich, with a dramatic arc that will jet viewers to Paris, Jakarta, Hong Kong, Monte Carlo, Rome and, not least, Berlin for President John F. Kennedy's Ich Bin Ein Berliner speech....
> 
> "Pan Am represented a time when America was at its apex," Orman continues. "The whole idea of the Jet Age. It was glamorous, new. Anything was possible."


That's a bit of an overstatement as at the end of 1963 a lot of us watched the hope and optimism reflected in Ricci's character in this last episode ominously carried to a grave.

We'll see.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

That's a great picture and really illustrates what's wrong with the overall design of this show (in contrast.) Look at the "whitewalls" on that guy in the center. Look at the posture of every woman in the picture... back straight but leaning slightly forward. The mural on the wall, hopelessly hokey by today's standards but obviously quite exciting then. Also notice that neither man is wearing a hat. I could see wearing a hat in the airport - my granddad did, even though it was gauche to do so inside. He wore hats in the airport and the train station but took them off when he sat. Too much indoor hat wearing in _Pan Am._

Yes, I'm still as picky as ever, and until _Mad Men_ comes back I'll be biting into this show with vigor.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Yes, I'm still as picky as ever, and until _Mad Men_ comes back I'll be biting into this show with vigor.


:lol:

I'm also suffering from "Mad Men" separation anxiety.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

phrelin said:


> Well, they did have to decide on how to split the budget between the cost of production design (sets, CGI, etc.), location expenses, and people (actors, directors, writers, etc.) and while I like Christina Ricci (probably the most expensive actor on the show) as noted in this article she isn't the ideal actress for the look.


Well but they could have chosen to build their set, if it is a set and not just a green screen, based on a terminal that existed in 1963. I'm not sure about location expenses, I believe it's all shot in NY.

And it wouldn't take much more effort to make a plane look like it's landing instead of just falling out of the sky. :lol:


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I think that all things considered they would have been better off using stock footage than trying to recreate stuff in the computer.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I think that all things considered they would have been better off using stock footage than trying to recreate stuff in the computer.


Yes, agreed.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

So are people still sticking with this show? I'm still watching, but have been kinda disappointed, the show just isn't clicking, like it's not sure what it wants to be or what the underlying story is supposed to be. 

I also think Christina Ricci is badly miscast here and it's showing more and more each week.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

mreposter said:


> So are people still sticking with this show? I'm still watching, but have been kinda disappointed, the show just isn't clicking, like it's not sure what it wants to be or what the underlying story is supposed to be.
> 
> I also think Christina Ricci is badly miscast here and it's showing more and more each week.


Yeah, there was a lot of promise in the premise, but the primary writers and showrunners Jack Orman and Nancy Hult Ganis seem to be out of touch with a potentially reachable audience. In retrospect, despite their denials, maybe they did think they were going to create the new "Mad Men" but on broadcast television. They should have focused on plot, plot, and plot and let others worry about what life was like in the early 1960's. And a consistent plot could not have the crew flying to Europe one day and the Far East the next.

Christina Ricci was an odd choice because she's too short - she couldn't have been a stew. I like her, but the recent back story on her character and her character's ambition just doesn't work.

I'll continue to watch because I anticipated something different - it's almost like a bullfight where the bull is winning.


----------



## EKrimmer (Mar 21, 2008)

I have all eps on DVR. Watched 1st 3 but after another "stews go to another foreign location and there's a spy subplot" my interest waned. It has more potential. Haven't given up but lost it's "must see" status with me. Plus Hell on Wheels is in the mix now...


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

The Berlin ep showed so much promise and depth. This last ep with the obnoxious Smash kid from Friday Night Lights was nothing but sickening pandering and political diatribe. The handling of Nico was just ridiculous, silly stuff. Show has gone from fresh and dynamic to slow and tawdry. Wake up, writers!

Of course, we're also witnessing budget-itis. The show promised a new city every week. Now all we get are airplane interiors, apartment interiors and NYC street scenes. Cheep cheep! I thought this was a road picture, guys!


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jul 9, 2007)

Well, it was supposed to be, but the ratings don't justify the expense hit that a real road series would involve. I know they make these things much in advance of the showings, so they just don't know how well they'll do, but we are far enough along that that I'll bet the budget cuts are a result of the first one or two episodes ratings falling short of expectations.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Unfortunately, budget cuts aren't going to save this show from the ratings ax. We'll see a new show in this slot mid-season.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

Didn't they bring in a new Producer to shake things up and work on the scripts?


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I had hopes for this show. I really did. I do think the production design has gotten a little better, although the sets have gotten more generic. I just think in the end the show was doomed by the spy subplot which seems just goofy.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> The Berlin ep showed so much promise and depth.


The Berlin episode is the one that finally helped me make my decision to drop the show.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

Man, these episodes keep getting worse and worse. 
The black sailor episode was incredibly superficial and the dialog was really clunky.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

mreposter said:


> Man, these episodes keep getting worse and worse.
> The black sailor episode was incredibly superficial and the dialog was really clunky.


It certainly was not the way I would have designed a plot dealing with racism at that time. This was a warm and fuzzy subplot that did not increase the depth of the Laura character (played by Australian actress Margot Robbie) or help the overall story arc.

What troubles me is that the writer credit for this episode went to Moira Walley-Beckett who has co-writer credits for 7 "Breaking Bad" episodes. I really don't understand what Producer/writer Jack Orman is thinking here, although he was the creator of the loser "Dr. Vegas". And I'm beginning to think that having ex-PanAm-stew producer Nancy Hult Ganis involved might not add much depth to the producer/writer ranks which is disappointing considering her non-stew background.

Pan Am, a major carrier in Latin America and the Caribbean at the time, was flying out of Miami and Houston. A thoughtful multi-episode story arc about the insidiousness of racism in the U.S., Latin American and the Caribbean could have been interesting and creative.

Instead, next week we're going to Caracas and be seeing a "dashing, wealthy" Venezuelan, plus confront a medical emergency involving Haiti "reeling from tropical storms." Groan.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

phrelin said:


> ...next week we're going to Caracas and be seeing a "dashing, wealthy" Venezuelan, plus confront a medical emergency involving Haiti "reeling from tropical storms." Groan.


Carlos Ramirez from the Flying Nun, perhaps? 
Groan, indeed...


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Well, I won't discuss plot points, but I'm still watching. It's definitely cheesy, but I kind of get a kick out of it. I won't be upset if it's canceled, but I'll watch until it is.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

Haitian rebels? Ugh. 
Okay, I give up.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

It was as sappy and awful as any old romance movie with Tab Hunter and Natalie Wood. What's with these people?


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

This can happen to TV shows, they lose focus, the showrunner panics, the budget is cut, etc etc. Ricci is truly a brutal casting here. She has neither the looks or the height or even the youth to pull this off at all. The French chick is fantastic: lovely, subtle, sexy, sophisticated. She blows away all the other stews and steals every scene she's in. Laura is just plain awful, and her sister is not much better. And the flight crew is a classic maleogeny deal: shallow horndogs on the prowl. Period. Flat as pancakes.

Berlin used the Kennedy backdrop brilliantly, and the French stew's subplot was touching and realistic.

They've done nothing remotely like that since. Just preachy and awkward morality lessons about racism and patriotism. If I wanted those I'd be over watching cable news channels.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Québec, Canada, Karine Vanasse is a powerful actress. I hope we'll see her in other shows in this country. What I'd give for a CBCA to go along with BBCA.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

An extraordinary natural beauty, and accomplished actress. Canadian and British actresses have to go through serious stage training. American actresses have to go through serious casting couch training. Pan Am feels like 5 high school actresses in with a seasoned pro. Kari should have her own show...I'd watch!


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Maruuk said:


> Kari should have her own show...I'd watch!


When Pan Am finally fails she will. She was the only thing that stood out as great about the show to me while I was still watching it. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thought that.


----------



## Maruuk (Dec 5, 2007)

Yeah, and this last ep with the super-weak Haiti plot following the brutally preachy and heavy-handed interracial romance ep does not bode well for its continuance. Berlin and Paris were fun and set a high standard that neither the budget nor the writers can maintain. The US scenes have been uniformly awful. Too bad, there was real potential there. 

Just when the show shows a glimmer of intelligence and depth, they dumb it down with more of this lame high-school bickering between the US girls. Which goes nowhere week after week.

This is why Jason Katims and Mathew Weiner and JJ Abrams and David Chase make the big bucks. They don't allow their scripts or casting to fall short of a show's full potential.

Here's hoping somebody throws Kari a life preserver as this one seeks a watery grave.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

According to TVbytheNumbers:


> People who can read knew that Pan Am was canceled 11 days ago when ABC made its mid-season schedule announcement and ordered only one more episode of Pan Am as schedule spackle. But sometimes "hope" fogs up the reading glasses. The glasses (and hope) were wiped clean this morning when the lovely Karine Vanasse who plays Colette Valois on the show tweeted:
> 
> Well, we received THE call, #PanAm is only coming back for one more episode after Christmas. But up to the end, we'll give it our all !​


She later clarified that the cast only has one more episode to shoot while the show has 5 to air until February. In the meantime ABC maintains that renewal of the show is still up in the air.

I sure hope we get to see the talented Karine Vanasse on another show soon!


----------



## pablo (Oct 11, 2007)

Too bad. Pan Am had great promise. So far I've only seen three or four eps, and enjoyed them a lot.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

Pan Am debuted to strong numbers in September (3.2 rating, 11m viewers) but pretty much each week has lost viewers, down to a 1.8 rating and 5.6m viewers the week before thanksgiving. 

The idea for the show was pretty interesting, but I think it's clear from the ratings that this show failed in execution. Each week the uneven writing and poor casting choices chased away more viewers. 

It's one thing to try and win new viewers, but once they've watched your show and decided they don't like it, it's much more difficult to win them back. It's unfortunate, but the producers killed a show with a lot of promise.


----------



## Supramom2000 (Jun 21, 2007)

mreposter said:


> Pan Am debuted to strong numbers in September (3.2 rating, 11m viewers) but pretty much each week has lost viewers, down to a 1.8 rating and 5.6m viewers the week before thanksgiving.
> 
> The idea for the show was pretty interesting, but I think it's clear from the ratings that this show failed in execution. Each week the uneven writing and poor casting choices chased away more viewers.
> 
> It's one thing to try and win new viewers, but once they've watched your show and decided they don't like it, it's much more difficult to win them back. It's unfortunate, but the producers killed a show with a lot of promise.


I completely agree! It is more like a preachy soap now, without the appeal of Desperate Housewives or The Good Wife. I like the Collette character and I like the character of the stewardess who moonlights for the CIA. But I can't stand Christina Ricci, and she is terrible in this role. And the younger sister character is far too naive and innocent to even be real. The pilots are growing on me, but I didn't really like them at first.

I also hated the plot line with the pilot sleeping with the Exec's secretary. It came off as contrived and forced, and I didn't feel any real chemistry between them.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

As we are coming up on the season (and perhaps series) finale this coming Sunday (ABC will run the Academy Awards on the last Sunday of February), we thought that last week was a far better written episode than any to date.

The LA Times has a piece interviewing writer-producer Steven Maeda who was brought in mid-season to try to fix it:


> *Did it feel like you were hired to save a sinking ship?*
> 
> It was tough the first couple weeks but a lot of it was moving things along. We have to come up with a new script every eight days. But it works and we're all happy with the show.
> 
> ...


The show could have been great, and given an opportunity Maeda might be able to create a different show from the wreckage. Whether that's affordable is in doubt.


----------



## rrdirectsr (Jan 30, 2011)

phrelin said:


> As we are coming up on the season (and perhaps series) finale this coming Sunday (ABC will run the Academy Awards on the last Sunday of February), we thought that last week was a far better written episode than any to date.
> 
> The LA Times has a piece interviewing writer-producer Steven Maeda who was brought in mid-season to try to fix it: The show could have been great, and given an opportunity Maeda might be able to create a different show from the wreckage. Whether that's affordable is in doubt.


When do they normally announce whether or not they keep a series? I'm curious about Pan Am and Revenge.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

rrdirectsr said:


> When do they normally announce whether or not they keep a series? I'm curious about Pan Am and Revenge.


Revenge is a lock for renewal, as it's one of ABC's most successful new shows this year. There's been no official word, but with the way things were framed in the press about the "final episode," I wouldn't count on Pan Am coming back.


----------



## Church AV Guy (Jul 9, 2007)

I have to agree. Baring something REALLY unexpected, Pan Am is finished.


----------



## rrdirectsr (Jan 30, 2011)

mreposter said:


> Revenge is a lock for renewal, as it's one of ABC's most successful new shows this year. There's been no official word, but with the way things were framed in the press about the "final episode," I wouldn't count on Pan Am coming back.


I'm glad Revenge will be coming back. I really don't care much if Pan Am does but other people in my family enjoy the show.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

from deadlinehollywooddaily:

_*Pan Am co-star Karine Vanasse* is set to co-star in a new ABC drama project. The Quebec-born actress has been cast in the drama pilot Scruples. Executive produced by Tony Krantz and Natalie Portman, the project is based on the novel by Judith Krantz and centers on rich and powerful clothing designer Billy Winthrop in a world of sex, revenge and scandal. _

Scruples - ick. 
But at least Karine will get to show off her sultry side 

ps - that probably means Pan Am is dead.


----------



## Supramom2000 (Jun 21, 2007)

mreposter said:


> from deadlinehollywooddaily:
> 
> _*Pan Am co-star Karine Vanasse* is set to co-star in a new ABC drama project. The Quebec-born actress has been cast in the drama pilot Scruples. Executive produced by Tony Krantz and Natalie Portman, the project is based on the novel by Judith Krantz and centers on rich and powerful clothing designer Billy Winthrop in a world of sex, revenge and scandal. _
> 
> ...


I agree. I never liked Scruples, nor novels/shows similar. I'd like to see Karine move over to The Good Wife. Or, if she has to stay on ABC, Body of Proof, or even Castle.


----------



## trdrjeff (Dec 3, 2007)

Just finished the last two episodes (or whatever that 2nd to last aired one was, I think it was supposed to be aired in November) With a screw up like that it doesn't sound like ABC thought much of it. 

Bummer it was different and had promise.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

As the networks announce their renewals, from Deadline Hollywood:


> In an ironic twist of fate, on the same day ABC renewed its first batch of series for next season, the network's long-forgotten freshman Pam Am won the best series category at this year's Rose d'Or awards, considered Europe's top television honors. On this side of the pond Pan Am was not among the seven scripted series renewed by ABC today. It is unlikely to be among the second wave of the network's renewals tomorrow either, though ABC has not officially passed on the series, which started off great but quickly lost traction with viewers.
> 
> Unless it has a change of heart, ABC is poised to officially cancel Pan Am, but that may not be the end of the period drama about the iconic U.S. airline. As evident by the Rose d'Or award, it enjoys strong popularity in Europe and has been a big international seller for producer Sony TV, which would love to see it continue. I hear there is a potential cable play eyed for the series if/when it is released by ABC. Unless European broadcasters swoop in and pick it up. If only they could afford it&#8230;.


----------



## mreposter (Jul 29, 2006)

without it's best actress, French-Canadian Karine Vanasse, I don't see this getting picked up by a cable network. She's likely a big draw for Europeans and so the show won't do as well without her.


----------

