Best Incarnation of DS

[Patti Feinberg]

Well, thankfully, it's no where near 'voting' time in the 'real world'.

IYHO, which of the above named 3 DS feature movies is your favorite?

Feel free to elaborate.

Have fun!


Patti

[The Doctor and K9]

My vote for HODS is subject to change, should we ever get to see the uncut version of NODS.

[KMR]

I voted for NODS. (Decades ago, I would have said HODS instead.) The pacing of the story, and the emphasis on chills instead of thrills, seem to be more in line with the whole tenor of the original soap opera. HODS seems to be "DS Takes on Hammer's Dracula Movies". For all of its flaws, it's still quite wonderful in its own right, however.

The 2012 movie is both the best and worst incarnation, if that makes any sense. There is so much that is fabulous in it, and the nods to the original pre-Barnabas storylines are fascinating. But I'm unhappy with Barnabas' makeup, and the final act of the story nearly jumped the shark.

[Janet the Wicked]

I like House of DS best. I have a hard time watching NODS, most likely because of all the missing footage. It never made much sense to me. I think House is John Karlen's movie all the way and I remember John was in attendance at my first fest watching the film. He seemed to be enjoying himself.
I like the Johnny Depp version because it makes me laugh.

[Uncle Roger]

It's House for me. Nice mix of horror and camp. Plus, it's got some great shots of the Briscoe pecs and Nancy Barrett's see through shroud.

[Janet the Wicked]

I know it's been said that House is too bloody bloody, but it was the times, and compared to the violence in movies and television of current times, it ain't so bad.

Briscoe pecks. Oh, yeah...

[KMR]

Yes, Don in his blue jammies is the highlight of HODS. 

[Patti Feinberg]

Loving some of the elaborations...Briscoe's pecks, lol.

I totally get the best/worst of the 2012...but, thankfully it's been done!!! (No empty promises, like the 2004 WB!!)

I too love the pacing of NoDS.

I didn't realize the NoDS that I recently purchased was dramatically edited...dare I ask what I've missed?

Patti

[Gerard]

For me, it's Dark Shadows (2012).  Was it perfect?  No, but neither was HoDS and NoDS.  I absolutely loved HoDS when it came out and I saw it in the theater, but I was 13-year-old back then an a hopeless DS fan, so of course I would love it.  Now, being a tinge older, I see its flaws.  If they had shot the entire screenplay, it would've been so much better.  As for NoDS when it came out a year later (played as a double-bill with HoDS), I also saw it in the theater and really liked it, but found it somewhat confusing (again, because the entire screenplay was not filmed, and parts that were - like HoDS - ended up on the cutting-room floor).  I still think it's an atmospheric film, but without the cuts it's far from perfect.  So that brings us to DS-2012.  After seeing (on-line) scenes that were cut, it would've been a greater film.  Many did not like the comedic elements (at our local Wal-Mart, it's sold in the "comedy" rather than the "horror" section).  But I found them - for the most part - a far more realistic element than what Dan Curtis would've brought into another cinematic reincarnation.  I'm afraid if this late, great man tried it again, we'd just get another rehasing of HoDS, like he did with the '91 version and it would've ended up being a logic-missing piece of work (just as '91 did).  DS-2012 took our beloved story and made it more logical - again, for the most part - and one could tell that Depp and Burton also loved the original series. 

I don't deny that Dan Curtis did some great things with the previous movie versions; he did.  In HoDS, he showed us what he originally intended for the Barnabas story-line.  He was able to add all the Hammeresque gore to it so popular back then.  In NoDS, he gave us a frightening ghost story.  But in so many ways he wouldn't think "outside the box."  (And, as I said, the never-filmed or deleted scenes would've done so much more for both films.)  Depp/Burton, however, tried to move outside that box and from my own experience with their movie it worked.  Friends of mine who always hated DS came to love it because of that film.  After we initially saw it, they had tons of questions for me.  Neither HoDS or NoDS, I would think, ever had that impact.

And don't forget, while HoDS and NoDS played maybe for a week-or-so in theaters, thrilling fans, DS-2012 played in them for almost half-a-year.  It was still in theaters when the DVD/Blu-Ray started coming out.

Gerard

[Gothick]

As a movie, I like NoDS best, because it tells its own story and stands on its own feet.  Granted, it had very little to do with the established DS universe of the broadcast series canon, but when you think about it, so did hoDS--the fact that the people have the same names and are played by the same actors makes it easy, perhaps, to overlook how "out of character" they are for their actions in the story of hoDS.  (I'll still never know what Barn's motivation was for his initial attack on Carolyn.  It sort of goes downhill from there, in terms of character, motivation, plot, etc.)

I think if the excised footage had been restored, particularly the piano scene and the seance sequence, we would see in NoDS a work that relates more fluidly and in a surprisingly sophisticated way to what we know of the DS Universe.  I've already cursed and kvetched my way across many screens about how enraged I am with the suits in WB home video about this so enough already for now.

All I'll say about Depp Shadows is that for me, it was a 100 minute, 165 million buck SNL skit.  But for those of you who enjoyed it, more power to you.

cheers, G.

[Gerard]

I respect your opinion about DS-2012, Gothic.  Not everyone warmed up to it.  I found it refreshing and more "realistic" than any version or adaptation of Ds, including the OS.  Having Barnabas freek out over a television scene of the Carpenters when he had no idea of life in 1972 made far more sense than having him show up at Collinwood in less than 48 hours in '67 clothing (did he really know how a zipper worked?). 

I fully understand that back in '67, Dan Curtis needed to move the story along.  Trying to do so in '70 was pushing it, but what else could one do in trying to keep it at 90 minutes when the PTB mandated it?  Doing so in '91 was inexcusable.  The moment in that latter version that people were wondering who the vampire was (a loss of sublety from the OS) and couldn't figure it out was unforgiveable. 

As for NoDS, I agree with you.  It was placed in a somewhat different world.  From the comment made by housekeeper Carlotta regarding the death of Eliabeth Collins Stoddard, it made a connection with HoDS, but was she the same ECS from HoDS?  What almost ruined the film was the cutting of script and scenes.

As I said, was DS-2012 perfect?  Far from it.  All those deleted scenes should have remained (as they should have in HoDS and NoDS).  But it gave us new and more practical twists on many of the characters (even if, because of screenwriting and editing cuts they were not fully fleshed out).  I especially loved what they did with Mrs. Johnson.  It gave us a more sympathetic character, whom the family kept on regardless of advancing dementia.  That says a lot for the Depp/Burton version of them.  It was both comedic and touching.  And, for people like me who have always loved Maggie Evans (TLATKLS), she was in there.  That says a great deal about the Depp/Burton version and its attempt to try and deliver.

Was DS-2012 filled with SNL material?  Absolutely. Did it work?  Absolutely.  Is DS fodder for SNL material?  Absolutely.  Look at the youtube stuff made by fans about it, including the guy who looks and sounds just like Julia Hoffman.  We love it.  Dank Shadows on youtube?  Wonderful.  Depp/Burton didn't go that far.  They still took is seriously, but placed in what was comedic about a 200-year-old vampire suddenly faced with the social and technological things of 1972.  In now way could he do that without it being, at times, funny.  And it should be. 

And, as I said, DS-2012 introduced a whole bunch of people I know who had either no knowledge of DS, or what knowlege they had making them hate it, to loving and appreciating it.  They have ended up fascinated by the OS plot-lines.  Now they think they are ingenious and groundbreaking.  They are amazed that a soap opera would have a cinematic star in the title role (Joan Bennett) and would use exteriors, large sets, a whole orchestrated soundtrack (rather than just an organ or piano) and take such risks that would influence soap operas and even primetime shows to this day. DS-2012 did that.  HoDS nor NoDS didn't do that.  As one friend of mine said when we all went to the movie:  "This is so good."  We DS fans need to remember what this movie, that played for almost half-a-year in theaters, has done so much to keep out beloved series alive.  We must not be so dismissive since it didn't portray out show the way wanted it to.  Dan Curtis, for all his noble work, didn't do so in his cinematic versions or the '91 version (I won't mention the '04 version, since those in control are so fanatically in control that they won't allow anyone to see it except in limited form - get over it, you people who control it, you're not going to make any money off of it, so put it on youtube and be done with it).

Gerard

[Patti Feinberg]

I am THOROUGHLY enjoying this conversation; but, is anyone actually voting?

Patti

PS....please keep up the dialogue

[KMR]

Well, I voted when I made my first comment, but I don't see that any votes are actually being tallied.

[Uncle Roger]

Same here.

[Midnite]

I don't see that any votes are actually being tallied.

Our polls have usually worked that way, but there's an option available when a poll is created to only show the results after the poll has expired, and Patti chose that setting.  So the results are something for members to look forward to.