i've heard mixed things, that it was both good and bad. so i dunno i'll at some point watch it. i don't mind the original show from the 50's. and i never saw the apparent (1981) film. but i heard that was dreadful as well.

my mistake it was in (1999) i just know cause i was in high school at the time and i still have my notebook i used in school somewhere. my mistake. i was a year off no big deal. and yes syfy is a terrible channel. it recently i dunno when even stopped airing the monster of the week films on saturdays! did they change days? or just cancel it altogether ?  only show i watch on it right now is just Haven.  back in the day all i would watch is The Sci-fi channel non stop it would be on the entire night. and weekends as well. we've had it since (1997)  and it was great back than. now it's pure crap.

and also yes i do think that IF given to the right writer and the right director who really do love the series and they are faithful to the show than yes it can be done. and don't make it a comedy either. if they want to say certain characters in the film if it's a villian of course and depending on who it is than if it's done right.

i can live with that. just as long as they give some of the original cast members from the show not just walk on roles but roles who actually speak. and are part of the film. i'm sure they'd love to come back to do another DS film. and even invite some cast that weren't in last years film.

i was just thinking the same thing i love it.

i really doubt they will ever put out Darren's Version. but i of course hope i am wrong. i'm curious & this may sound like a stupid question but how well did the Depp version do anyways? i wasn't really following it. it of course didn't do business like say "Batman' did back in (1989) for example. or "Edward Scissorhands' both are
i think classic in their own right.

but is there going to be a sequel to the Depp film? i thought i heard somewhere that it was greenlight for one. but the thing is though i have heard that. i haven't heard anything since if that is still going to even happen. if they do make one & by the trailers it looks like they added comedy? in it they should remove that in the next film. maybe have someone who will do it better since i haven't heard the greatest things about the film. & honestly i don't always get the spelling of "J.Frids's name right either. but than i don't often type or write his name anyways it's only on a rare occassion so that's my excuse. what's theirs?

i think with them using "Joan Bennet's name on the front makes sense actually. no her part isn't big in the film but she is  a name actress. kind how like some films that "John Carradine" did through the years when he only had a cameo in it, he was billed on the front.  & in some of the 'Christopher Lee" films where he's only has a cameo or just a small role or just even hell a narrator. he gets sometimes top billing. even though

he wasn't used that much. that's prolly the same reason on why "Joan's B.' name is on the front.
i dunno why Kate Jackson's name isn't on the cover she's i think still a name. just from "Charlie's Angel's itself. unless the current moron's running that department hasn't even taken a look at the film.

i don't mean the people who did restore it a few years ago at the Warners. anyways if the Depp Version did flop maybe they just don't want to tie it in together? or something? i dunno it'll prolly say something mentioning it though. no doubt they will stick a trailer on for the film before the film starts. or i dunno they may think that people will get confused on which film they are buying. i may have said this in the past here. where some people are pretty damn stupid. back when my brother was manager at various video stores through the years. people would rent say "Malcom X' sorry about my spelling. when that was out in the theatre. & when they saw a video in the video store called that. they thought it was the actual film.

than they'd rent it & watch it & than complain that it wasn't the film but the actual documentary! they didn't carry porn so it wouldn't surprise me if someone would even get those titles confused. well the paradoy's anyways. there are some pretty stupid people out there. i'm not calling anyone here stupid but you all know someone like this. or are related to at least one person. my point is maybe that's WB reasoning on putting them release wise apart?

well said well said. & you too Cousin Barnabas. honestly not to be Mean it didn't even occur me to how much Jim Pearson put his hard work into as well. as well as the cast. you would think that with the cast members who were involved & who support it. plus the man who Run DS Jim Pearson they'd reconsider & realize there's a market for it. hell they did put out the whole series on dvd. yes i know that MPI originally put those out. but they sold well enough to do the whole show.

i forget who's since re-released the show but that has to be doing well. & those big box sets of the whole series you'd think they'd look at the numbers if Warner's didn't put those out they could have at least picked up the phone. i doubt they did but it would have been nice. i haven't seen the Johnny Depp/Tim Burton Film yet to be honest. i never got around to see it in the theatre. but i have heard it wasn't good. so i'll prolly buy that on blu-ray. since it's DS & i'll go in with an open mind. like i always do when it comes to watching a film. or tv show etc..

honestly i dunno if refusing to buy the films as they are going to put them out will help our cause. i don't think dvd is done yet to be honest. we prolly still got a few years left of it i'm sure. but i do see your point though. i'd say i wish MGM would help us out. but they have been having money problems for years!
cause didn't they release the films? way back when? i know my VHS copy of the 1st film was put out by them at least. or does Warner own them now? i lose track who owns MGM since it's been sold countless times through the past 20-25 years to be honest.  even though MGM is my favorite movie company. well that & New Line. this kinda reminds me of Paramount with the Friday the 13th Series well the films i mean.

on how for years they denied having ANY deleted scenes for any of the films. than in (2004) they put out that dvd box set. & what do you know it's got deleted scenes!  now they are saying that's all there was.

which i doubt. the original uncut versions for those from what i hear the MPAA prolly has their own copies. but Paramount isn't putting those out. nor seeking them out either. same thing isn't it? sorry for going off topic a bit. i've been watching that series a little bit in the past few days. he he.

granted that's NOT based off a tv series. but they drag their feet on those as well. it did later become a great tv series though. anyways. back on topic. i also thank Darren & everyone who has worked on getting the intended film out as it was meant to be. i was also a follower of his website for a long time as well. & i missed it & still miss it a great deal but i do understand why he closed it. as you can tell i've calmed down a LOT. it just sickens me HOW cheap these movie companies are yet they can afford these stars with these stupid pay checks. & these over priced films that most of time these days anyways suck. sure we get some good ones. but movies honestly have sucked ass in the past few years.  that's why the lose money.

i'll prolly buy them just to have them. but oh this pisses me off. since Darren was unable to find footage for the 1st film ok that makes me sad. but that's not his fault. i know he did try for quite a long time. & he worked quite hard to find all the cut scenes for the 2nd film. i'm to lazy to put the titles.

sorry this just makes me mad. he worked his ass off working on that one. so not only does this i'm sure upset him. but the rest of us as well. as you can tell i am mad about this.  i'm sorry i don't care about the theatrical cut for the 2nd film. that film well that cut makes no sense to me & it was cut in a way that the film makes NO SENSE to me. it's boring as well. i was dying to see the uncut version so that the film would explain more of the story for not only me but the rest of us here. oh there's no doubt that i prolly would have enjoyed that cut MUCH better than the theatrical cut.

since it was the version that "Dan Curtis" wanted to put out but was as we all know was pretty much forced to cut. i'm sure i'm not alone in this either. sorry folks i just had to vent.

i haven't seen the flix yet. i hope it's good. but i do got a bit off topic question though. did they do a video game to this? i know for the last couple "Tim Burton" films they did one for. but did "Dark Shadows" get one does anyone know? i can't seem to find any info on this whatsover!