DARK SHADOWS FORUMS
General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '24 I => Current Talk '08 II => Topic started by: Watching Project on October 27, 2008, 05:55:14 PM
-
Robservations #661
-
Once again Barnabas's "My mother is dead because of you!" hit me right in the stomach.
As Nathan practiced with the crossbow in the study, I thought of a commentary I listened to recently, in which the director said, I think, that a candlelit scene was done solely with the light of the candles. Recalling it, I think I must have heard wrong - it couldn't be done with just candles, could it? - but that scene was quite dark. The study in today's flashback was by no means dark; the studio lights had it all lit up, and I thought that it would have been a more interesting scene if the lights had been turned down. Dan Curtis said that when he did the revival series he wanted to do it as people remembered Dark Shadows - much better than it actually had been - and today I thought that this was one scene that could have been improved, but it wasn't in the revival series.
It was good to see Ben Stokes again, and to think about how different he is from his descendant Timothy Eliot Stokes. If Professor Stokes were to see Ben, he would be interested in him and also amused, I suppose - but what would Ben make of the Professor?
-
When Barnabas meets Ben and asks if this is the night his mother found him in the tower, shouldn't Barnabas have gone back a day earlier to prevent Nathan from telling Naomi? That way he can save two people he loves the most.
I always found that line to Ben one of the most absurd/bizarre given the fact he had the way to stop it.
Once again Barnabas's "My mother is dead because of you!" hit me right in the stomach.
-
Since Barnabas appealed to Peter's desire to save Vicki (and perhaps save himself) in order to get his spirit to return to get him too, how would Barn convince Peter to let him return him to an earlier time so he could also save his mother? Would Peter care?
I'm with Julia-- Barnabas' cavalier attitude about changing the past is incredibly stupid.
-
Once again Barnabas's "My mother is dead because of you!" hit me right in the stomach.
Yes, of course, but it was strange to hear Barnabas fall into the exact same dialogue with Forbes just as if the events had just happened to him.
As Nathan practiced with the crossbow in the study, I thought of a commentary I listened to recently, in which the director said, I think, that a candlelit scene was done solely with the light of the candles. Recalling it, I think I must have heard wrong - it couldn't be done with just candles, could it?
Stanley Kubrick did that for the first time I believe in "Barry Lyndon" circa 1973. They needed a new process or technique to do it-- it hadn't ever been done before.
-
As Nathan practiced with the crossbow in the study, I thought of a commentary I listened to recently, in which the director said, I think, that a candlelit scene was done solely with the light of the candles. Recalling it, I think I must have heard wrong - it couldn't be done with just candles, could it?
Stanley Kubrick did that for the first time I believe in "Barry Lyndon" circa 1973. They needed a new process or technique to do it-- it hadn't ever been done before.
I believe there was also a candle-lit (or was it fire-lit?) scene in The Grapes of Wrath.
ProfStokes
-
I didn't realized Dark Shadows did a Flashback episode. It was nice to see Joel Crothers again!! [hall2_smiley]
Other than that, I just can't believe Barnabas could be will to the past. I thought that was really out there and lazy on the writers. Couldn't they come up with anything else.
-
"My Mother is dead because of you!" "I cannot die, because I am already dead!" I just loved hearing Barnabas say those lines! They are among the best in the whole series. Barnabas was so angry, deservedly so. This was really emotional, and oh, so true! I loved the frightened look on Nathan's face after he "shot" Barnabas with the pistol and later missed his heart with the crossbow. [hall_shocked]
I'm glad that Barnabas recounted to Julia the story of the last night before he was chained in his coffin. It was great to watch those scenes again. [hall_wink]
I thought it was neat when we saw Barnabas' point of view when he was pleading with Peter's spirit for him to go back to the past, and Julia and the graves disappeared! So fascinating and exciting! [hall2_cheesy]
Poor Julia didn't want Barnabas to go back to the past. It sounded so preposterous to her. She loved him, and he was willing to risk his life to save another woman, not her. But there was nothing that Julia could do to stop him, because he was so determined. [hall_sad]
Kudos to all for an excellent episode. [clap2] It was great to see Lewis Edmonds playing Joshua, Joel Crothers playing Nathan, and Thayer David playing Ben again. These characters are so different from Roger, Joe, and Prof. Stokes.
----- Sally -----
[coolg] [hippy2]
-
I'm glad that Barnabas recounted to Julia the story of the last night before he was chained in his coffin.
It would, I suppose have been very unkind of Julia to ask Barnabas, "So what was with that cock-and-bull story you told me one night in 1967 on Widows Hill about Josette being married to Jeremiah for years?" but I wish she had anyway.
I thought it was neat when we saw Barnabas' point of view when he was pleading with Peter's spirit for him to go back to the past, and Julia and the graves disappeared!
Me too! I had forgotten that it had been done that way, and was expecting Julia to disappear.
-
I just can't believe Barnabas could be will to the past. I thought that was really out there and lazy on the writers. Couldn't they come up with anything else.
Barnabas didn't will himself into the past-- he used Peter to bring him there just as Peter was the vehicle that brought Vicki back to that year. Barn assumed his spirit would be willing since Peter had basically doomed Vicki by bringing her there, plus his own hanging was imminent. Asking for Peter's help was mentioned a few times in #660 and twice more in this episode. Here's RobinV's description of that final instance:
Barnabas summons Peter Bradford's spirit--help me as you helped Vicki to transcend time's barrier--I must rectify a great wrong from the past--open the way for me, I implore you! says Barnabas, and suddenly, it appears that Julia has disappeared! We hear howling dogs, and Barnabas stands, fangs bared, dressed in his old 18th century outfit! He has returned to the past!
I don't think it was necessarily lazy writing, and at the very least the writers were being consistent because I don't find this development all that different from having [spoiler]Sarah's spirit be responsible for sending Vicki to the past the first time (during the seance).[/spoiler]
-
With Sarah and Vicki[spoiler]there was a senace.[/spoiler] To me this allowed for the time travel.
Even when Peter took Vicki back into the past at least he was present in the room. I just find it hard to believe (even for DS) that Barnabas could call out to Peter and just vanish into the past. Vicki spent days crying out for Peter before he could show back up and take her. Maybe I just wanted Barnabas to have a harder time getting back to the past. I think that could have added more to the storyline.
-
I hear what you're saying, JWGucciEnvy. Would you have been more satisfied if Barnabas had held a seance in this ep to contact Peter's spirit and disappeared into the past then? But hmm, we would've lost the twist of Julia disappearing in the cemetery instead of Barn, and the bit with no gravestones in the other time so they're not dead yet, and maybe I'm just easily entertained but I like all that.
If Peter had come for Barnabas, DC would have had to pay RD. [hall2_wink]
-
The less I have to watch the Jeff Clark/Peter Bradford character the better!!! So yeah...maybe the time travel storyline wasn't that bad.... [hall2_wink]
-
For a second it seemed as if Julia were the one being transported back to the past. I almost expected to hear her scream, "Barnabas, you blew it. You were supposed to be the one going back, not me!"
-
Nice idea, Roland. If I were Peter Bradford, I would certainly prefer to get Julia for the job rather than Barnabas.
-
I agree.
Another strange thing is why has the date of Vickie's execution been moved from 1795 to 1796? I realize it's probably because of the change in the calendar year from 1968 to 1969, but it's still pretty stupid and illogical.
-
It really wouldn't have made sense for Julia to go back to 1795 instead of Barnabas. Barnabas was the one who lived through those events, not Julia. He knew exactly what would happen when it would happen. Julia would have had no such knowledge.
Would have been funny though if Ben Stokes had encounted Julia in all her 20th century clothing and say "Hey, Countess, where the heck did you get THAT wardrobe?!" [snow_grin]
Or suppose someone else had encountered her. If only dear Abigail had still been alive at this point, I can see her take one look at Julia and scream "Witch!". [snow_grin]
-
Another strange thing is why has the date of Vickie's execution been moved from 1795 to 1796? I realize it's probably because of the change in the calendar year from 1968 to 1969, but it's still pretty stupid and illogical.
Check out this discussion beginning with this post:This episode, I believe, originally aired 1/2/68, so everything that happens from this point on is 1796.
-
Yes... all this makes me wonder whether the evidence for broadcast dates matching 1796 dates might be something that's open to interpretation either way, since people are of both minds about it.
-
Any way you slice it, the day on which Vickie "died" on the gallows wouldn't have changed. Why does the date in the past have to somehow correlate with the one in the present? That just doesn't make any kind of sense.
-
Most of the audience had never been exposed to science-fiction concepts, and time travel just by itself was disorienting and hard for people to wrap their heads around. I think making air dates and past era dates coincide was a way to make it all easier for the audience. They could feel as if the past was a "place" to visit, where things were still happening "now". Going to another era could be experienced in the same way as going to Europe.
-
all this makes me wonder whether the evidence for broadcast dates matching 1796 dates might be something that's open to interpretation
Honestly, it's not. And as I said, there are several posts on the forum that point this out. But be that as it may, pay close attention the next time you watch the 1795/96 storyline, and it will become apparent to you. [snow_smiley]
-
Just wanted to add one more thing about this: in light of all the criticism Barnabas has gotten for wanting to change the past (and I admit a lot of times he, even unintentionally, winds up doing more harm and good), I think it's wonderful that he wanted to save Vicki from hanging as a witch. Some may feel that Julia would have been a better choice to help Vicki than Barnabas...I don't see how. As I said, Barnabas lived through those events, not Julia, therefore he was the more logical choice to go and help Vicki.
[spoiler] If only that dumb twist about Vicki getting killed by Jeb hadn't happened during the Leviathan storyline. [/spoiler]