Author Topic: History and Storylines  (Read 996 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Josette

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • NEW ASCENDANT
  • ******
  • Posts: 4601
  • Karma: +75/-3067
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
History and Storylines
« on: October 19, 2002, 09:50:38 AM »
Once again, they can't get their story straight.  A lot of what Barnabas had told everyone about the past family turned out to be quite different when they actually went to 1795.  Much of that was from when he first appeared, so they clearly hadn't thought of doing 1795 at that point and obviously didn't worry about remembering what they had previously said.

But, I always ask before they go to 1795 if anyone knows when they plotted it, because it seems as though a lot of those differences are still mentioned very shortly before 1795 starts, and surely by that point they must have decided on least some of it.

So, now we get the same thing.  It's very close to 1897.  They must have decided on the main characters and the beginning of the plot - yet here they are referring to Quentin's "younger brother" Jamison.
Josette

Offline Gerard

  • NEW ASCENDANT
  • ******
  • Posts: 3587
  • Karma: +559/-6684
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: History and Storylines
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2002, 03:20:43 PM »
I have my degree in history and have taught history.  The way the Collins family history is constantly changed and distorted simply reminds me of some of the answers and ways of understanding given by my past pupils.  I guess it's universal.

Gerard

Offline dom

  • Long Lost Cousin Returned
  • Global Moderator
  • SENIOR ASCENDANT
  • *****
  • Posts: 12180
  • Karma: +591/-43260
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: History and Storylines
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2002, 08:39:14 PM »
It appears to me that much of the writing was done "as they went along." I'm pretty sure it was stated by Curtis or maybe one of the writers (perhaps in one of the MPI specialty tapes or maybe I heard it at a fest) that they had a "devil may care" attitude toward the continuity and integrity of the show. (Can someone back me up on this? If I misinterpreted what I remember hearing, I'd like to be corrected). And it is an extremely sore point with me because to me that translates into a blatant disrespect for the bulk of the fans, which were "kids," and for the show in general, by its creators.

Honestly, as a child I never noticed anything amiss with the show. I even thought the verbal bloopers were purposely done for "realism." But as an adult I find myself constantly insulted by what they laid down before us and expected us to swallow.

I do feel corny for taking it all so seriously now. And I am constantly haunted by the quote attributed to the MGM executive who told Curtis and his writer (S.H.?) on the movie NODS, in response to the exclamation that cutting 45 (?) minutes from the finished product would ruin the movie. The MGM executive said something to the effect, "Are you forgetting who is actually going to see this movie?" As far as I'm concerned this pretty much appears to be Curtis' attitude from the start of the Barnabas era on.

Dom (who's glad he was a dumb kid back then.)


Nancy

  • Guest
Re: History and Storylines
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2002, 09:15:38 PM »
Hi Dom! You heard correctly.  I had the fortune of speaking with Peter Miner and Ron Sproat in person in New York at different times when they were involved with current projects.  Ron Sproat was a writer (and had gone to drama school with Frid) and Peter Miner was a producer and director on DS. Anyway, both men concurred that the key reason they left the reason was the "chaos" they endured working on DS.   The scripts became ridiculous and it was dictated to them that everything had to be at lighting speed: every day had to be a cliff hanger, etc.  I don't care how good you are at what you do but if you are driven to produce at a consistent manic pace, things will get sloppy and you will soon not know which end is up or what you did yesterday.  Yes, they could have hired someone or assigned the task of having the ongoing story monitored for the sake of consistency but they didn't for whatever reason. Probably because Curtis did not want to spend the money.

Sam Hall admitted in at least one interview that even though he authored Levithan scripts, he had never understood the story.  That's how nuts it got.  Curtis hit the gold mine with Barnabas and wanted more more and still more but seemingly without the discipline to understand the importance of continuity, consistency and obviously pacing.  The show's production values, even on a low budget, would look better if the show had been done more on the standard shooting pace of soaps of the era.  The stories would have been better drawn out and the actors who were not speedy studies would have made less mistakes on air since rehearsal and study would not have been as compromised.  

I don't believe the attitude Curtis had was meant to be a slight towards the viewers as much as it was the desire to get higher ratings for the show for the moment and thus gain more and more publicity.  In the end, that kind of attention would get him more work.

I agree - it would be embarrassing to most people to have something so sloppy go on the air.

Nancy
Quote
It appears to me that much of the writing was done "as they went along." I'm pretty sure it was stated by Curtis or maybe one of the writers (perhaps in one of the MPI specialty tapes or maybe I heard it at a fest) that they had a "devil may care" attitude toward the continuity and integrity of the show. (Can someone back me up on this? If I misinterpreted what I remember hearing, I'd like to be corrected). And it is an extremely sore point with me because to me that translates into a blatant disrespect for the bulk of the fans, which were "kids," and for the show in general, by its creators.


Offline dom

  • Long Lost Cousin Returned
  • Global Moderator
  • SENIOR ASCENDANT
  • *****
  • Posts: 12180
  • Karma: +591/-43260
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: History and Storylines
« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2002, 12:27:00 AM »
Quote
 

I don't believe the attitude Curtis had was meant to be a slight towards the viewers as much as it was the desire to get higher ratings for the show for the moment and thus gain more and more publicity.  In the end, that kind of attention would get him more work.


Nancy,

Good to hear from you. And thanks for your response and confirmation of the facts. Your pragmatism always heals my wounds, lol.

By the way, I was catching up on past posts and came across your post about the J. Frid site update. I visited it and I really enjoyed it. I loved the present day photo of Jon in front of the computer. Also his verbal presentation about how he got the idea to start doing readings while attending a fest. It tickles me to know that he is taking such an active role in his website. I can hear it in his voice that he is enjoying it. I'm so happy for him.

Dom

Offline jennifer

  • Full A ed Newest Fervor Post
  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2784
  • Karma: +541/-615
  • Gender: Female
  • we'll always love you Don!
    • View Profile
Re: History and Storylines
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2002, 06:41:51 AM »
it did work !as a kid running home from school, never noticed the errors, just loved the scary things .Now watching it as an adult several times do notice and some really do irritate me! it is funny too some of the movies my daughter watches i can't stand because the storylines make no sense quess it is also funny to think of a show i loved as a kid still appealing to me now! i always feel this is what makes this show so special and timeless!
jennifer
we are the champions!!!!
 2007 Boston Red Sox
PAV