1969 and 1970: the "Best" Years of DS?

[AndreDuPres]

I've been watching Collection 22 today (which features 1995 and most of the Summer of 1970 plot), and I've been thinking:  man, this is some great drama.  I don't remember the show being this intense and colourful and interesting and positively mesmerizing during, say, the Adam storyline.  When did it start?  Well, 1969 marks the beginning of 1897, and from then on into 1970 it progresses into Leviathans, Parallel Time 1970, 1995, Summer of 1970, and finally 1840.  There are so many storylines, so many characters, so much innovation and creativity.  Yes, it's over the top and a bit too fast at times and almost psychedelic in its break with reality, but...wow!  It's different from the '66 to '68 years, because I think the pacing and the direction of the show underwent a massive change.  Reality seems to have been thrown out the tower room window.  And I think I love this era the best out of the years of DS.

[Barnabas'sBride]

My favorite year of DS is easily and without doubt 1967. It was heavily into the supernatural & gothic horror but still retained some of that "reality" that the later years threw out (which was unfortunate to me).

1969 had Quentin's haunting of Collinwood and 1897, which were great, but 1970 (& '71) is my least favorite year of the show. Too much time jumping. Too many characters I didn't really care about.

[ProfStokes]

Except for 1897 and the atmospheric, ominous, and delightful jaunt into 1995, I don't care for most of the latter story lines.  Leviathans, parallel time 1970, and 1840 are only so-so in my opinion--they have equally good and negative things about them but there's nothing in particular that captures my attention or excites me the way that 1795, Quentin's ghost, or the first phoenix storyline and Barnabas's arrival do.  And, I absolutely despise the Summer of 1970; I can't even stand to watch that sequence again because I think the writing is so terrible.  There was less focus on the original characters in the last two years.  The pacing was frenetic--new characters entered the scene (e.g. Hallie, Sebastian, the Todds, Bruno, etc.) and were soon killed off or departed without explanation (Chris, Sabrina, Amy, and Ned) and the plots were convoluted.  Many plot features were recycled: although parallel time and the Leviathans were novelties, [spoiler]we twice dealt with possessed children, (David by Quentin and then by Gerard) disembodied limbs, (in 1897 and 1840) and a female character who survives by draining others' warmth (Laura and Angelique).[/spoiler]

I don't know if it's possible to say that there was a "best" or a "worst" year on DS.  I tend to care for individual storylines, not necessarily for a year's span of shows, and I've noticed that the show tends to follow a pattern of brilliant stories (1795, 1897, 1995) that alternate with stories I don't really like (Adam & Eve, Leviathans, Gerard & Daphne) within the same year.  However, I agree that 1969-1970 was certainly the show's most ambitious year; I think that was mainly due to the pressures that DC put on the writers to maintain a fast-paced show full of cliffhangers to keep the kids tuning in.

ProfStokes

[Professor1985]

My favorite years of DS were the 1966-1970 ones, and my least favorite were 1970-71 ones, I like the episodes with KLS in it better. I've just finished watching the 1897 storyline and now I'm on DS DVD #17 on episode #896 (where I just finished watching hours ago).

[Sandor]

I tend to agree with Prof. Stokes - I felt the later episodes were sort of herky-jerky in the pacing - scenes were short or hurried, too many extraneous characters drifted in while other mainstays were dropped or under-used... my preference is late 1968 through early 1970 as DS' best years. There seemed to be a real "repertoire" sense with the cast during that stretch of time.

[AndreDuPres]

However, I agree that 1969-1970 was certainly the show's most ambitious year; I think that was mainly due to the pressures that DC put on the writers to maintain a fast-paced show full of cliffhangers to keep the kids tuning in.

Perhaps "ambitious" was the word I was searching for, too.  DS attempts to break out of all traditions, to go where no show (soap) had gone before.  1969 and 1970 were so vibrant and dazzling and almost tacky in some respects--garish and outlandish but macabre and perverse at the same time.  The earlier years seem so quiet and subdued in comparison.  Perhaps it's the mood I'm in which allows me to enjoy the later years so much right now.  In a month or so, I'll find 1970 distasteful, and I'll be watching Victoria and Burke traipse about Seaview, but I'm delighting in the dreamy, drug-induced high of the last few storylines at the moment.  Like Hallie said to her uncle, they're just so "groovy."

[stefan]

I've tried sorting through my 1897 CD but the only stories I gravitate towards are the Kitty/Josette/Barnabas triangle and Judith/Trask and parts of Edward/Kitty (when they gave it air time). The rest I FF or use as background noise. As it steers towards the Levithians I am totally turned off. My still favorites are early DS/Black & white and 1795. I even felt 1897 was jumpy and after watching my 1795 tapes for so long, where most of the focus centered on Barnie/Josette, I felt the continuous jumping from one supernatural story to the next tended to water-down any genuine emotion I may have felt for the characters. I was catching some 1897 last week and felt curious that though I consider Terry Crawford to be a worthy actress with potential [spoiler]I didn't blilnk an eye when Beth also jumped ship over Widow's Hill.[/spoiler] It's a shame as Josette Widow's Hill jumping was such a sad thing with genuine and heartbreaking repurcussion. Maybe, because in 1795 the stories (at least for a few episodes) tended to focus on one character or couple at a time so the audience had a chance to absorb what was happening, to breath and truly feel. In 1897, jumping over Widow's Hill seemed standard fare, like, OK, next ..... who's getting it next.

[tragic bat]

No, I do not think that 1969 and 1970 are the best years.  Personally, I really enjoy the 1968 storyline as it featured the dream curse, Cassandra, Nicholas, and the arrival of Chris Jennings on into the ghost of Quentin Collins and 1897.  After that, aside from paralell time 1970, I feel the show deteriorated a lot.  The summer of 1970 had a lot of lost potential, while 1840 was just repetitive campy nonsense.  I think 1795 is most certainly better than 1840!

[BuzzH]

I tend to care for individual storylines, not necessarily for a year's span of shows

Like the Professor, I too tend to think of/break up DS into about 8 plotlines.  My favorites are 1967 (intro of Barnabas), 1795, early 1968 (Dream Curse) and later 1968 (intro of the werewolf and Quentin's ghost).  HATED the Adam/Eve thing (a shame too as both Robert Rodan and Marie Wallace are very nice ppl, just didn't like their plotline) because it DRAGGED on and on, and I was ready to pitch that brat Adam off Widow's Hill and the consequences be damned!  I will never watch that part of 1968 again, will skip right from the Dream Curse to Chris Jennings and Quentin.

And of COURSE, my second favorite plotline (1795 being my absolute fave) is 1841 PT! 

[Charles_Ellis]

To me, DS hit its stride in '68-'69, when everything came together with the 1795 storyline and the show's brilliance was unchecked for the next year and a half, ending with the Leviathan story.  The plotlines were executed well and we soon began to see an established format of sorts that would frame the show for its remaing run.  The only time when the writers broke from the format was Leviathan, and that proved costly.  The show did rebound with the 1970 PT story, which was one of the better overall time periods, even better than 1840, which tended to crib elements from 1795 and 1897 (a witchcraft trial, a severed body part with mystical powers, Jerry Lacy as another crazy Trask relation who has it in for Barnabas, sibling rivalry at Collinwood, etc.)  In PT, the writers were able to experiment with the familiar present-day characters with new personalities and stories (Willie as a sophiticated writer, Elizabeth as a busybody poor relation, Quentin as master of Collinwood and married to Maggie) while staying within the format established over time.

[Joeytrom]

1966 through Quentins Ghost, the stories seemed to have some kind of plan with all loose ends tied up (at least better then later ones).  1897 seemed to have some kind of structure but was broken apart when David Selby became popular and then extended (wrongly so IMHO).  They should have stayed with the intended 1897 three month story and have David Selby return as another character in the present time once that is wrapped up.  If you think about it, the Quentin story with his ghost and the eventual 1897 time travel to when he was alive was one year long storyline.

1897 should have been done as 1795 was by having  Barnabas as an observer.  Think of the I Ching having him as a ghost like figure, invisible to all, and watching the events playing up to Quentins death and being sealed in his room.  Then he could return to the present with the information necessary to deal with Quentin's ghost and saving David.

Summer of 1970 and 1840 was a rehash of Quentin's Ghost and 1897.  I would rather have had more present time stories, time travel should have stopped after 1897 and allowed for present time stories with the characters we all watched for the past three years.

[AndreDuPres]

Personally, I'm GLAD 1897 was extended, for it resulted in my favourite era of the show; as I've noted before in previous postings, I enjoy late 1897 (body switching, time traveling, Lady Hampshire, Pansy Faye, all of it) the most.  Even over 1795 (which though featuring some fine drama in its magnificent 1st half, is terribly overrated, IMO, because it has one of the most dreadful plots in the series:  Vickie's witchcraft trial that lasts AGES).  True, the loose ends weren't resolved as well as I had hoped, but nothing's ever perfect.  Oh, and I actually like the Summer of 1970 haunting sequence better than the one in late '68-early '69.  It's tighter/shorter and more to-the-point (I'm far more creeped out by the evil Gerard and his helper, Daphne, than by Quentin), and it has a much better subplot (a certain new vampire in town vs. werewolf curse), which unfortunately is not explained as well as it could be in 1840.  Anyway, despite all of their quirks, I love the later storylines.  And 1840 itself is NOT a rehash of 1897.  It has a more centralised and over-arching plot that's at once less romantic and more horrific (even though 1840's denouement is confused and rushed).  So...whew, I hope I got something across with all my parentheses and tangents.  I know there aren't many DS fans who actually like the later years a lot, but to each his or her own.  

[Barnabas'sBride]

I also love the last episodes of 1897. They managed to keep it interesting even though they extended it, which was pretty surprising to me. The middle dragged, but the last half made up for it. 1795 is my favorite of the period storylines, but 1897 was entertaining and fun.

I felt summer of 1970 in the present time was horrible. I agree with ProfStokes, the writing was utterly abysmal. The temptation to skip episodes was overwhelming for me. None of the characters were acting like themselves.

I was unable to get into the Daphne/Gerard haunting...it was just too much of a recycle of Quentin's haunting - only with Hallie instead of Amy as David's friend. The whole thing just bored me to tears. While watching 1995, I thought Gerard was menacing and interesting, but when they got back to the present time and started recycling too many plot elements, I lost all interest in it. And jumping into yet another different time period didn't do anything to rekindle the interest I had originally with 1995. At that point in the show, I was just sick of the time swtching and wanted to see all of my regular favorites have a good storyline again. 1795 and 1897 worked great, but the time traveling became way, way overdone. I didn't mind 1995 because it was short and to the point. I wish it had led to a good present day storyline, instead of a redo of Quentin/Beth and 1840.

I was more than ready to get back to the original characters. I wanted to see more of Willie, Elizabeth, Roger, Carolyn, etc... Unfortunately, summer 1970 was their last storyline, and what a way for them to go out. 

[BuzzH]

1966 through Quentins Ghost, the stories seemed to have some kind of plan with all loose ends tied up (at least better then later ones).

This isn't exactly true.  The pre-Barnabas eps just END when he arrives.  We get no resolution to who was Vickie's mother, she doesn't even seem to care about finding out who she was anymore after Barney arrives.  And Frank Garner all but disappears w/out anyone seeming to notice.  Literally overnight too.  One ep he's there at the seance at the Old House, then he's gone and w/in a week Barnabas is set free by Willie.  In fact, the portrait of Betty Hanscomb that Sam Evans gave to Vicki (Betty resembled Vickie more than Maggie resembled Josette IMHO) that she took to her room at Collinwood ends up BACK at the Evan's cottage during the 1968/Nicholas wooing Maggie plotline, w/NO explanation as to why it's suddenly back there [spoiler](this is of course BEFORE Vickie goes back to 1796 w/Peter!)[/spoiler]

[michael c]

i'm so with barnabas' bride here.

for me 1967 is the year.

it started with laura collins(which technically began in 66)and ended with 1795(which technically ended in 68)and if that was the only part of the show i saw i'd find that satisfying.

i was mesmerised by the 1967 episodes.i watched as if under a spell.after the storyline returned to the present from 1795 the spell was broken and the show became wildly uneven for me.i enjoyed some storylines and disliked others but i never loved the show again in quite the same way.i just loved the pacing here.it was the perfect blend of the supernatural and "normal" soap opera storytelling.it involved the original characters in a very compelling way.for me it was the show at it's freshest and most organic.later it becomes too contrived,gimmicky and plot-driven.

when i think about what the show means to my heart i think about those episodes and those characters.