Author Topic: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991  (Read 5569 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline michael c

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3434
  • Karma: +653/-1184
  • Gender: Male
  • mr.collins i'm fed up with this nonsense!
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #30 on: January 19, 2008, 04:16:54 PM »
funny,

in watching the "present day" part of this show one can almost check-off the high points of the early part of the barnabas story on the original series...

vicki getting caught at the old house during a storm and spending the night in josette's room.CHECK.barnabas biting carolyn and placing her under his control.CHECK.sarah stopping barnabas from kiling julia.CHECK.costume party.CHECK.sceance.CHECK...

if one is familiar with the original one knows to look for these milestones.that might have been part of the problem with this version.dan curtis was trying to touch on all these points because they were part of the original "mythology" and he and the fans of the original series were expecting these plot developments and he tried to put too much in during the twelve episodes he knew for sure he was going to get.

this might have worked better as a deliberately self-contained mini-series.
sleep 'til noon and your punishment shall be the dregs of the coffeepot.

Offline michael c

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3434
  • Karma: +653/-1184
  • Gender: Male
  • mr.collins i'm fed up with this nonsense!
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2008, 03:47:12 PM »
a few more observations...

this version of the series seems to exist in something of a void.some distant star in the d.s. galaxy.

it's 'dark shadows' but because of the huge changes to the storyline it doesn't mesh with "canon" and has to be viewed on it's own terms.

for whatever such things are worth the original actors seem to have the "clout" here.
if lysette anthony penned a novel based on the show it would not have the same cache as being written by "angelique" as the lara parker books do and that's even if she had the rights to do so.the original actors have been given the key to market their experience with the show in a way that these actors have not(even if they wanted to).the kathryn leigh scott books mention this version as a mere footnote when it's mentioned at all.these actors are not invloved in any of the "official" continuations of the series such as the "return to collinwood" presentation or the new "big finish" audiodramas.they do not attend the festivals.this version rarely comes up even here at this board.other "cult" show seem to be a more inclusive "world" involving all the various versions of the base show but both versions of d.s. seem to exist as separate entities.it's a bit like 'dan curtis productions' views this as something of a forgotten stepchild.

i did find a site devoted to this version run by a fellow who used to post here once in awhile.

it's 'd.s.' but it's not.that's not to say it's not a valid spin on the story and is sort of an interesting chapter in the show's history.
sleep 'til noon and your punishment shall be the dregs of the coffeepot.

Offline Gothick

  • FULL ASCENDANT
  • ********
  • Posts: 6608
  • Karma: +124/-2898
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody book me a suite at Wyndcliffe, NOW!
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2008, 06:04:26 PM »
Good golly!  The DS Forums are back and looking more spiffy than ever!  Io Evohe!

MSC, the 1991 stars did attend the first DS Festival I ever attended which I believe was the 1993 one in NYC.  I remember Lysette Anthony, Jim Fyfe, and I think Barbara Blackburn was there as well.  I saw a lengthy autograph line at Lysette's table when I arrived. 

My impression was that the 1991 stars were either too busy working or simply were not sufficiently courted by the DS Festival machine (I vaguely recall Nancy writing about how the thing is organized but I can't remember the details sufficiently to know whether one should speak of a committee, a volunteer-run thing, or a top-down business run as a side venture by Dan Curtis Productions--this has never been something I understood, just as I have never understood all the legal rigmarole about who owns the DS master tapes and where the tapes lived during the years between the end of DS and the beginning of syndication in the mid 1970s).  I have read several times that only some actors have their plane tickets and hotel rooms paid for by the Festival.  If the 1991 stars did not fall into that privileged category, there may have been no real incentive for any of them to want to have anything more to do with the Festivals.

Again, it's been noted in the past, but my understanding is that at most conventions these days, you pay the star for their autograph. Some are charging very high sums for their John/Jane Hancocks--I've heard upwards of $50 for some actors.  I'll never forget how at a Lost in Space event held in Boston in circa 1995, you could pay $99 and get a large color photograph signed by all the surviving cast members (obviously Guy Williams was no longer with us then).  At the time this seemed unbelievably exorbitant to me, but I went just to gawk and people were lining up with memorabilia in hand to meet the stars and pay their money for the signatures.

G.

Offline michael c

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3434
  • Karma: +653/-1184
  • Gender: Male
  • mr.collins i'm fed up with this nonsense!
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #33 on: January 28, 2008, 04:10:14 PM »
i finished this over the weekend.

as i believe lydia pointed out they were in this huge rush to get to the 1790 storyline(at the great expense of developing the present day characters and storyline)and then once there didn't do much to develop those characters either.it was just too much story to try and cover in six episodes.the original telling of the 1795 story was a rich tapestry with lots of colorful supporting characters and subplots to give it atmosphere.

if i cared more about this version of the show i think they would have been better off spending the first season in it's entirety developing the present day story and then having as a season-ending "cliff-hanger" the seance that sent vicki back to 1790 and then spending a good chunk of season two there.

something about the way the 1790 sequence was filmed and the costumes had the air of the old 1980's judith krantz "bodice ripper" mini-series.i half expected jane seymour to walk in at any minute.

poor jean simmons.her agent must have pitched this to her as a "starring" role but in both time periods she was little more than a bit player.

all that being said i cannot say that i disliked this version of the show.it had it's own vibe and made for an entertaing few nights worth of viewing.it would have been interesting to see where it went if it had been picked up for a second season.even though i vastly prefer the original series i can see where this developed it's own fanbase.
sleep 'til noon and your punishment shall be the dregs of the coffeepot.

Offline Joeytrom

  • Senior Poster
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Karma: +98/-946
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #34 on: January 28, 2008, 05:26:43 PM »
Thats why the original series worked so well, as there wasn't any prior DS series to go by, so they were able to start fresh and slow.  First, by the regular Collins characters for the first 10 months and then the development of Barnabas, and later Julia, over the next 8 months before they decided to show an origin in 1795 that was for five months. 

Being a daytime soap allowed them a lot of trial and error to get it right and by doing that trial and error, we got to get really involved with these characters for the long run.

Offline michael c

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3434
  • Karma: +653/-1184
  • Gender: Male
  • mr.collins i'm fed up with this nonsense!
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #35 on: January 28, 2008, 05:57:47 PM »
one more minor detail...

in this version everyone called victoria "victoria" where as in the original everyone called her "vicki".

it sort of made the her sound more like a character from a romance novel.more "flowery" somehow.

i wonder why they made this decison. [snow_undecided]
sleep 'til noon and your punishment shall be the dregs of the coffeepot.

Offline Doug

  • Full Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 184
  • Karma: +0/-62
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991
« Reply #36 on: May 23, 2008, 12:05:02 PM »
I watched the remake a month ago. I have the collection on VHS. When I was watching, I could'nt get
the fact the series was filmed in Beverly Hills, CA out of my mind. I tried to make believe the story is
taking place in Maine.

The Collinwood house looked to be okay, but I did'nt like the old house.