DARK SHADOWS FORUMS

General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '24 I => Current Talk '07 II => Topic started by: michael c on September 21, 2007, 06:50:16 PM

Title: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on September 21, 2007, 06:50:16 PM
for about four years i had been watching the show sequentially from begining to end...but about a year or so ago i started to get burned out on the whole thing and stopped watching with the "summer of 1970" episodes.

i re-watched a few favorites(laura collins,1795)but i finally decided i was ready for something new and i just bought dvd collection 23 and thus will begin my "journey" to 1840 this weekend.i have always heard very mixed things about this storyline but i'm excited for a new group of sets and characters.

to get "reaquainted" with the storyline leading up to this i watched some of the summer of 1970 episodes this week and was reminded of why i stopped watching with these episodes.the writing was terrible and everyone seemed really worn out.grayson especially seemed exhausted here.

this has been said many times before but both david and hallie were much too old for the storyline.
i wonder why they needed to remain "children"?the storyline could easily have been written with adolescents or teenagers in mind.the business with the playroom,dollhouse and governess were much too babyish for kids that age.

still,as uneven as i'm told 1840 is i'm glad to have new stuff to watch.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on September 21, 2007, 07:11:12 PM
still,as uneven as i'm told 1840 is i'm glad to have new stuff to watch.

Fans shouldn't necessarily believe what others say about the individual storylines because we all love and dislike a whole assorted array of things when it comes to DS - and no two fans are completely alike. And truthfully, our differences are what makes discussion boards like this so much fun to take part in. But at the same time these boards can often give the impression that everyone thinks this or that - though, of course, that's not true. For instance, Leviathans is many fans' least favorite DS storyline - while others rank it as one of their favorites. ;)  So try to approach 1840/41 with a completely open mind and go for the ride. Others may perceive it as flawed (though one might ask what DS storyline is actually perfect?), but it also has some absolutely wonderful things going for it.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gothick on September 21, 2007, 07:55:20 PM
Things I adore about 1840:

The incredible Virginia Vestoff and her scorchingly brilliant work as Samantha

Joan Bennett's *initial* characterization as Flora (who all too quickly turns back into Reigning Dowager of Collinwood--but Joan does get to have some fun first!)

Nancy Barrett's return as another Faye--Leticia (presumably Pansy's Grandmother???)

The *initial* Judah Zachery storyline (I won't mention here where I think it jumps the shark since it involves a *major* spoiler)

There are some other moments that shine involving specific scenes but, again, as this involves major spoliation, I won't bring them up here.

Chris Pennock is really brillaint as Gabriel, too, although I find that a little bit of the character goes a long way.

Hope you enjoy watching the shows!  I gather you've never seen PT 1841, either?

G.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: BuzzH on September 21, 2007, 08:25:02 PM
Fans shouldn't necessarily believe what others say about the individual storylines...for instance, Leviathans is many fans' least favorite DS storyline - while others rank it as one of their favorites.

SO true!!  I'd always heard terrible things about Leviathan and dreaded it's approach greatly.  But I LOVED it, I thought it was great!

Nancy Barrett's return as another Faye--Leticia (presumably Pansy's Grandmother???)

Wow!  I never even picked up on that, duh!   ::)  What an interesting fan fic that would make showing a familial relationship between Pansy and Leticia!   ;)

I gather you've never seen PT 1841, either?

Ah, I LOVE 1841 PT!   ;D
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: barnabasjr on September 22, 2007, 02:57:14 AM
Things I adore about 1840:

The incredible Virginia Vestoff and her scorchingly brilliant work as Samantha

Joan Bennett's *initial* characterization as Flora (who all too quickly turns back into Reigning Dowager of Collinwood--but Joan does get to have some fun first!)

Nancy Barrett's return as another Faye--Leticia (presumably Pansy's Grandmother???)

The *initial* Judah Zachery storyline (I won't mention here where I think it jumps the shark since it involves a *major* spoiler)

There are some other moments that shine involving specific scenes but, again, as this involves major spoliation, I won't bring them up here.

Chris Pennock is really brillaint as Gabriel, too, although I find that a little bit of the character goes a long way.

Hope you enjoy watching the shows!  I gather you've never seen PT 1841, either?
I was going to snip this quote to concur with your praise of Virginia Vestoff, but I just couldn't disregard the rest of your post, Gothick. You've really pointed out the great things about this storyline, and, myscbryk, I sincerely hope you are able to fully enjoy these fantastic characters. Sometimes it may seem like a long ride, but this era of DS is, in my opinion, vastly underrated. Have fun!
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Brandon Collins on September 22, 2007, 04:25:04 AM
I've never really had anything against the 1840 storyline. I think it's pretty tight, barring some obvious things that have been pointed out many times here and other places. It's basically the same story, or the same way into a story in the past as the Quentin/Beth thing, but it's told in a newer way, which is nice. I like it primarily because it doesn't stretch on for MONTHS like the 1897 story eventually did.

And I used to HATE 1841 PT when I watched it when I was younger. The first and second times I saw it I thought it sucked. But now that I'm older, and can appreciate regular soaps more, I like this storyline much more. It''s very well written and has some great plot developments, and even pushes an evelope in one relationship. It's become one of my favored DS storylines.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on September 22, 2007, 04:42:55 AM
1840 is the reason not to give up on DS after Petofi disappears, I think.     It sags after Judah goes out of his head.     I love the new bit of music associated with the Head.   Gabriel is great.    JF come to life again ironically when he plays 1840 Barnabas w/o 1970 BC in hin yet.   
Title: are they boring?
Post by: michael c on September 22, 2007, 05:41:25 PM
a few more thoughts on 1970 before i start 1840...

again i'm reminded of how bad the writing was towards the end of this storyline.

but more importantly i was thinking about barnabas,julia and quentin.here we have a trio of two formerly evil characters(barnabas,quentin)and one at least formerly flawed and conflicted character(julia).

once these characters became wildly popular with the fans they were written into the roles of "protagonists" and "anti-heros" and in the process lost alot of what i think made them interesting in the first place.

1967 julia is a way more fascinating character i think than 1968-70 barnabas' assistant julia.she becomes a one note character after a while.quentin i think becomes similarly dull and even superfluous after parallel-time.barnabas in also too much of a goody-two-shoes during this period as well.it's easy to forget he's still a vampire.with gerard afoot the whole thing is top-heavy with villians and former villians and the rest of the cast is largely wasted.the writing for maggie is terrible here and i can see why this is the moment she chose to jump ship and move to france.

anyways i just think b,j and q are woefully dull during this part of the show.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on September 22, 2007, 10:50:38 PM
Ideal Barnabas for me is the anti-hero, intimidating, frightening protagonist of early 1897.    Plain old "evil" Barnabas gets boring fast to me, but straight-ahead good guy BC even more so.    1840 Barnabas who is of 1840, at the start, is great.    He hadn't stewed in his juices long enough to get really twisted yet... but long enough to make him interesting.    I love 1795 human Barnabas.  It's just the present day good Barnabas that really bothers me, though he gets boring in 1840 too.

Few writers write protagonists who are interesting and have personalities.   It can't be an impossible task.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on September 23, 2007, 04:46:40 AM
I'm off and on watching 1840 myself. The odd thing is that when I first watched it I was riveted to the damn screen, this time I am distracted and keep going back to the Leviathan storyline which has really become one of my favorite storylines on the show. From what I have seen (To the end of disc one in boxset 24) it's pretty fun, but for some reason I just can't get into it right now. I LOVE Samantha though, I forgot what an awesome character she was, I also really like Roxanne. I'm waiting for things to kick off I think. I remember really loving Kendrick and Gabriel too. Maybe I'll give the discs a spin tomorrow. Don't give up on 1840, it gets to be a kick in the pants (LOL! Again, from what I remember.)

As for summer 1970 I used to think it was a pretty damn ridiculous storyline as well, but after another viewing had entirely different thoughts on it.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on September 23, 2007, 01:00:06 PM
I haven't seen evidence of you for awhile, arashi.   Welcome back!
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on September 23, 2007, 04:09:59 PM
Thanks Magnus!
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gothick on September 24, 2007, 05:49:54 PM
John Karlen as Kendrick is *luscious* but just doesn't have all that much to do.  Particularly after a certain plot development.  His scenes with Nancy Barrett are a highlight of the remainder of DS.

I forgot to mention that this period (really the entire final 12 months of the series, but this period in particular) was, for MANY years, a Holy Grail for fans, because up until I think around 1993, this period had never been syndicated out or shown on television in any form and what fans had to go on for it were publicity photos, stills and people's Dark Shadows Journals (also, some people had taped each episode at home and then lovingly preserved the tapes--I think those fan cassette tapes were used to replace dialogue that was missing on the master tapes, most notably in the missing episode towards the end of the series).

When fans finally got to see it again (I think on Sci Fi; if memory serves, the Sci Fi airing pre-dated the VHS release of these shows, but I could be wrong about that), it was a huge rush for oldtime fans and probably something the like of which DS fans will never see again.  I think this may be part of why the reaction to how certain developments was handled in 1840 has proven so durably extreme in fandom--that, and the nature of the crowning denouement of 1840, which a lot of fans find simply unacceptable (in various ways, of course).

As for the Summer of 1970, what I don't get is why they set up such a different backstory from events as they actually staged them in 1840.  I can only presume that the writers were working under their own reconnaissance and then at some point DC came in and saw what was planned and yelled, "A shipboard romance on THIS show?  Whaddya think our budget is--the national debt???" Or words to that effect.

cheers, G.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on September 24, 2007, 10:36:59 PM
I guess you're talking about all of 1840-1, whether PT or RT.   Unless you meant Desmond instead of Kendrick.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on September 25, 2007, 03:00:50 PM
one more thing on 1970...

i just watched maggie's final episode where she dons that little head scarf,says goodbye,and is driven to wyndcliff.

i actually felt a bit emotional about saying "goodbye" to maggie.we've been through alot together over the years.

yes i know i can watch hundreds of other maggie episodes but this was the last time i would see her in an episode that was "new" to me.i felt sad.since vicki's final appearance featured an actress other than alexandra i wasn't that emotional about it but with mags it was k.l.s. from day one.

also during these episodes maggie reminded me alot of linda blair about mid-exorcist before she really turns into the pea-soup spewing monster.
i don't know alot about vampire lore(my knowledge is limited to d.s.)but as maggie here was the victim of a female vampire is there anything "saphic" about that?obviously that could not be spelled out in specifics on a soap in 1970 but can this subtext be read into it?
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gothick on September 25, 2007, 04:29:08 PM
I watched those shows on the original b'cast in 1970 and the vampire's identity really came out of left field for me.  I actually remember that scene where the unknown vampire was influencing Julia into a doze and we saw the creature as a shadowy figure and I swear it looked as if "he" was wearing a sombrero and a cape and I remember thinking, "Oh My God, the Cisco Kid has become One of the Living Dead!!!"  (some may not have a clue regarding the humor in this)

1970 was kind of the banner year for Lesbian Vampires, wasn't it?  The Vampire Lovers and Daughters of Darkness (starring out own Johnny Karlen) were both filmed in that year, and soon after followed a bevy of films such as Les Vampyres and Vampyros Lesbos and then the lesbian sequence in Count Yorga Vampire... it was quite a fad for a time.

I really wish they had done at least one scene between Maggie and her Vampire Mistress.  I noticed that when Julia fell victim to the same Vampire in 1840, they were very careful never to show the two together and Julia being dominated, both psychically and perhaps sensually, by another woman.

They could show John Yeagar licking Maggie Collins' necklace but they couldn't show THAT.

G.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Willie Loomis on September 25, 2007, 05:36:18 PM
Ideal Barnabas for me is the anti-hero, intimidating, frightening protagonist of early 1897.    Plain old "evil" Barnabas gets boring fast to me, but straight-ahead good guy BC even more so.    1840 Barnabas who is of 1840, at the start, is great.    He hadn't stewed in his juices long enough to get really twisted yet... but long enough to make him interesting.    I love 1795 human Barnabas.  It's just the present day good Barnabas that really bothers me, though he gets boring in 1840 too.

Few writers write protagonists who are interesting and have personalities.   It can't be an impossible task.

all the characters were good until we got Frid into the mix with them.    he dominiated every scene he was in and quite frankly (i'm ducking now) i think he kind of ruined the show.  :o He always whined like a little bytch who never gets their way.  he ruined alot of the dramatic scens he was in because of his stumbling on lines and he also messed other people up as well. 

and to boot, on the interviews he seemed to denounce the Barnabas character.  
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Willie Loomis on September 25, 2007, 05:40:35 PM
1970 was kind of the banner year for Lesbian Vampires, wasn't it?  The Vampire Lovers and Daughters of Darkness (starring out own Johnny Karlen) were both filmed in that year, and soon after followed a bevy of films such as Les Vampyres and Vampyros Lesbos and then the lesbian sequence in Count Yorga Vampire... it was quite a fad for a time.

I really wish they had done at least one scene between Maggie and her Vampire Mistress.  I noticed that when Julia fell victim to the same Vampire in 1840, they were very careful never to show the two together and Julia being dominated, both psychically and perhaps sensually, by another woman.

They could show John Yeagar licking Maggie Collins' necklace but they couldn't show THAT.

they never showed barnabas going to willie's neck.   and williew wound was on his arm. 

also, i always picked up lesbian vibes from hoffman in parallel time with her alexis/angelique.  also with Carolyn and Julia in the Carolyn as barnabas's servent.   Carolyn seemed to "domininate" julia.

quite franly hoffman always gave off lesbian vibes to me.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on September 25, 2007, 06:58:37 PM
i only watched a few late 1970 episodes to get caught up before i started 1840.

can someone refresh my memory on this point?is the roxanne/vampire plot tied into the gerard plot or do they just run concurrently with no connection?

does this plot mean anything in 1840 or does it just get dropped once the storyline switches time periods?
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: ProfStokes on September 25, 2007, 07:25:54 PM
Congratulations, mscbryk on your first foray into 1840!

can someone refresh my memory on this point?is the roxanne/vampire plot tied into the gerard plot or do they just run concurrently with no connection?

does this plot mean anything in 1840 or does it just get dropped once the storyline switches time periods?
The Roxanne and Gerard stories were not connected in 1970, but the Roxanne issue is addressed again in 1840 in a way that will leave you scratching your head and asking, "How can this be?"

ProfStokes
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gothick on September 25, 2007, 07:55:32 PM
I did think that a connection between Roxanne's story and the main Gerard story was *implied* in the Summer of 1970 storyline--if you watch carefully, there are snippets of dialogue here and there that imply this.  But in typical fashion the Roxanne storyline was just turned into a dead end like so much else from this period.

G.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Nelson Collins on September 26, 2007, 03:59:01 PM
they never showed barnabas going to willie's neck.   and williew wound was on his arm.

Hee hee (and OT), I remember though once Sandor discovered Barnabas' coffin in 1897, Barnabas did bite him on the neck, though we only see the wound and not the act.  Maybe Barn just has a thing for bears?  >:D
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on September 27, 2007, 02:56:11 AM
LOL Gothick! Yes, I too can hear that coming from the big DC. As for things being set up different in 1970 Summer versus what actually happened..... a common happenstance when dealing with time travel I'm afraid! Like what was the deal with Carrie and Tad being dead, or Gerard's boat (which I don't recall being mentioned YET in 1840), etc.

And Thank you Magnus! I did mean Desmond! *Forehead slap* I knew that sounded wrong.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on September 30, 2007, 03:41:52 PM
thus far i'm really enjoying these episodes.

a few observations...

with kathryn leigh scott gone this is the first time travel storyline that does not have some sort of "josette-centric" theme going on.it has a whole different "feel".

obviously jonathan and grayson are front-and-center but with joan,louis and nancy in supporting roles this leaves the later actors...james storm,virginia vestoff,christopher pennock,donna wandrey,kate jackson...to head things up.this really gives the storyline a "new" or "different" feel as the previous two time travel storylines(1795,1897)featured a signifigant number of the original actors.this feels about as far away from 1966 as possible and yet is still the same show.

i understand that kls was originaly slated to portray samantha collins.i just can't picture it.she has an inherent sweetness that i think would be at odds with the character.i wouldn't have minded seeing either terry crawford or elizabeth eis in the role.

i have to say i was disappointed with what happens with barnabas in these episodes.i was excited when ornery 1795 barnbas was released from his coffin and was momentarily at odds with julia again.that would have been a much more interesting direction to explore for awhile.instead after just a few days boring,1970,casper milquetoast barnabas "i-chings" his way into the picture with a dull thud.the "barnabas-and-julia-variety-hour" wears on my nervers in a real hurry.

i really like the costumes in this era...what keeps driving me nuts is how they keep changing the chandelier in the drawing room from the 1897 one to some other one specific to the 1840 storyline.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on September 30, 2007, 03:54:30 PM
i understand that kls was originaly slated to portray samantha collins.i just can't picture it.

I can't picture anyone other than Virginia Vestoff in the role because she just so owns it and plays it to perfection.

Quote
i really like the costumes in this era

Yes - Mary McKinley-Hass did a really great job.  [thumb]

Quote
what keeps driving me nuts is how they keep changing the chandelier in the drawing room from the 1897 one to some other one specific to the 1840 storyline.

Really? How wild. I've never noticed. I'll have to look for that the next time I watch.   [hall2_wink]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on September 30, 2007, 04:10:04 PM
mysterious,

the 1840 chandelier has orange globes on it.i'm not sure what type of fuel was used in 1840.was it gaslight?

similarly it drove me nuts how the 1897 chandelier used to come and go in the "present" after 1897. [hall2_rolleyes]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on September 30, 2007, 04:22:38 PM
similarly it drove me nuts how the 1897 chandelier used to come and go in the "present" after 1897. [hall2_rolleyes]

That I've noticed.  [hall2_cheesy]  But I've just chalked it up to the fact that, because space was at a premium in the studio, and because the drawing room set was a permanent set, they'd sometimes erect a different set inside the drawing room if it wasn't being used in an episode. Naturally, the different set would require the drawing room chandelier to be taken down - and I suppose some days they simply forgot to put it back up when the drawing room was needed.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on September 30, 2007, 06:51:01 PM
I had no idea KLS was originally slated for the role of Samantha! Like MB I can't picture anyone but Ms. Vestoff in the role, she is superb! In a way I'm glad they didn't cast KLS because it would have been a bit to much like 70PT for me. [hall2_rolleyes]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on October 02, 2007, 06:12:16 PM
a couple more thoughts...

although the dates of the events originally told during the 1795 storyline alternate here between being 1796 and 1797 it is still only 1840.so how is it that daniel,only a child in 179-whatever,is "aged" and "senile" when the numbers add up to him only being in his early fifties?

again i think the writers really copped out on bringing "good" barnabas into the storyline too soon rather than exploring what would have happened had the "bad"(or at least very conflicted)barnabas released from his coffin stuck around for awhile and caused some trouble.was this due to fear that the show's pre-teen audience might get "mad" like they did during the leviathan storyline when barnabas turned nasty again?that's pretty weak storytelling as far as i'm concerned.

here goes something of a tangent...by making previously "bad" characters like barnabas and quentin "nice"(or at least nuetral)it actually does them a tremendous disservice and nullifies alot about what made them compelling in the first place.

in 1897 they created in quentin one of the most fascinating and complex characters in the show's history.yet when he's brought into the present by trying to make him "nice" they negate all that.if it weren't for david selby's striking good looks and the character's strong name recognition he was written almost as a nonentity.at least as a vampire barnabas still had an element of dangerousness to him.speaking of quentin's name i think it is more cynical "branding" than valid storytelling that made the writers name selby's character that in every single time period.again did they worry that those "kids-that-you-know-what" would not be able to identify him as a character with another name?

that bitch-session aside i do really like these episodes and am looking forward to angelique's return.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on October 02, 2007, 07:06:09 PM
They couldn't interfere with the "Quentin" phenomenon.   Same with Barnabas.    Imagine one of the most popular characters on TV suddenly renamed "Fred" or something....

As for aged Daniel, people didn't live as long back then.   I feel pretty aged as I approach that decade in life, but I have extenuating circumstances.    I like to think I'd be biking across the country if I got well.   For the moment I'll just have to content myself with having walked a few blocks to the store and back.    Not bad.

It's not that protagonists are boring, but that they wrote them to be boring.    Villains are as boring as Dudley Do-Right heroes, unless you make them otherwise, that is.    Quentin was still borderline-violent and touchy no matter when he was... but they didn't make him interesting.   1968 Barnabas could have had a fascinating transformation after the hospital scene where he steps into sunlight, but instead, we got a cynical Frankenstein ripoff, and high-school-creative-writing-class-type forced "conflict", in the form of Adam repeating the same threat, and he and Barnabas bickering and bickering and bickering.

A healing Barnabas could have been the finest hour of the program.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on October 02, 2007, 07:15:43 PM
I have to agree with mscbryk: The characters were so much more fun when they were tortured souls than out and out nice guys (though they never really were that either). Once they became the "good guys" there wasn't much for them to do but fight the "bad guys" or in Quentin's case, get buried alive (am I imaging it or did that happen more than once?)

And to Magnus, nice signature, definitely got a sarcastic chuckle out of me.  >:D
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 02, 2007, 08:53:14 PM
was this due to fear that the show's pre-teen audience might get "mad" like they did during the leviathan storyline when barnabas turned nasty again?

Perhaps. But it wasn't just the teen audience who disliked evil Barn during Leviathans. The daytime magazines were flooded with letters from adult viewers complaining.

Quote
by making previously "bad" characters like barnabas and quentin "nice"(or at least nuetral)it actually does them a tremendous disservice and nullifies alot about what made them compelling in the first place.

True. Though in the case of Barn it might be less of an issue because they never truly reformed him. Even while trying to save the family or solve some other crisis, he still managed to do many (some might even say far too many) decidedly unheroic things. But with Quentin it was, sadly, a different story because after 1897 he basically lost much of what was most appealing about him in 1897. After 1897 Selby didn't get much good material to work with unless he was playing some alternate Quentin.  [hall2_sad]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: IluvBarnabas on October 06, 2007, 12:20:48 AM
I couldn't disagree with Willie Loomis more about Jonathan (he's my favorite actor on the show).

Jonathan was the reason I started watching Dark Shadows in the first place....I found the show a bit on the boring side (aside from the Laura story) before Barnabas came.  Once Jonathan came onto the show I was hooked. Of course I watched the Barnabas episodes long before the episodes before he came so that may have made a difference.

I think Jonathan should be cut some slack on his stumbling over his lines. He had been a theatrical actor before he came onto DS, and he himself admitted he had been a slow study. Working on a soap opera is quite different from working on the stage too, I would imagine.

Jonathan was better in some scenes than others, but he was not an absolute washout by any means. There are several dramatic scenes he played to perfection, his weeping at Sarah's disappearance after she finally appeared to him, for example. He was so great in that. And if he did trip up other actors on occasion, it's not like he did it on purpose.

I do think the other actors, Joan and Louis for example, got shortchanged as far as having their own storylines when Jonathan came on, but that's hardly Jonathan's fault.  DS actors were known to do other projects and leave for long periods of time while still on the show.


As far as 1840 goes, it's one of my favorites. In fact all of the time-travelling sagas are my favorites.

Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 06, 2007, 03:33:22 PM
In fact all of the time-travelling sagas are my favorites.

It's interesting that you say that because back in '98 when AOL's now defunct Dark Shadows Online asked all online fans (not just AOL members) to nominate their favorite DS storylines, hundreds of fans responded, and the three highest voter getters were all time-travelling sagas: 1795, 1897 and 1840. Not one of the present day storylines came close to the amount of votes those three storylines received.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on October 06, 2007, 03:57:14 PM
a few comments and many questions...

of all the time stravel storylines 1840 is the "prettiest".it reminds me of 1970 parallel-time in that collinwood itself looks bright and cheery despite the sinister doings beneath the surface.blue seems to be a signifigant color here that contrasts nicely with all the dark woods.there is a particularly lovely cornflower shade that colors everything from draperies to gowns.the set for rose cottage is especially nice.

questions and this will involve major spoilers...

how are flora and desmond related to the family?they are refered to as "cousins" but wasn't daniel the last surviving member of the collins family?since flora had to have married into the family was there some other hitherto unmentioned male relation or is this simply one of those things that goes unexplained?

why does nancy barrett as leiticia faye act just like charity trask possessed by pansey faye in 1897?is there a particular reason or was that just a popular character the writers thought they could milk a bit more?

one can assume that the child of gabriel and edith ends up being the father of the 1897 characters(judith,edward,quentin and carl)but those numbers don't really add up.again does this major continuity issue go unaddressed?are the 1840 quentin and the 1897 quentin supposed to be the same character for some reason?and for major spoiler points i peaked ahead in the episode summaries and see that at some point towards the end of this storyline gabriel kills edith...how is that possible if she's the head of the family in 1897???is this just another major continuity snaffoo or does some sort of parallel-time mumbo-jumbo undo this at some point?

i know this is cheating but i'm already confused by this storyline. [hall2_huh]

p.s.i'm probably one of those rare fans that prefers the "present day" storylines to the time travel stuff.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 06, 2007, 04:32:53 PM
Hi, mscbyk,

I'll address two of the issues you bring up:

one can assume that the child of gabriel and edith ends up being the father of the 1897 characters(judith,edward,quentin and carl)but those numbers don't really add up.again does this major continuity issue go unaddressed?

Unless I'm forgetting something, I don't believe we're ever told the ages of Gabriel and Edith's children. I believe all we know is that they're away at school. So, it might be possible that in 1840 they had a son who was younger than Tad but still old enough to start a family within the next 5 or so years. And also, even though Joan Bennett was 59 in 1969 that doesn't necessarily mean that Judith was 59 in 1897 - Judith might have been a bit younger.  [hall2_wink]

Quote
are the 1840 quentin and the 1897 quentin supposed to be the same character for some reason?

In Ep #1077, while researching the events of 1840 during the summer of 1970, Quentin mentions that he had a great-grand uncle with the same name as his, and he remarks how very strange it is to think that someone had his name and lived at Collinwood 130 years earlier.  [hall2_smiley]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: LeFanu on October 06, 2007, 06:42:06 PM
hey msbryk,

1840 is one of my favorite storylines, but there are definitely some inconsistencies that have left me scratching my head too.  hope you enjoy your first viewing of it - i think it's really fun!  and you're right - it is pretty to look at.

piggybacking onto what mb was saying above, it isn't ever stated what the ages of gabriel and edith's kids are - in fact, being "away at school", they could even be older than tad, imo.  maybe the father of edith, quentin et al was almost university age?

edith getting killed in the 1840 storyline creates a paradox that many dark shadows fans have debated for years.  i can't explain it either, except to say (somewhat cynically) that i'm sure the writers likely didn't care if anyone remembered edith from 1897, and certainly never dreamed we'd be sitting around, virtually, talking about why they did what they did forty years later.  inconsistent, sloppy writing/continuity like this certainly isn't uncommon on television.

as for the leticia/pansy similarity - i'm pretty sure everyone just liked nancy barrett as that character, so they brought her back, albeit with a different name.  perhaps leticia's meant to be an ancestor of pansy?

as to daniel supposedly having been the last of the collinses in 1795/6, i don't remember ever hearing that, but perhaps someone else here does.  since we were later informed that the collins family came to maine in the 1690's, there were certainly enough generations between the 17th and 19th centuries for an offshoot line from which desmond's unnamed father sprang.  plus, with the collins family being so...peculiar, i'm sure that even if they had said daniel was the last collins, there would've been some black sheep of the family in the 17th or 18th centuries that didn't make it into the official family history, who nobody acknowledged.  yeah, that's fanwanking, but it could be used to explain any "cousin" showing up later on the show.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on October 06, 2007, 10:40:29 PM
Alright, I thought I knew what "fanwank" meant, but now I guess I don't.

The only thing that really makes 1840 impossible is B, J, and Stokes returning to 1971 and finding things normal, with Liz knowing them.    I think they never intended to return to the "present" except for a moment... then they fled from 1971 as fast as they could, because they'd screwed it up so badly that no story in 1971 RT could possibly be viable.    As long as they were staying forever in the past, contradictions and loose threads wouldn't matter (they thought).     They weren't even staying in the same "universe". 

Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Brandon Collins on October 07, 2007, 03:36:28 AM
Don't know what to say about Edith being killed in 1840 and then having old Edith in 1897 just bursting to tell the family secret. Which would mean that Gabriel would've known it because Daniel would've told it to him in 1840, which obviously didn't happen because A) we didn't see it and B) Daniel HATED Gabriel a whole spankin' lot, and probably would've told it to Quentin instead.

I can't remember if Gabriel bites the bullet or not in 1840, but if he didn't, maybe he married another Edith?

I agree with what others have said about the ages of Gabriel's children. We were never given any hint as to how old or young they were, so they could've been anywhere from probably 6-25.

And in regards to Daniel being the last surviving member of the family in the late 18th or early 19th century, that's heavily debateable. Especially since the Collins family tree, found in the DS Almanac, shows that Isaac Collins, the first ancestor, had three unknown children. And then one of those unknown children had Joshua and Abigail, from which the rest of the tree branches out. So it's possibly that one of Joshua's uncles had children, thus resulting in Flora and Desmond appearing as cousins of the 1840 family.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Joeytrom on October 07, 2007, 01:50:43 PM
In the Summer 1970 episodes, there is a painting of an ancestor right outside the playroom named "Abner Collins".  He may have been Flora's husband.

I always figured that Edith wasn't killed in 1840 but unconscious and revived sometime later.  They should have had Edith & her family out of the country at the time the 1840 events happened, tp make it easier.  Its funny they actually remembered about Edith in 1840 at the beginning of the story only to forget at the end she was supposed to be alive.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on October 07, 2007, 02:54:03 PM
Yeah, the unconscious theory worked for me too. LOL!
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on October 07, 2007, 07:47:21 PM
Hey, o'm sure that's not the first Gabriel strangling she survived.

 [skelleton_runs] [skelleton_runs] [skelleton_runs]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on October 08, 2007, 04:51:32 PM
i was pleasantly surprised at what i thought was a remarkable bit of continuity with the inclusion of edith in this storyline.what's more she was at an age in 1840 that would have jived with her being in her eighties/nineties in 1897...

but i was disappointed when i learned that they tossed this out the window by having edith die later on.

yes i've heard a million times that the writers only thought the audience would only see these episodes once but still did they think that their audience suffered from a collective case of amnesia and would forget about a very important character from only about a year before?

the show itself ran for less than five years so it's quite likely the audience vividly remembered most of the characters from it's entire run even only having seen each episode once.do you forget what happened three years ago?the writers should have given their viewers a bit more credit.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 08, 2007, 05:53:16 PM
Based on the ways in which they wrote the show, I've surmised through the years that the DS writers didn't look at the concept of time in the same way that, say, science fiction writers do or a majority of writers might have. They pretty much viewed the storylines in terms of the points in time when they took place on the show, as opposed to their actual chronological time. Even though in real time 1840 obviously took place before 1897, the 1840 storyline took place after the 1897 storyline on the show, and the 1840 events took place after Barnabas' trip to 1897. So, to the witers' minds, anything that happened in the 1840 storyline didn't invalidate anything that we had seen in 1897 because Barnabas had travelled to 1897 before he'd travelled to 1840 - 1897 took place before 1840 in the show's and Barnabas' own timeline - and thus any changes that Barnabas & Co. made to 1840 hadn't yet taken place when Barnabas had been in 1897. Yes, that creates all sorts of paradoxes, not to mention it conflicts with a logical view of time - but there you have it. But then, that's hardly the only unique take on the concept of time in the DS universe as it's endlessly fascinating how changed events in the past had been able to change outcomes in the future like David's death due to Quentin's haunting, but they never actually changed the fact that events like the haunting had taken place because several characters still remembered. It's not so much the writers didn't expect the audience to remember - it's that they expected the audience to accept and to go with the concept of time in the same ways that they did. DS is quite simply a show with many of its own unique rules.  [hall2_wink]
Title: Thaddeus (Tad) Collins
Post by: Gothick on October 10, 2007, 12:05:24 AM
Just thought I'd poke my head in the door to say that I'm more or less equally fond of the present day storylines and the time-travelling ones.  I have a special fondness for the pre-Barnabas 1966-67 shows, and for the Cassandra Collins/Nicholas Blair 1968 storyline--as regards the latter, mainly because I started watching DS during that period so it was my introduction to the series.

I haven't watched the episode in quite some time, but as I recall it, when David and Amy are exploring the West Wing in December of '68, they pass a portrait of a mutton-chopped gent of the 1860s and David solemnly informs his new friend that this is Thaddeus Collins, an ancestor who fought in the Civil War.  I realize I'm imputing WAY too much power of recall to the writers but I like to think of Thaddeus as the child Tad grown up and doing his bit during the War Between the States.

G.
Title: Re: Thaddeus (Tad) Collins
Post by: Midnite on October 10, 2007, 05:47:03 AM
I haven't watched the episode in quite some time, but as I recall it, when David and Amy are exploring the West Wing in December of '68, they pass a portrait of a mutton-chopped gent of the 1860s and David solemnly informs his new friend that this is Thaddeus Collins, an ancestor who fought in the Civil War.  I realize I'm imputing WAY too much power of recall to the writers but I like to think of Thaddeus as the child Tad grown up and doing his bit during the War Between the States.

But in that original timeline, Spoiler:

Tad didn't live beyond 1840.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on October 10, 2007, 07:01:44 PM
......which totally throws everything for a loop for if Tad survived past 1840, why would Edith's children inherit Collinwood?
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 10, 2007, 07:13:19 PM
Perhaps after the changed events of 1840/41 Tad never had children, or perhaps his child(ren) died with Collinwood still passing to Gabriel and Edith's son's heir.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on October 11, 2007, 04:07:55 PM
Good point!
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Joeytrom on October 11, 2007, 04:32:38 PM
The Thaddeus Collins in the portrait may have been a son of Gabriel & Edith.  David said to Amy this Thaddeus was alive during the Civil War, perhaps he was the father of Judith, Edward, Quentin, & Carl.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on October 13, 2007, 03:22:05 PM
a quick question.is the exterior of rose cottage also the house they used for angelique and sky rumson during the leviathan story?it looks similar.

there's something really sumptuous about the colors here.lush blues,purples,rusts,forest greens.

the character of roxanne drew is perhaps the most poorly developed ever on the show.in all three of her time periods(parallel-time,1970,1840)we're just supposed to accept that barnabas instantly falls in love with her the minute he sees her but we learn next to nothing about her.in parallel-time she spends half the time lying on a slab.in 1840 he's "in love" with her from minute one,then we don't see her for several episodes,then angelique show's up and all of a sudden it's this huge rivalry and she's out to destroy the woman barnabas is "in love" with.it's mentioned as an afterthought that they had been "seeing" each other but they didn't bother to actually write scenes of them together so this love affair has zero emotional impact for the viewer.poor lara parker tries to work herself into a jealous frenzy over this most unworthy opponent but without someone signifigant(like josette)to play against this whole plot plays completely flat.

with kathryn leigh scott out of the picture they needed b. to have the hots for someone else but they should have given this character some identifying characteristics.we don't see alot of josette but at least we know that she was the picture of virtue and innocence and thus b. carries around a torch for her for two hundred years and for similar reasons he goes for victoria but roxanne is too much of a blank page for the audience to care about.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on October 15, 2007, 01:56:18 PM
I agree! They set up more in her scenes with Jerry Lacy than they did with Jonathan. All we ever really see of her character is that she despises the thought of marrying Trask!
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on October 15, 2007, 11:34:59 PM
I think we get to see Roxanne as a developed character through those scenes with Lamar, but when did Barnabas get a chance to? 

Roxanne is established as unusually independent, and sees through hypocritres and stuffed shirts pretty easily.    She's very verbal about all this, and we do get a chance to know her.    Barnabas is never there during those exchanges, though...

Barnabas's life doesn't exactly establish sense or logic or communication as ways of dealing with situations, or people.    His life has been filled with magic.    It figures, then, that he'd believe in love at first sight, fate, whatever....
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on October 16, 2007, 05:52:59 PM
to get into the supernatural element of d.s. one obviously has to suspend disbelief...

but i think on an emotional level it works better when the writing approached the characters in understandable human terms.

contrast barnabas' relationship with roxanne to the earlier storyline of his relationship with vicki.
they meet,they talk,they're interested in similar things,they forge a friendship and the whole plot develops over a period of several months and the viewer has the opportunity to become emotionally invested in how it plays out.

with roxanne we're just asked to accept it and care about it without any insight into why the attraction exists(other than roxanne being pretty)or any time for the relationship to develop.for me that's very hard to care about.the supernatural stuff works better when anchored by true human emotions.

again i think that's why barnabas' relationships with julia and angelique are much more interesting than the one he has with roxanne.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Brandon Collins on October 17, 2007, 02:23:59 AM
It wasn't Barnabas' fault that he fell in love with Roxanne. She pointed at HIM first!



...............sorry, couldn't resisit.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on November 02, 2007, 03:07:56 PM
perhaps this is just me however...

i was home yesterday and on a lark watched several episodes from the 1897 storyline(which i haven't seen in years).

what i was struck by was how fresh and crisp and energized everyone seemed(including the writers).it seemed as if the show was in an "expansive" period.

to me the 1840 storyline seems like the show in decline.i can't really put my finger on why but it just feels sort of spent.the actors a bit tired.that's how i felt about the storylines after parallel-time and the brief trip to 1995.was everyone just plain exhausted after the movie and the constant change in time period that ran across the 1970 episodes?

jonathan and especially grayson seem really burned out after running aroung like chickens with their heads cut off for the last several months.there's not alot of nuance to their work here.it's like going through the motions...parallel-time was the last time i think grayson must have felt challenged by the scripts and did some of her finest work ever as hoffman...but when she's just screaming "barnabas!!!" all the time it's kind of boring.

without joan bennett in a pivotal role the period lacks for me as well.as the owner of rose cottage flora gets alot of mentions(much like liz late in the series)but not much screen time and little to do with what she got.

not to say that there isn't much to like here but my overall impression is that the whole thing is winding down and everyone knew it.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gothick on November 02, 2007, 03:58:21 PM
MSC, I think you are right about the old-timers on the show being generally tired or at least in a state of discontent.  From things that have been shared here, I know Jonathan Frid was basically fed up with playing a vampire and doing "the fanging thing."  Grayson was feeling end-of-the-run blues, I think--they scheduled one of her shows in August on the same day she had just flown back from LA from doing Night Gallery and I don't think she was terribly thrilled with that, just for an example.   I have no idea what the story was with the writers but as 1840 goes on the shows become very repetitive--there are seemingly endless scenes of "Gerard" putting a spell on Daphne or somebody else and then the results of the spell.

Good things in the later part:  any scenes with Virginia Vestoff or Chris Pennock (unlike the others, Gabriel was very fresh material for him); Johnny Karlen's romantic bits with Nancy (aren't they just adorable together!), Julia's occasional scene with Angelique; ditto for Barn and Trask (I love a certain scene where Barn confronts Trask at a moment when the latter was in a state of abject terror).  But there's this period where Lee Beery and James Storm seem to be vying for the Fickle Finger of Fate award as to who can botch the most dialogue, and Humbert is pretty much wasted in the cookie-cutter role of Charles Dawson, Lawyer and Satanist.

My favorite Grayson moment from this period is when Julia is watching her counterpart in the Parallel Time room:  not only is it Grayson in Stereo, but Grayson gets more to do in five minutes as Aunt Julia Collins than she gets in weeks of regular time 1840.

G.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on November 02, 2007, 04:55:53 PM
i agree that julia's scenes with angelique are nicely done.she has a few early scenes with gerard where he's questioning her true identity that are well played as well.

for me grayson is at ther best when her character is being coy or evasive or operating with some sort of self serving motivation.it brings out the best in her.she also needs a foil to play against which is why i love her opposite nancy barrett in 1967Spoiler:
(when carolyn was under barnabas' control)
or as hoffman in parallel-time when she plays against nearly everyone.she has some genius scenes in 1968 against nicholas blair as well.some duplicitousness on her part is nice.when she's just functioning as barnabas' assisitant it's not so interesting.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: buzz on November 02, 2007, 07:21:30 PM
I agree that Grayson could be very good when playing against fellow actors such as Frid, Astredo or Parker. She does a very good job when she is intellligent, courageous and aware of the threats she is facing. When she goes into "hysterical" mode it becomes too over the top for me.

I've been slowly watching the return to 1970 stories as Spoiler:
the children slooooooooooooowly become possesed and have held on, barely, to continue watching. Every once in a while a good episode appears, usually involving THayer David. One moment involving Grayson was very good. David and Carrie were caught coming in the house at 1AM after having gone to the cemetary to stand on Gerards grave at midnight to see if the spirit was gone (or some such nonsense). Julia caught them coming in and David was coming up with some poor excuses (of course, in DS, two teens hanging out in the middle of the night would not elicit questions about sex!). Grayson's disbeliving looks and replies to David are underplayed and perfect.         

The only other interesting parts of this storyline was the introduction of another vampire. The silent ghosts are ok for a while but were drawn out, as was "the smell of lilacs" and Quentin's constantly calling on Daphne.

In another 10 episodes or so the children (who we see far too much of) will become possesed and Daphne will come to life.
Will I make it to 1840? Stay tuned.....
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on November 03, 2007, 06:30:50 AM
Quote from: buzz
She does a very good job when she is intellligent, courageous and aware of the threats she is facing. When she goes into "hysterical" mode it becomes too over the top for me.

I agree.

mcsbryk-- I agree about 1897, not about 1840.    But then, by 1840 my expectations have been lowered.    After Leviathans and PT, and pre-1840 1970, which seem to be the most tired and apathetic periods, 1840 is always a big relief to me.   Of course, it's sort of a cynical grab-bag of elements that were popular in previous storylines, but the show seems to wake up and they seem to care to some extent.    All the Gabriel-Gerard sparring at the beginning is great.    Barnabas before his 1970 self pops in is great, too.    Old Ben too, but we lose him soon, and the storyline sags in the middle with all the Quentin-framing.    The Head is the best bit.   They introduce an incredible bit of music for it, too.    Once the Head takes over Gerard, I lose a lot of interest.  It picks up at the end, though.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gothick on November 05, 2007, 04:27:38 PM
MSC, one of my all-time favorite Grayson moments is, I think, in the introduction of Sabrina storyline (and those painful weeks when we had to deal with RD's Ned Stuart characterization).    Julia is trying to see someone and the other person is claiming that the individual she seeks is not around.  Then somebody else comes out and says "Oh, they're in the next room."  Julia turns to whoever it is she was speaking to before and asks, in this gently wounded innocent voice, "Why was it necessary to LIE?"  Watching that scene as an adult years ago, I had to guffaw, being all too acutely aware of the NUMEROUS times our dear Dr. Hoffman had lied her way with a sweet and smiling face out of one situation after another.

If someone could remind me just when the scene I attempt to describe above actually occurred, I'd be very grateful; since reading Michael's comments above I've been jonesing to see it again.

cheers, G.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Lydia on November 09, 2007, 07:26:28 PM
Gothick, I don't remember the scene you're talking about.  Perhaps I'm blocking all scenes with Ned Stuart out of my mind.  What I do remember is something similar in the episode in which Julia first meets Barnabas, which would make it 286, I believe.  It's during Julia's conversation with Willie at the Old House before Barnabas shows up.

If you're going to watch that episode again, watch 290 - my very favorite - for me while you've got that tape or DVD in your machine. 
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: michael c on November 12, 2007, 06:53:17 PM
a few more observations...

the mens' hairstyles certainly are "fluffy" here.i think it's much more a reflection of what fashions were in 1970 more than anything that had to do with the 1840's.the glued-on muttonchops are funny...i wonder why the actors just didn't grow out their own sideburns for this period?

for all of the build up tad and carrie got in the 1970 set-up to this storyline they actually have very little to do with it thus far.i just finished dvd volume 23(about halfway through)and tad has yet to appear at all and carrie only in a few episodes.again both kids are too old for a governess but at least they acknowledge that with carrie as she develops a crush on gerard and remarks herself that she's growing up.it would have been quite annoying to have her again fussing around with that dollhouse...speaking of which both the dollhouse and the playroom disappear from the story early on.do they reappear or does this entire plotline get scrapped in favor of something else?i have a sneaking suspicion that that all of that is going to go unresolved.i haven't heard much about the "java queen" or most of the other things that set-up this storyline.

does it just go free-form from here on out?
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on November 13, 2007, 01:08:47 AM
Quote
does it just go free-form from here on out?

Brace yourself, but sort of, yeah.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on November 19, 2007, 12:00:13 AM
for all of the build up tad and carrie got in the 1970 set-up to this storyline they actually have very little to do with it thus far.i just finished dvd volume 23(about halfway through)and tad has yet to appear at all and carrie only in a few episodes. ... the dollhouse and the playroom disappear from the story early on.do they reappear

As you've no doubt noticed, the playroom reappears and Tad finally appears in Ep #1147 (in today's current slideshow):

(http://www.dsboards.com/eventimages/1117ds_15.jpg)
1970: Ep #1147 - Carrie tells Tad that she saw a vision of the
two of them dead in the playroom.

Much of what was built up with Tad and Carrie in 1970 had to be scrapped when David Henesy decided he'd grown tired of doing DS. If one does a search for topics on that subject (particularly from around October/November '03), more details are likely to be found.  [hall2_smiley]
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Doug on March 25, 2008, 05:37:05 AM
I'm wondering about Gabriel's wheelchair. It look modern to me. Did the wheelchairs of the 1840's had
metal chrome wheels with metal spokes? I thought wheelchairs at that time only had one rear wheel
that swivels in the back of the chair.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Midnite on March 25, 2008, 07:26:26 AM
I'm wondering about Gabriel's wheelchair. It look modern to me. Did the wheelchairs of the 1840's had
metal chrome wheels with metal spokes? I thought wheelchairs at that time only had one rear wheel that swivels in the back of the chair.

You're right.  In the 1800s, they had 2 big wheels with one small one in the back, but in 1840 these were still wood, and there were no wire spokes until the turn of the century.

If the one in the storyline had chrome anywhere on it, that was probably the biggest anachronism.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Lydia on March 25, 2008, 09:15:28 AM
That wheelchair definitely had modern wheels.  They kept catching my eye.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on March 25, 2008, 10:01:23 AM
We're all just too damn observant for our own good....
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Gerard on March 25, 2008, 03:32:08 PM
How much you wanna bet that they simply took the wheelchair David Henesey had to use for awhile during the Leviathan story line when he actually hurt himself (and they had to write it into the plot) to save a few bucks.  All they had to do was ask if he still had it laying around somewhere (unless it was a borrowed one), drag it in, pull off the back and slap on a wicker replacement and - voila! - one 1840's-style wheelchair that they hoped no one would look at too closely.

Gerard
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Doug on March 25, 2008, 04:00:52 PM
How much you wanna bet that they simply took the wheelchair David Henesey had to use for awhile during the Leviathan story line when he actually hurt himself (and they had to write it into the plot) to save a few bucks.  All they had to do was ask if he still had it laying around somewhere (unless it was a borrowed one), drag it in, pull off the back and slap on a wicker replacement and - voila! - one 1840's-style wheelchair that they hoped no one would look at too closely.

You might be right. I guess it was too expensive for them to find and use a antique wheelchair in mint
condition or too expensive to borrow a replica from MGM Studios.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Lydia on March 26, 2008, 11:58:27 AM
Couldn't somebody have sprayed some mahogany-colored paint onto the wheels?  Water-soluble, of course.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Doug on March 26, 2008, 02:54:59 PM
Samantha told Quentin that Tad is not his son. Has that been proven to be true or not?
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: IluvBarnabas on March 26, 2008, 05:35:36 PM
Samantha told Quentin that Tad is not his son. Has that been proven to be true or not?

SPOILER ALERT:

After Samantha's death, and Quentin was cleared of the witchcraft charge, he found a letter from her, telling him she had lied, and that Tad, indeed was his son.


I suspected all along that Samantha was lying about Tad not being Quentin's son. Don't forget, she wanted to leave Quentin for Gerard at the time and she would have said ANYTHING so Quentin would let her leave with Tad. Unfortunately for her, it didn't work.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on March 26, 2008, 11:11:56 PM
Quote
After Samantha's death, and Quentin was cleared of the witchcraft charge, he found a letter from her, telling him she had lied, and that Tad, indeed was his son.

Well, that was handy, wasn't it?   Did Q #1 prove this?    We may just not know, but Tad could have been made heir anyway.   
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: IluvBarnabas on March 27, 2008, 03:49:55 AM
Quote
After Samantha's death, and Quentin was cleared of the witchcraft charge, he found a letter from her, telling him she had lied, and that Tad, indeed was his son.

Well, that was handy, wasn't it?   Did Q #1 prove this?    We may just not know, but Tad could have been made heir anyway.   

Well, they didn't have DNA tests back then. I don't know how they went about establishing paternity in those days.

Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on March 27, 2008, 05:05:06 AM
Prior to DNA, paternity would have been determined by blood type, as in given a child's blood type (and possibly the mother's?), a man's blood type could include or exclude him as potentially being the father. But I don't believe that was very advanced in 1840. Actually, it might not have even been available at all because I *think* the major discoveries pertaining to blood types didn't come until at least a few decades later.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Garth Blackwood on March 27, 2008, 06:25:55 AM
I took Samantha's letter to mean that she lied about the whole affair, and that Quentin was the only possible father. Besides, we know that Tad is obviously Quentin's son, due to those persistent Collins' genes!! ;)

For the record, I thought this admission by Samantha was not very believable and very out of character for her. Aside from that, why and when did she possibly write that?? When she died, it was still understood that Quentin would be executed within days, so I don't see why she would even expect this letter to ever be read. A minor blunder by the writers IMO, they would have been better off never mentioning it again ...
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on March 27, 2008, 08:29:18 AM
The announcement of that letter seemed like the equivalent of ... I don't know... a telegram arriving from God saying that it's always going to be sunny from now on and there will never be any trouble in the world ever again, hurrah!     You know, something thrown in there to make the happy ending even happier.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: Lydia on March 27, 2008, 11:02:09 AM
Yes, come to think of it, I might add that letter to the list of dumbest things that ever were made to happen on the show.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: arashi on March 31, 2008, 05:54:36 PM
LOL Magnus! I could use a letter like that.
Title: Re: i'm doing 1840...finally
Post by: MagnusTrask on March 31, 2008, 08:29:54 PM
LOL Magnus! I could use a letter like that.

Sort of a Get-Out-of-Misery-Free Card....