Discuss - Ep #0404

[Watching Project]

(Hopefully everyone girded themselves before watching this episode to prepare themselves for a certain someone's debut. )

Robservations #404

[Lydia]

Annoying episode.  Those people really need Julia to transcend time and space and go back to the year 1795 and tell them all what idiots they are.  Every last one of them.  Heaven knows they wouldn't listen, but it would do my heart good to hear her.

I was ready for one debut.  I forgot about the other, and was therefore insufficiently girded.  Can I sue?

[arashi]

I'm not even going to comment on Vicki's decision to spill the beans about where she came from. Her best defense would have been to go along with Barnabas and claim she couldn't remember. She sealed her own fate once she opened her mouth about the future.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

I was ready for one debut.  I forgot about the other, and was therefore insufficiently girded.  Can I sue?

Sorry, the forum assumes no responsibility for the minor debut. Though we certainly felt a warning about the major debut was required. 

[EmeraldRose]

Well, I may be in the minority, but I like Roger Davis - and Peter Bradford! He looked very handsome in this episode.

Yes, indeed, Vicki was very stupid to tell the truth to Judge Matigan!  I agree, she would have been better off had she followed Barnabas' lead.

That was smart thinking on Barnabas' part to get Josette to meet him by going out with Millicent. It's good that Josette listened to Barnabas.

That bat at the end was even more spooky than in the last episode!  Those red eyes - and that mouth! Really scary!

----- Sally -----

[Misty]

If Vickie had told folks that she transcended time in 2007, or even 1971, I imagine she may have been taken relatively seriously---given the UFO stories circulating. However, in 1795, I can't imagine folks believing or understanding the concept. Witches, I can understand because of the superstitious nature of many people. Another dumb choice. OH Vickie. Vickie, Vickie, -----------catch a clue!

                                                                                                   Misty

[Sunny_Collins]

It was nice and quite selfless of Barnabas to help Vicki even in the midst of his own troubles.

I actually like Peter Bradford.

[Roland]

Gotta agree...Roger Davis definitely gets a bum rap on this site.

What I find odd is that, in 1795, Barnabas' interest in Vickie seems to be purely platonic, yet in 1967, he is all but in love with her. She's the exact same person, yet his response to her is so different.

[Josette]

In 1795 he's still in love with Josette and has no interest in anyone else.  In 1967 he's still in love with Josette, but it's been a very long time!  And, actually, his main purpose is to recreate Josette, and having failed with Maggie, Vicki is a very good substitute.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Gotta agree...Roger Davis definitely gets a bum rap on this site.

When exactly was the last time you saw RD's entire oeuvre as Jeff Clark?    If you can come back after seeing that and still say he gets a bum rap, well, I for one will be speechless. 

[michael c]

i think that the loathsomeness that is jeff clark is a bizzare cocktail of the scripts and roger davis' acting style.

the character was supposed to be "confused" because he didn't know who he was(only on d.s. folks!)but because of davis' belligerent acting style he always seemed angry.

and the way that the dialogue for jeff and vicki was written it always seemed like they were bickering even though they were supposed to be in love.what's more alexandra moltke's placid acting style gave their scenes together an odd dissonance.

it was said recently on another topic that peter(jeff)and vicki actually look "cute" together.i never really thought about it but yes,physically.they do make an attractive couple.

[Lydia]

Peter Bradford didn't always seem angry, and he was Davis's first role on the show.  Why, after the role of Jeff Clark, was Roger Davis given the role of Ned Stuart, who was even angrier than Jeff Clark?  If Dan Curtis was insisting that Roger Davis be on the show, couldn't they have given him something different?

What I find odd is that, in 1795, Barnabas' interest in Vickie seems to be purely platonic, yet in 1967, he is all but in love with her. She's the exact same person, yet his response to her is so different.

Vicky's the exact same person, but Barnabas is not.

[michael c]

yes,

having jeff clark and ned stuart overlap so closely was weird.especially given that they looked and acted exactly the same.they could have done something to differentiate the two characters but they didn't.

my guess about this is that roger davis had a contract and Spoiler:

after jeff "disappeared" into the past the producers needed to create a role for him.

ned stuart was a pretty minor player.they could easily have hired a different actor for his few episodes so using davis must have been a cost-saving measure or a contractural obligation.

[Lydia]

Clever idea, mscbryk!

[Roland]

it was said recently on another topic that peter(jeff)and vicki actually look "cute" together.i never really thought about it but yes,physically.they do make an attractive couple.

I have to confess that when I first saw the series in its initial airing, I wanted desperately for Vickie and Jeff to get married.  I was only 10 years old at the time and certainly not into "romance," but something about those two really touched me somehow.  I can remember being so disappointed when it didn't happen and posivitely PO'd when Alejandra was suddenly replaced by an obviously inferior interloper (how I came to loathe the "the part of ________ will be played today by..." intros. after that).  Ah, the traumas of youth. 

Funny the things that stick in one's mind over the decades!