Author Topic: 1840 ben stokes question  (Read 3078 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: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #15 on: June 18, 2012, 01:55:03 AM »
another thing that i think alienates from this time period is that it is so largely populated by the series' latercomers...

christopher pennock, james storm, virginia vestoff, donna wandrey, kate jackson, etc., etc,...


there's nothing wrong with these actors i just never bonded with them the way i did the early cast of characters. with kathryn leigh scott and clarice blackburn departed and joan and louis relegated to the sidelines i'm disengaged out of the gate. something about it feels very alien to me all these newbies traipsing about collinwood.

and this is the third time period in a row where they try and give the barnabas and roxanne the big buildup which for me was a flatliner from day one. roxanne is in every storyline a very weakly developed character and frid and wandrey have absolutely no chemistry.
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: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #16 on: June 18, 2012, 02:52:21 AM »
According to what Prof. Stokes says in 1968, Ben died in 1830.
I regard 1840, from what others on this board have theorized, as another parallel time caused by the staircase.

Offline michael c

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3434
  • Karma: +653/-1184
  • Gender: Male
  • mr.collins i'm fed up with this nonsense!
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2012, 12:38:02 PM »
i don't think we should really just chalk major continuity gaffes up to it being a "parallel time" issue...

more like sloppy writing.
sleep 'til noon and your punishment shall be the dregs of the coffeepot.

Offline Gerard

  • NEW ASCENDANT
  • ******
  • Posts: 3587
  • Karma: +559/-6684
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2012, 02:46:38 PM »
While the 1840/41 story was just a retread of 1897 with the addition of throwing in a whole mish-mash of "plot twists," the one thing I did enjoy about it was having Virginia Vestoff playing Samantha.  Her seens with Quentin (especially when she intimates there might be some family, shall we say, "differences" regarding Tad) chewed up the screen in classic, soap-opera style.  For me, the non-supernatural elements (few that they were) were much better and more interesting than the "spooky" ones.

Gerard

Offline Mysterious Benefactor

  • Systems Manager /
  • Administrator
  • NEW SUPERNAL SCEPTER
  • *****
  • Posts: 16240
  • Karma: +205/-12199
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2012, 04:54:42 PM »
Yes, Virginia Vestoff is amazing as Samantha. And Chris Pennock has so much fun as Gabriel that it's impossible for me not to thoroughly enjoy him in the role. And I've always thought that Kate Jackson makes for a great new ingenue with the just the right combination of vulnerability and spunk.

David

  • Guest
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2012, 05:14:22 PM »
But the story as written, with that piss poor ending and no explanation offered as to [spoiler]how the deaths of Angelique, Roxanne and Edith affected future time stories[/spoiler] was infuriating! No explanation as to how that stairway worked either. Nothing made sense and it was obvious that Curtis and Frid no longer cared.

David

  • Guest
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2012, 05:58:08 PM »
BTW, the Big Finish audio drama Path of Fate does explain how the stairway thru time works.

Offline MagnusTrask

  • * 100000 Poster!! *
  • DIVINE SUPERNAL SCEPTER
  • ***************
  • Posts: 29347
  • Karma: +4533/-74785
  • Gender: Male
  • u r summoned by the powers of everlasting light!
    • View Profile
    • The Embryo Room
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2012, 07:18:49 PM »
I've always loved the journal entry of 1840 Quentin's which present-day Quentin read aloud in 1970.  There is no such thing as time, there is only physical space.  Impossible, but it makes me try to stretch my imagination to reach it and understand, which was the intent, I think.
"One can never go wrong with weapons and drinks as fashion accessories."-- the eminent and clearly quotable Dark Shadows fan and board mod known as Mysterious Benefactor

Offline DarkLady

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2727
  • Karma: +6/-408
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #23 on: June 18, 2012, 07:33:13 PM »
Yeah, I liked the whole Stairway Through Time thing, with Quentin at one point mentioning a professor at Nuremberg University or somewhere who first got the idea.

And thanks to the kind soul who fixed the spoilers in my post from yesterday. Sorry....  [ghost_embarrassed]

Offline Gothick

  • FULL ASCENDANT
  • ********
  • Posts: 6608
  • Karma: +124/-2895
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody book me a suite at Wyndcliffe, NOW!
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #24 on: June 18, 2012, 10:55:11 PM »
I realize the repetition is wearisome, but I feel called upon to point out again that while 1968 boasts the dreary Adam storyline, it also features some of the series' best moments, such as the plotline MB mentioned, but also pretty much ALL of the Nicholas Blair scenes (I really think 1968 Blair was head and shoulders above all of HAA's divine characterizations), Cassandra Collins which is one of my personal favorite characters in the series, some great Prof. Stokes stuff (Stokes was one of the characters who first got me watching the show), and the original Chris Jennings werewolf storyline.  Some of Eve's scenes were really quite juicy as well, I thought--Marie played her with such understated venom--and then there was Danielle Roget, "the most evil woman of the 18th century."

The parts of it that frustrate me the most are the endless winding-down of Vicki's trial storyline in the final part of 1795, and every scene involving Peter/Jeff; nearly all of Adam's scenes, although before Adam learned to talk Robert Rodan brought great heart to the role; and the interminable storyline involving Liz's curse to live in fear of death and being buried alive, a terrible betrayal of what was once a great character.  The reduction of Vicki to a simpering idiot who just "doesn't understand" is a very, very disappointing end to another character who was the fascinating centerpoint of the entire story, originally.  And finally, the unimaginative, dull scenario by which Joe Haskell was written out of the show, although Joe's final episode boasts one of the series' most compellingly bizarre and creepy dream sequences.

G.

ClaudeNorth

  • Guest
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2012, 11:39:23 PM »
Gothick, I agree with you about 1968!

While I am not blind to DS's faults, and I agree with certain criticisms of the series, I tend to be forgiving and embrace all of it because my enjoyment far outweighs my frustrations.  In 1840, I enjoy the scenes of domestic drama between Quentin and Samantha (I'm always drawn to stories about marriages falling apart), Christopher Pennock at his best as Gabriel, and I especially like seeing John Karlen in a romantic leading man type of role.  I know I'm in the minority on this, but I'm also a fan of [spoiler]Barnabas's declaration of his love for Angelique because I see it as the final fulfillment of her curse and the dissolution of his ties to his past, thus clearing the way for him to build a future with Julia.  When Barnabas and Julia take the final walk from the drawing room, I view it as the first steps of that journey.[/spoiler]

1841 PT?  Many complain about the loss of Barnabas, but I applaud Frid's portrayal of Bramwell.  I've never considered Frid to be sexy, but he positively smolders during these last weeks.  And I recall a scene between Frid and Kate Jackson that was as good as any scene during the show's run.  However, I do feel that storyline drags, but I suspect it's because the writers had to stretch out the plot to fill the remaining episodes because there wasn't time to introduce anything new.

--and then there was Danielle Roget, "the most evil woman of the 18th century."

Ah, yes! Erica Fitz, with her "drag version of Marianne Faithfull" vibe and bizarre line delivery.  True, Adam could be tedious, but without him we wouldn't have had her.

Offline DarkLady

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2727
  • Karma: +6/-408
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #26 on: June 19, 2012, 12:24:17 AM »
I also am very partial to PT 1840. I've always liked JF's work as Bramwell, and Kate Jackson's work too.

And yes, the whole Adam story got tiresome very quickly, but there are some nice scenes with him and Carolyn. And of course I wouldn't have missed Nicholas for anything!

Offline MagnusTrask

  • * 100000 Poster!! *
  • DIVINE SUPERNAL SCEPTER
  • ***************
  • Posts: 29347
  • Karma: +4533/-74785
  • Gender: Male
  • u r summoned by the powers of everlasting light!
    • View Profile
    • The Embryo Room
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #27 on: June 19, 2012, 12:43:08 AM »
When I brought up 1968, I meant the story actually taking place in 1968, which leaves out 1795.   Also, I think of Chris Jennings as 1969, and I think his first appearance is very close to the start of 1969.   

I think I'm answering David with this one:  If we're judging storylines by how satisfying the resolution of each was, I'm not sure we'd be left with more than one or two good storylines...
"One can never go wrong with weapons and drinks as fashion accessories."-- the eminent and clearly quotable Dark Shadows fan and board mod known as Mysterious Benefactor

Offline michael c

  • DSF God
  • *****
  • Posts: 3434
  • Karma: +653/-1184
  • Gender: Male
  • mr.collins i'm fed up with this nonsense!
    • View Profile
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2012, 02:09:49 AM »
part of the problem with 1968 is that it comes directly on the heels of what many consider to be the series' highpoint. 1795.

there the mythology and magic came to it's fullest fruition. then, out of the blue, it's a show about a bunch of really dumb and boring monsters.

and when i speak of "1968" i don't mean the tail end of 1795. and i really don't mean the chris jennings/quentin hauntings either. i believe that plot starts in december of 1968(during the unfortunate miss durkin's residency)but i always think of it as a 1969 storyline.

cassandra's a hoot. and julia and nicholas blair have a few memorable showdowns. but for most of the year it was just dumb. [ghost_tongue]
sleep 'til noon and your punishment shall be the dregs of the coffeepot.

David

  • Guest
Re: 1840 ben stokes question
« Reply #29 on: June 19, 2012, 04:07:01 AM »
At least 1968 didn't F with established facts as 1840 did.
And 1968 had Nick Blair, Eve, Angelique as a vampire, which are grand fun!