DARK SHADOWS FORUMS
General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '25 I => Current Talk '07 I => Topic started by: IluvBarnabas on January 09, 2007, 04:40:14 AM
-
While on trial for witchcraft [spoiler]admitting to a zealous fanatic and the 18th-century judges you took part in a seance, a ritual to summon up and talk to a ghost, or threatening the 19th-century prosecuter while on the witness stand in your own behalf on the same charge?[/spoiler]
I have gotten some interesting discussion on this with the friends I see everyday who also happen to love the show. I am interested in hearing what you all think....
-
I'd be willing to bet that the former, talking about a seance to drum up a ghost, would be more damaging. That's practically ADMITTING that you're a witch, and telling the court to just stop what they're doing and hang your stupid ass already.
-
Given the paranoia of the time, I'd say both are equally dumb. But, if you want to talk dumb, how about Vicki and her big mouth in 1795? It seems she implicated herself more and more, despite her innocence to the charges.
-
Oops. I'm watching all this for the first time in my memory, now. VW is the first and Bradford the second I guess, since even though PB isn't accused yet, obviously it's going to happen. I'm starting to realize how plagiarized later storylines were from this one. I thought I knew, but it's worse than I thought.
-
??? Vicki was incredibly stupid to admit that they were having a seance at the time she disappeared into the past. She didn't have to tell them that! It's definitely one of those times when you needed to lie. Geeze, that sealed her conviction right there. She had said something about a family meeting. Why not just say "We were discussing what to do about Mrs. Johnson's cooking?" Anything!
Alondra
-
Did she really do that!? LOL! I haven't seen those parts, yet! I never mind the spoilers, but gimme a BREAK Vicky! Eh, then again, maybe she got nervous and her mouth decided before her brain could speak up that she would spill her gutts. That's gotta suck
for her.
Both are equally dumb. I think they go hand in hand. ~DJ
-
:-[ Yes she did that. Her case was really looking bad and Peter decided that the only way to hopefully get her off was to tell them she had come from the future. I forget now exactly why he thought that. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that she had been dressed "horribly immodestly" when she first arrived. But when Trask cross examined her he asked what she was doing at the time she was whisked to the past. She said everyone was in the drawing room having a meeting. He asked what sort of meeting? She said a seance. That pretty much guaranteed she'd soon be wearing a noose around her neck.
Alondra
-
:-[Yes she did that. Her case was really looking bad and Peter decided that the only way to hopefully get her off was to tell them she had come from the future...
Peter decided that? :o
Here's your sign!
[lghy] [lghy] [lghy] If that isn't the stupidest... I understand that desperate times call for desperate measures, but woo! :shakes head: ~DJ
-
Speaking of dumb (or at least ill considered), there was Natalie, blase as you please about using tarot cards! I guess if you have money and position, using so called "black arts" to foretell the future isn't considered a witchcraft enough to be punishable.! :)
-
:o Yes and though Trask ragged on her for that he didn't bring it up again and he didn't call her a witch. I guess it was ok for her since she was a countess.
Alondra
(Edited by mod.)
-
Speaking of dumb (or at least ill considered), there was Natalie, blase as you please about using tarot cards! I guess if you have money and position, using so called "black arts" to foretell the future isn't considered a witchcraft enough to be punishable.! :)
Yes! OMG, that annoyed the hell outta me! ::)
-
:o Yes and though Trask ragged on her for that he didn't bring it up again and he didn't call her a witch. I guess it was ok for her since she was a countess.
But then, despite being a "man of God" and all, I am sure he was being well compensated by the Collinses and/or DuPres' for his trouble .... ;)
-
Besides the fact she didn't really hide her clothes or the family history.
Lori
-
How many of us would be able to confabulate some satisfactory alternate explanation for everything? It's a valid approach to err on the side of telling the truth, if you just absolutely have no alterative that automatically gets you off. Or, short version, VW was screwed.
-
I hope that were I to find myself in that position, I'd have the sense to say, "Oh, deary me, I don't know what happened, and I don't understand it at all! Please, Miss Abigail, burn those clothes and PRAY with me! Oh, Reverend Trask, please PRAY for me!"
The clothes part always gets me. "I'll need those clothes!" She knew that she had other clothes to wear in 1967, and she could reasonably assume that if she ever got back to her own time, her friends would not reject her for temporarily wearing strange clothes - so why couldn't she let that one outfit go?
I still maintain, however (until the next time I watch 1795), that Vicky thought she was in a nightmare - literally - so she though it was OK to say all the stupid things that she said.
-
I hope that were I to find myself in that position, I'd have the sense to say, "Oh, deary me, I don't know what happened, and I don't understand it at all! Please, Miss Abigail, burn those clothes and PRAY with me! Oh, Reverend Trask, please PRAY for me!"
Agreed. If she'd shown some foresight and been seen to enter church and spout the Lord's Prayer on occasion, especially when she could be sure that Abigail was watching or even go with her, that might have solved some problems...
It still irks me a little though. Angelique is the only person in all this that benefits from the "witch" Vicky's actions. I mean, did the snooty Collinses perhaps think that a servant girl marrying into the family was part and parcel of the witch's goal of destroying the family or something? ;)
The clothes part always gets me. "I'll need those clothes!" She knew that she had other clothes to wear in 1967, and she could reasonably assume that if she ever got back to her own time, her friends would not reject her for temporarily wearing strange clothes - so why couldn't she let that one outfit go?
I still maintain, however (until the next time I watch 1795), that Vicky thought she was in a nightmare - literally - so she though it was OK to say all the stupid things that she said.
I do seem to recall that she did think she was in some kind of a nightmare for a time so some of her reactions at first were natural. She had no past experience at all to fall back on, so yes "nightmare" seemed the most logical "default setting."
However.....teaching Sarah and Daniel about airplanes, and describing the ram's head on her zodiac charm bracelet (!!!) as a "devil" to them (done IIRC off screen and mentioned as evidence against her at the trial) well, gosh, Vicky, if that was true them may as well start tying the noose now. :)
Regarding the clothes, well, you know how fashion conscious Collinsport girls are! ;) But you have a point. After all, she does still have that happenin' red long sleeved sack dress with the blue trim waiting for her at home.... :P
I liked the way the revival series handled the clothes issue. I haven't seen it since is originally aired, but IIRC, Abigal is examining Vicky's dress and finds the cleaning instructions tag, with reference to using a "cool iron" and the washing symbols that she thinks are witch's sigils or somesuch. Very amusing. :)
-
If she is smart enough so see the difference in the Old House. Barnabas dressed in strange clothes. (that is not his costume from the party) Sarah being alive. It would have been interesting to make Vickie smart here. Maybe she would have thought about Angelique being the witch.
Lori
-
A bit off-topic but this is something that has always bothered me.... [spoiler]in the original show, the Countess and the whole family (except Barnabas and Naomi) believe Vicki to be the witch and are determined to see her hang as a witch. In the revival, the whole family and the Countess are FOR Vicki and want to see her acquitted....Trask had Abigail, Natalie, Angelique and Nathan testify against Vicki and she is convicted in the daytime show. In the revival, Trask only had Abigail's testimony, whereas Vicki had Joshua, Ben Loomis, the Countess testifying FOR her, yet Vicki is still convicted.
I understand Dan wanted to make changes for the revival but shouldn't he have at least divided the Collins a little more when it came to Vicki's innocence or guilty like he did on the show? Half of the family believe her guilty the other half innocent? I appreciate the fact he decided to make Vicki be the Josette look-alike in this one but still....as I said Dan should have put members of the Collins family on a more even divided stand...having Vicki convicted on Abigail's testimony alone looked really silly to me, especially since it was obvious Abigail didn't like her or never liked her.[/spoiler]
-
If she is smart enough so see the difference in the Old House. Barnabas dressed in strange clothes. (that is not his costume from the party) Sarah being alive. It would have been interesting to make Vickie smart here. Maybe she would have thought about Angelique being the witch.
I need to get a hold of the Revival series and watch it again. ISTR Vicky being much more with it there. Am I right?
-
This is making me want to see the revival series now. I really didn't have any interest before. I'll have to check and see if it is in Net-Flix.
Lori. :D
-
The revival series DVD's are always for sale on Ebay. I like it but not as much as the original of course.
Alondra
-
I liked the way the revival series handled the clothes issue. I haven't seen it since is originally aired, but IIRC, Abigal is examining Vicky's dress and finds the cleaning instructions tag, with reference to using a "cool iron" and the washing symbols that she thinks are witch's sigils or somesuch. Very amusing.
I liked that scene as well, LOL! The Collinsport Players did a skit at the '91 November Fest called Victoria Winters' Bogus Journey that was based on the new show and absolutely hilarious! The above-mentioned scene was very amusingly parodied as well. ;)
-
I, too, have wanted to see the Revival Series for a while. I don't want to pay too much for it. I'd like to get it real cheap so I can watch it and resell it if I don't like it. I'm willing to wait a few more years until I can find it dirt cheap, I'm not pressed to watch it.
-
I, too, have wanted to see the Revival Series for a while. I don't want to pay too much for it. I'd like to get it real cheap so I can watch it and resell it if I don't like it. I'm willing to wait a few more years until I can find it dirt cheap, I'm not pressed to watch it.
yeah, looking for a good deal here myself. I did love it when it first aired, though, and was very disappointed that it ended when it did. Up to that point, I had only ever seen the vampire arc and 1795, so in a way the revival was covering the same ground :)