DARK SHADOWS FORUMS

General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '24 I => Current Talk '08 I => Topic started by: IluvBarnabas on April 22, 2008, 08:54:48 PM

Title: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: IluvBarnabas on April 22, 2008, 08:54:48 PM: Watching the first year of Dark Shadows, I've really grown to appreciate Louis Edmonds as Roger a whole lost more. It's such a shame he was so neglected later on. He was so dang funny. He still had his moments after Barnabas' arrival.

[spoiler]The episode where he and Joe are searching for David in the cemetary...he was so dang hilarious all throughout that episode.

"Of course he heard something....he heard the pearl-shaped tone of a spook saying 'boo'!"

"Let's pursue this folly to it's natural end!"

"Maybe one of my ancestors was kicking up a fuss!"

"I was hoping we'd hear a nice ghost!"[/spoiler]

And of course the famous incestors/ancestors flub....but Louis bounced back beautifully.

Watching Roger's earlier attitude toward David in the beginning is still jarring, but absolutely fascinating to watch. It's nice to have watched their relationship progress as the show went along.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: IluvBarnabas on April 28, 2008, 03:43:52 AM: No one has an opinion on this?
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on April 28, 2008, 04:08:26 AM: I love Roger. I've said so many times. Which is why I'd been holding off saying anything here in this topic. I suppose at first I was waiting to see what others had to say, but eventually I simply forgot about the topic. Sorry. :-[ But I'll definitely shout it loud for everyone:

I LOVE ROGER! EVERY SARCASTICALLY WITTY FIBER OF HIS BEING!!

It's definitely a shame that he wasn't used to great advantage as often as he might have been in the latter present time DS storylines.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Nancy on April 28, 2008, 05:16:34 AM: I loved the character of Roger as well. However, my favorite Louis Edmonds role remains to be Joshua.

Nancy [ghost_rolleyes]
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Patti Feinberg on April 28, 2008, 05:56:16 PM: Having 'known' Louis Edmonds from AMC, then when I got to see DS (1999-2003?), at first, I didn't know how I felt about him.

But as time went by, delicious!!! Anything with LE & DH is a treat to watch; I also enjoy his work with Nancy Barrett.

I wonder how it was for a relative newbie like Louis Edmonds working with Joan Bennett....?

I enjoy the 1969-1970 work on DS by big Lou....

Patti
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: arashi on April 28, 2008, 06:50:08 PM: Are there people out there that actually don't like Roger? There must be, but I imagine they are in a very small minority.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: sallycollins on April 28, 2008, 06:52:56 PM: I've heard that Louis Edmonds was very much like the character of Roger Collins, in his manner.

Sally
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: IluvBarnabas on April 28, 2008, 07:02:48 PM: Quote from: arashi on April 28, 2008, 06:50:08 PM
Are there people out there that actually don't like Roger? There must be, but I imagine they are in a very small minority.

I haven't met a soul yet who didn't enjoy the character of Roger. He was just so pompous you had to love him!
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on April 28, 2008, 07:18:39 PM: Though as hard as most of us might find it to believe, I'm sure Roger's detractors are out there. Just like there are fans for every DS character/actor, there are detractors for every character/actor. Some characters/actors just seem to be more lopsided in on direction or the other...
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: MagnusTrask on April 28, 2008, 07:35:26 PM: Wait a minute.... Roger as a character didn't serve much of a function in the years I watched as a kid, and I still haven't seen pre-Barnabas. He was eclipsed by all the supernatural characters. He didn't get many of those sarcastic lines in the years I've seen. He got outraged and said "Why I never!" or similar things. Now I like seeing Louis Edmonds no matter what his character is, but from my childhood, I remember Roger as the stuffy, clueless, rich guy. Elizabeth was the female equivalent. I guess I'm just saying one can be bored with that character. It's hardly Louis Edmond's fault, of course.

Edward I always liked. He had a number of bizarre disturbing threats thrown at him and after some adjustment, coped with it all and took action. My favorite LE moment may be when he pulls Jamison's fake hand off. We see someone deeply rooted in normality flailing and struggling to adjust. My favorite LE "character" may be Edward as the butler, earnestly pleading to be allowed to serve, and being so hurt by how he's being treated. Funny but touching.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on April 28, 2008, 07:52:12 PM: See, you've just hit the nail on the head as far as the point of this topic goes, Magnus. Roger was used to great effect during DS' first year and somewhat beyond - but in later years, not so much. He certainly had his moments (calling Jeb you know what was most certainly a classic one! [stfl]), but unfortunately they were few and far between. And those of us who are only too aware of how he could have been used in the latter storylines deeply regret how those storylines all too often neglected him. :(
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: MagnusTrask on April 28, 2008, 08:00:41 PM: Happy 8600!
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: alwaysdavid on April 29, 2008, 03:20:03 AM: I have to agree with Magnus Trask on my perception of Roger in my original viewing which started after Cassandra disappeared from the scene. Everyone in our neighborhood watched the show and then we would reinact or make up new stories using the characters and nobody wanted to be Roger. I got stuck being him when I wasn' t David. When our local PBS station began to show the Barnabas episodes, I could see there was more to Roger and now seeing the Beginning, I think, what a wonderful character he is.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: michael c on April 29, 2008, 03:44:10 PM: once monsters became the main characters the show's writers were in a bit of a quandry with how to deal with the original,human characters.

characters like vicki,carolyn and maggie could be written into 'damsel in distress' type situations.

david could get haunted,put under spells or possessed.

characters like burke devlin,sam evans and joe haskell were eventually killed-off or otherwise written out.

but as key members of the collins family roger and elizabeth were kept around but were in a way the hardest to write for and thus were often on the back burner after the first year or so.yet they remained an important grounding 'presence' which kept the whole thing from going off the deep end.but for whatever reason the writers didn't know how to use them to their best advantage.they both should have gotten better storylines than they did.
as much as the 'leviathan' storyline is criticised i was pleased that liz got some great material to work with.

in general both joan bennett and louis edmonds seemed to do better in the historical time periods than in the 'present' in the show's later years.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: arashi on April 29, 2008, 04:11:50 PM: Quote from: mscbryk on April 29, 2008, 03:44:10 PM
as much as the 'leviathan' storyline is criticised i was pleased that liz got some great material to work with.

It was quite nice to see them get something to do again wasn't it?
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Gothick on April 29, 2008, 05:44:25 PM: I have a close male friend who is about five years older than me and watched DS religiously up until sometime in 1968, when a mixture of hormones and boredom meant he was doing other things at four in the afternoon besides tuning into DS. (I've been loaning him some of the DVDs so he can catch up with 1897--Laura is his favorite character and he was fascinated by her re-appearance then!)

Anyhow, when he was around 15 or 16 years old, from what he has told me, he had a huge crush on Roger! He loved it all--the arrogance, the ascots, the pomposity, the fact that Roger always acted as if he owned not just the room, but all of Collinwood whenever he walked in, even though he was basically living there because of Liz's love for David.

My friend's spouse just got him a Netflix sub so he can rent all the early 1966 DVDs and recapture Roger in his regal glory.

In the later years of DS, Louis went off for a month or two at times to do theatre. I believe this is why he wasn't around at all for some months of the Summer of 1970.

Do check out the late Craig Hamrick's marvelous book, Big Lou. The real life Louis was NOTHING like Roger Collins, a fact for which we can all be grateful, fond though we may be of Roger's sneering and posturing.

G.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Brandon Collins on April 29, 2008, 09:57:08 PM: I like the early Roger a bunch of bunches! Everyone has already outlined the reasons why he's so great, and it is true that he got back burnered as the series went on. But think of what a great time it must've been for LE, to have time to go off and do other things. He never got bored with the show, which meant his performances were always fresh because he didn't have to hang around the studio like an ornament. He didn't get tired like JF and others did as the show went on. That's probably a big factor in why his performances were so great, not to mention his unbelievable acting.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Patti Feinberg on April 30, 2008, 02:47:43 PM: For me, one of Roger's top two lines is when everyone is evacuating Collinwood because of Quentin's ghost and he, the last one out, declares WE WILL BE BACK, THIS IS OUR HOME!!

Patti

And I hated Joshua Collins, which just proves what a good actor Louis Edmonds was!
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: adamsgirl on April 30, 2008, 04:17:18 PM: I always enjoyed his performances, no matter what character he was playing. For me, the most poignant scenes were when Joshua lamented the loss of his children and the death of his wife. He had come off as so cold and dictatorial, yet underneath it all, he loved his family. Truly great acting on his part! He was able to make what was initially an unsympathetic character into a sympathetic one.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Pansity on August 01, 2008, 04:10:11 AM: Quote from: Patti on April 30, 2008, 02:47:43 PM
For me, one of Roger's top two lines is when everyone is evacuating Collinwood because of Quentin's ghost and he, the last one out, declares WE WILL BE BACK, THIS IS OUR HOME!!

One of my favorite scenes in the whole show. Mr. Balderdash, suddenly face to face with a spook he can't rationalize away. (Though it's interesting that in the very beginning, he was the one all gung ho to do seances.) He recovers himself SO well, and refuses to cave in and admit that Quentin has won, even temporarily.

And in Leviathan we see some of that again, but regrettably short lived.

I wish I had been motivated to go to Fests before Mr. Edmonds passed. He sounds like he was a hoot and a great all around guy.

Jeannie
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: MagnusTrask on August 01, 2008, 07:47:40 AM: Quote from: Pansity on August 01, 2008, 04:10:11 AM
Mr. Balderdash, suddenly face to face with a spook he can't rationalize away. (Though it's interesting that in the very beginning, he was the one all gung ho to do seances.)-

Jeannie-- I LOLed at this line of yours. As for early Roger vis a vis seances, I think if he'd really believed in it, he wouldn't have wanted to do it. Just some spoiled rich boy lark maybe. Maybe that's what happens when Roger shifts from brandy to the harder stuff. It may just be that brandy is his stuffy juice. Anyway, I like any L Edmonds character when the scales fall from the eyes, and he stands up against the monsters, even when he's wrong, or we want to think so anyway.

1897: [spoiler]I'm thinking of 1897, Barnabas is found out, kills Carl, we either are or aren't supposed to mind (one of the most confusing moments of television ever made), Edward takes charge and defends his family. I think one has to admire how he deals with all this, especially considering he is, as always, one in a continuing series of Mr. Balderdashes. He shifts gears in his perspective pretty damn fast and efficiently. And was he wrong?[/spoiler]
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: IluvBarnabas on August 01, 2008, 03:02:10 PM: Quote from: MagnusTrask on August 01, 2008, 07:47:40 AM
1897: [spoiler]I'm thinking of 1897, Barnabas is found out, kills Carl, we either are or aren't supposed to mind (one of the most confusing moments of television ever made), Edward takes charge and defends his family. I think one has to admire how he deals with all this, especially considering he is, as always, one in a continuing series of Mr. Balderdashes. He shifts gears in his perspective pretty damn fast and efficiently. And was he wrong?[/spoiler]

While I do admire Edward for taking charge of the family, and I don't think he was wrong [spoiler] at being mad at Barnabas for killing Carl and wanting to destroy him, in other areas he was totally clueless. However, Quentin told Edward that Petofi was behind cursing him and Jamison yet Petofi sweet-talked Edward into believing Barnabas was the one who did it, which was a big fat lie. When Edward had Barnabas imprisoned in the cell, he condemned Barnabas for all the misery "he" brought and for making a deal with the devil to live eternally, which is so far from the truth it isn't even funny. In truth, the family was in more danger from Petofi than from Barnabas. However wrong and misguided some of his his actions were (i.e. killing Carl), Barnabas wanted to save the Collins family. Petofi was willing to destroy the Colllins family if he didn't get what he wanted and that was to go to the future. [/spoiler]

In conclusion I admire Edward for taking charge when the situation called for it, especially when he had to deal with Trask, but he's just putty in the hands of Petofi and it's infuriating to watch. I just want to shake some sense into Edward.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: MagnusTrask on August 01, 2008, 10:05:44 PM: I think the Carl thing just blew any chance of Edward listening to Barnabas or to anyone making a case for him, ever, and any of us would have reacted the same way, I feel sure.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: IluvBarnabas on August 01, 2008, 10:40:06 PM: You make a good point Magnus. You're so perceptive. [ghost_smiley]

I still think Edward was a fool to disregard Quentin's warnings about Petofi. Still, that may say something...the fact that QUENTIN said Petofi was behind all the trouble. We've all seen that Edward and Quentin don't get along all that well. If it had been anyone else, someone that Edward could trust, that had told him Petofi had been causing all the mischief and therefore not to be trusted, then maybe Edward wouldn't have been so fooled by Petofi. Maybe. [ghost_rolleyes]
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Positivenergyone on August 01, 2008, 11:18:31 PM: You're right, ILB. Edward & Quentin's sibling rivalry did cloud Edward's view. Their rivalry itself, however, has always been very amusing to me, especially when Quentin manages to push Edward's buttons and rile him up!! I'm thinking of the 4 siblings discussing "Grandma's" will and Quentin digging into Edward to get a reaction. The same type relationship carried over with Quentin's ghost and Roger as someone previously remembered Roger's line: "We'll be back--be assured of that!" then slamming the front door of Collinwood! The hilarity to me is Quentin's ghost confidently looking over the bannister surveying his conquest, laughing his head off at finally being "master" of Collinwood and once again riling up his relative (somewhat of a continuation of his sibling rivalry with Edward transferred to Roger)! Quentin really knew how to get Edward's goat and LE played the furious brother/cousin beautifully! :)

As far as the character of Roger goes and for that matter Liz & Carolyn, there had to be some non-supernatural characters to lend some normalcy to the stories, and I think that's where they came in. As a result, sometimes they weren't in the spotlight as much as the other characters.
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Pansity on August 02, 2008, 12:26:05 AM: Quote from: MagnusTrask on August 01, 2008, 07:47:40 AM
Jeannie-- I LOLed at this line of yours. As for early Roger vis a vis seances, I think if he'd really believed in it, he wouldn't have wanted to do it. Just some spoiled rich boy lark maybe....
Glad you liked "Mr.Balderdash". Quentin has a nickname too: "Mr. Plays with the Dark Arts for Fun and Profit". [91a2]

As to the "rich boy lark" and Roger's just wanting to do it for kicks -- guess he's got a lot in common with 1897 Quentin. Two spoilt rich boys messing with the supernatural for kicks. Only Roger was lucky and never had it turn around and take over his life. [Wolfie] [whew]

Jeannie
Title: Re: Roger - a neglected gem
Post by: Angelique Wins on August 03, 2008, 06:01:41 AM: Like Pansity, I regret that I didn't discover the DS Festivals until after Louis Edmonds had passed away. I LOVE Roger and each of his characters on the show. Nobody was a cardboard cutout. You knew, deep down inside--maybe WAAY deep down inside--there was lots more to his characters than just the lines they spoke.

In my own attempt at fan fiction, I've tackled both Roger and Joshua (though Joshua may be a bit easier as he's had the benefit of learning from the past) and gotten some rather nice comments, but the last chapter I wrote was met with mixed reaction from my betareader/festival roommate and her "I liked it but..." always elicits an "ok, what's wrong?"

What was wrong, we decided, was that I was unfamiliar with the original Roger. I didn't get to Collinwood until Roger arrived with his lovely wife Cassandra, and for several days, I witnessed all these people being really rude to his new wife--just because they THOUGHT she looked like somebody else...) Anyway, that was my first Roger moment.

But I went back and marathoned the first 200 episodes, many that I had never seen, and went, "OOOOOHHHHHH!!!!! I GET IT now!!!! LOL!!!!

The resulting rewrite was met with "YES. THAT's IT!!! MUCH BETTER!!!!"

I'm certainly glad I did that. Now most of the first 200 eps are in my "favorite storylines/parts of the show. Thanks, Adamsgirl!!!!

Judy
[9366]