DARK SHADOWS FORUMS
General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '24 I => Current Talk '02 II => Topic started by: DSFAN4EVER on September 26, 2002, 07:32:09 PM
-
Just because he's back in the late 1700's again, and he has his fangs back,[vryevl] you mean to tell me he couldn't resist his lust for blood? Okay, I could understand why he bit Nathan Forbes, but there was no need to go after the old tramp on the docks. He could have just knocked her out or something. What the hell, he's leaving that time soon any way, no? [hdscrt]
-
Not the time to be doing that when he's only got one hour to dispose of the body, and go and break people out of jail.
-
[scrm][scrm]Scream!!! It is a compulsion that is too strong to fight, we are led to believe. Glad that it is just a TV show, movie, or book. Can't be real can it???
Afan
-
Well, as someone who absolutely can NOT sit through church with an itch and not scratch it, I sympathize with Barney. I think it is one of those things that we non-vampires have trouble understanding! [wink2]
Another comparison is as a recovering alcoholic, I know that I can't have one drink without a physiological change leading to irresistable cravings. Those who don't drink seem to have a much better understanding than those who can have one and put it down. They are more like: "Just have one! No problem!"
-
Just because he's back in the late 1700's again, and he has his fangs back,[vryevl] you mean to tell me he couldn't resist his lust for blood? Okay, I could understand why he bit Nathan Forbes, but there was no need to go after the old tramp on the docks.
Yes because the writers needed a way to sneak Angelique back in...
-
Yes because the writers needed a way to sneak Angelique back in...
well, *duh*
and why are we even in 179X?
-
well, *duh*
and why are we even in 179X?
Because we LIKE it there. Reason enough.
-CLC
"duh"
-
well, *duh*
and why are we even in 179X?
Supposidly to save Vicky from the gallows.
What gets me is that if he can do this, then why didn't he go back before Josette died and save her? [hdscrt]
-
What gets me is that if he can do this, then why didn't he go back before Josette died and save her? [hdscrt]
So did Barnabas really love Josette?
-
I am so glad Cassandra brought this up. If Barnabas can time travel why didn't he go back to Martinique and keep his pants zipped? He could have gone back and saved his sister or his mother but Nooooo! He saves some putz that went back of her own free will to a fate she knew would happen. All this for a woman who was in love with someone else. I think all the other deaths just are not worth it . Josette, Sarah, Bathia, Naomi, Abigail, Trask, assorted street tarts. Did I leave anybody out?
-
but Nooooo! He saves some putz that went back of her own free will to a fate she knew would happen.
[lghy] Love that line! And so true.
Bette
-
I am so glad Cassandra brought this up. If Barnabas can time travel why didn't he go back to Martinique and keep his pants zipped? He could have gone back and saved his sister or his mother but Nooooo! He saves some putz that went back of her own free will to a fate she knew would happen. All this for a woman who was in love with someone else. I think all the other deaths just are not worth it . Josette, Sarah, Bathia, Naomi, Abigail, Trask, assorted street tarts. Did I leave anybody out?
because Barnabas can be a male fluff head at times!?!?
jennifer
-
I am so glad Cassandra brought this up. If Barnabas can time travel why didn't he go back to Martinique and keep his pants zipped? He could have gone back and saved his sister or his mother but Nooooo! He saves some putz that went back of her own free will to a fate she knew would happen. All this for a woman who was in love with someone else. I think all the other deaths just are not worth it . Josette, Sarah, Bathia, Naomi, Abigail, Trask, assorted street tarts. Did I leave anybody out?
Well, to be fair, Barnabas was not about changing the course of history so much as he was obsessed with the idea of saving his precious Victoria. In doing so he called upon the spirit of Peter Bradford, who has proven an ability to will his spirit back and forth across time, to draw him to the night in 1796 when Vicki was hanged. It is doubtful that Peter gave much thought to anyone other than Vicki, such as Naomi or Sarah; his purpose in bringing Barnabas back was to save Vicki.
It's not until Barnabas learns of the powers of the I-Ching that he acquires the ability to travel through time on his own; a case could be made at that time for him to travel back to 1795 and try to re-do his life. He does, in fact, attempt to correct the mistake he made with Josette when he travels back to the 1700's once again after the 1897 story line is over.
-
It's not until Barnabas learns of the powers of the I-Ching that he acquires the ability to travel through time on his own; a case could be made at that time for him to travel back to 1795 and try to re-do his life. He does, in fact, attempt to correct the mistake he made with Josette when he travels back to the 1700's once again after the 1897 story line is over.
How convenient....to just be able to "I-Ching" back to any time and fix your mistakes. And if you screw up, you can always go back again! lol.
-
Time travel/Parallel Time stories on DS were a cost saving device. Keep moving the same actors around through time and you could have a plethora of characters without having to hire more people at union wages.
The difficulty in such stories is that they are VERY complicated to construct well....so that they make at least SOME sense. It's pretty well established by now that Dan Curtis didn't put (or allow anyone else to put) that much effort into it. He didn't mind using the device...he simply didn't use it well.
John Karlen once said that being multiple characters later in the show was like working in a repertory company......for his sake, I'm glad he saw it in such a positive light.....I think it looks more like indentured servitude.
RP
-
If Barnabas can time travel why didn't he go back to Martinique and keep his pants zipped?
He would've had to have traveled to Martinique again to be able to arrive there when he goes back to time and like a previous poster said there was no one to take him back. Too bad Peter didn't have Barnabas go back to prevent Angelique from even getting started, then a whole lot more would've been fixed but then we'd lose Barnabas in the present so that's probably why the writers didn't do it. Either that or they were being lazy or Dan Curtis was being cheap. *shrug*
-
John Karlen once said that being multiple characters later in the show was like working in a repertory company......for his sake, I'm glad he saw it in such a positive light.....I think it looks more like indentured servitude.
Yes, but indentured servitude was something he was already used to. LOL
-CLC
-
I am so glad Cassandra brought this up. If Barnabas can time travel why didn't he go back to Martinique and keep his pants zipped? He could have gone back and saved his sister or his mother but Nooooo! He saves some putz that went back of her own free will to a fate she knew would happen. All this for a woman who was in love with someone else. I think all the other deaths just are not worth it . Josette, Sarah, Bathia, Naomi, Abigail, Trask, assorted street tarts. Did I leave anybody out?
Dear Onyx,
Your message cracked me up! ROTFLOL!!!!
-
Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think the zipper was invented until the early 1900's??? Also, that was really funny about Barnabas being a male fluff head :-) Maybe by going back in time to 1795, he could only save Victoria because she was the only one who didn't love Barnabas when the original curse was given to him by Angelique. Also, B does put himself directly in the line of temptation by going down to the docks in the first place. He never could control himself very well as we all know. His lust for blood could probably be comparable to a drug addict.