DARK SHADOWS FORUMS
General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '26 I => Current Talk '03 I => Topic started by: Blue_Whale_Barfly on March 28, 2003, 12:40:05 AM
-
It was done two years after her death? How? Couldn't be with a picture. From another painting? Was it really done by CDT? I'm so confused.
-
Her [ghosty] sat for the portrait ? [confused5]
-
It was done two years after her death? How? Couldn't be with a picture. From another painting? Was it really done by CDT? I'm so confused.
I'm told the signature was "Coswell" but the date on the picture was 1797.
-
Yea, I saw that it was Cogswell but I figured CDT might have congered her up. Just being a smarty pants.
-
I'm so confused.
Nah, but the writers were. ;)
-
Her [ghosty] sat for the portrait ? [confused5]
~ ~ ~
Now that would be quite something to behold...
There was no doubt the year was in error, also isn't that signiture a bit big! I know it was never there before.
The proper year should have been 1795 what were they thinking ???
Sarah's [ghost]
-
It's a goof - bizarrely, from this time onwards, the writers seemed to decide that 1795's flashback had actually taken place in 1797, which is the date you'll hear given pretty much every single time it crops up from now on.
And yeah, it makes my brain hurt too :-
-
Now that would be quite something to behold...
There was no doubt the year was in error, also isn't that signiture a bit big! I know it was never there before.
I noticed the same thing Sarah. The signature was so big and so clear that you couldn't miss it. Yet, it was missed in 1795! Usually an artist will sign their signature very small where it's barely legible. This one definetely wanted to be noticed. ;)
Cassandra[/font]
-
I noticed the same thing Sarah. The signature was so big and so clear that you couldn't miss it. Yet, it was missed in 1795! Usually an artist will sign their signature very small where it's barely legible. This one definetely wanted to be noticed. ;)
Cassandra[/font]
Wanting to be noticed is definitely a Charles Delaware Tate thing ;D Having said that, I think his character is one of the most interesting ones on DS. I understand that there is a lot of fan fiction about his character. I'd love to know what he was doing between 1897 and 1969. There were some landscapes painted and he apparently had some sort of reputation. Perhaps he even painted some portraits too.
-
I think it was a deliberate "goof". The writers simply wanted to make this Josette storyline take place exactly 100 years after the first one. They just hoped no one would notice the discrepency. It's kinda like the Laura storyline in reverse. She was s'pose to show up every hundred years to wed a Collins, reproduce, and then shake-and-bake her kids, but it didn't work out that way. She was always off by several decades each century (but I imagine when you're a few thousand years old, a decade here or there doesn't really mean much).
Gerard
-
I noticed the same thing Sarah. The signature was so big and so clear that you couldn't miss it. Yet, it was missed in 1795! Usually an artist will sign their signature very small where it's barely legible. This one definetely wanted to be noticed. ;)
The new Coswell signature is so noticeable that its disappearance later on in the series is just as incredibly obvious. ::)
-
I thought that signature was a hoot! For some reason the sheer comic travesty of it all had not hit me before.
Also, I must be out of my mind, because I am sure this portrait is a copy, not the original. I don't remember the trim of J's dress looking as if it had been ripped off in a bar fight, as is the case in this one. I can see the scene now. J-Co (sorry, can't resist) staggers into the Eagle having had just about as much as she can stand of Jeremiah's marital attentions.
Lorna Doone Bell, queen of the C'port doxies, spots J-Co, trying to sip a whisky in her wedding dress, screams "Whore!" and rips the trim. J tries to grab Lorna's wig, makes a big swipe, misses and goes tumbling off the bar stool as the men of the Eagle watch the lady from the big house on the hill in mingled horror and amusement.
Goddess, where did THAT all come from? I'd be curious whether others think the Josette portrait we're seeing now was a copy. They could have decided to make it look more like KLS, if that was the case.
The girl in the picture looks a lot more like Maria Montez than Our Katie!
Crazed senile fan in Boston,
Gothick
-
J-Co?!?!?!? [clap] [scrm] [a1f5] ;D
Bar fight between J-Co and Ms. Bell?!?!? [clap] [scrm] [a1f5] ;D
And, ohmigoddess! That portrait really DOES look like Maria Montez!!! Wherever did you come up with that, Gothick?
-
Just blame that bizarre archduchess's jewellery-chest known as my mind, Cassandra darling. One of my favorite pieces of writing is "The Perfect Filmic Apotheosis of Maria Montez," by the late Jack Smith. He regarded a bit of dialogue from Cobra Woman, "Give me that cobra jewel" (which comes out sound more like "GEEF me that copa-rah chewel") as the most perfect line in American cinema, perhaps even world cinema. I think that Jack Smith's ideas about movies and culture were the source for the opinions Myra expressed in her classes in Gore Vidal's "classic" Sixties novel, Myra Breckinridge (I'm sure Liz and Julia were reading it behind closed doors at Collinwood in 1968).
I still think it's mega-weird that it looks as if Josette's dress is torn. And, those colors! bizarro. The red chosen for the artist's sig is particularly excruciating. Mary, turn off those sirens!
Gothick having a difficult Friday
-
Just blame that bizarre archduchess's jewellery-chest known as my mind, Cassandra darling. One of my favorite pieces of writing is "The Perfect Filmic Apotheosis of Maria Montez," by the late Jack Smith. He regarded a bit of dialogue from Cobra Woman, "Give me that cobra jewel" (which comes out sound more like "GEEF me that copa-rah chewel") as the most perfect line in American cinema, perhaps even world cinema. I think that Jack Smith's ideas about movies and culture were the source for the opinions Myra expressed in her classes in Gore Vidal's "classic" Sixties novel, Myra Breckinridge (I'm sure Liz and Julia were reading it behind closed doors at Collinwood in 1968).
I still think it's mega-weird that it looks as if Josette's dress is torn. And, those colors! bizarro. The red chosen for the artist's sig is particularly excruciating. Mary, turn off those sirens!
Gothick having a difficult Friday
oh Steve darling the weekend is coming! i'm planning on
relaxing and kicking back a few pink drinks! ;D
jennifer
-
Love the archduchess and the Jack Smith references. Haven't ever seen Ms. Montez in action, but an "auntie" of mine swears by her.
I hear you on the Friday thing! Can I pour you a virtual cocktail, Gothick? I make a killer martini! [lick]
-
I think that Jack Smith's ideas about movies and culture were the source for the opinions Myra expressed in her classes in Gore Vidal's "classic" Sixties novel, Myra Breckinridge (I'm sure Liz and Julia were reading it behind closed doors at Collinwood in 1968).
Gothick having a difficult Friday
I read it behind closed doors in the 70's. I wanted to get my hands on every book that made the banned list the nun posted in the HS library. There was also a banned list of movies, things no good Catholic girl should see. I was thrilled when NODS showed up on it.
Nancy, who feels sorry for the parochial school kids of today, pissing off a nun can't be nearly the fun it was when they still wore whimples, and their faces nearly exploded out of them when you got one worked up into a fine rage.
-
Here I had it all figured out that this portrait of Josette was simply a copy the Collins family commissioned from the original (perhaps having returned the original to Josette's father or surving relative).
But if 1795 is hereafter referred to as 1797, I guess that shoots my theory ...
However, I did think that this portrait looked more like KLS than what we had seen before ... which would support the theory that DS produced a new portrait for this storyline.
-
Actually, while the 1795 storyline supposedly took place in just 1795, You had Victoria Winters arriving in the fall of 1795 and staying for several months, which would have made it the winter of 1796. The goof I like the best connect to the dating of the 1795 storyline happens after Vicki returns and searches for Peter Bradford's tombstone. That stone says he died in April of 1795, yet that would have been months before Vicki's arrival.
The writers later did take it to 1796 when we had the mini flashback, when Barnabas went back to save Vicki from the gallows, but apparently they just couldn't keep their years straight and 1796 became 1797 and had the show last 20 years, it would have 1817.
Richard Holt