DARK SHADOWS FORUMS
General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '26 I => Current Talk '03 I => Topic started by: Philippe Cordier on May 01, 2003, 03:03:20 AM
-
It's possible I've missed someone's post about this, but I'm surprised that no one seems to have mentioned anything about yesterday's very pivotal Leviathan episode.
The second episode yesterday was interesting on many levels, with all of the dreams ... though I'm not certain how well it was all executed. I ended up being rather confused as to what was dream and what was reality -- but maybe that was the intention (like stepping into a Dario Argento flick? ;)
I remember last time this aired I defended Barnabas' change of heart as a believable character development, but this time I'm not so sure. On second viewing, this did seem rather abrupt -- which is understandable when you know that the writers/producers changed tracks at this point in response to viewer complaints about Leviathan.
Ironically, these first weeks were probably the best part of the Leviathan storyline.
There's still some good parts to come -- especially with the return of a certain witch -- but by the end the whole storyline falls apart with a deadly splat ...
Just my opinion ... others will disagree.
-
The whole dream sequence with Marsha Mason, hooker-turned-into-vampire, was absolutely wonderful. It reminds me of a movie - I can't remember the name now - about a soldier who passes from one dream to another, never knowing what is reality and what is not. Just when you think he's finally awake, it's another dream.
The most delightful part of the Leviathan storyline right now is Elizabeth's embracing of the dark side. When she stormed out of Paul's room, thinking he was conked out, saying: "What made you think I ever wanted you back here?", or to that affect, was just brilliant. For me, this Elizabeth, and nasty-Judith-Collins-who-bricks-up-dastardly-husbands, are the most enjoyable performances by Joan Bennett. She'd even spook Bette Davis or Joan Crawford if either of those two divas got guest parts on the show. She reminds me of Olivia DeHavilland as Cousin Miriam in Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte.
While I'm an enjoyer of the Leviathan storyline (and a hater of the Adam one), it does fall apart at the end. I think they just needed to get it over so they could send everyone off to parallel time in order to get half the cast up to Lyndhurst for a coupla months to start making a movie. Time is money.
Gerard
-
She reminds me of Olivia DeHavilland as Cousin Miriam in Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte.
I love that movie. Southern Gothic at it's twisted best!!
-
The whole dream sequence with Marsha Mason, hooker-turned-into-vampire, was absolutely wonderful. It reminds me of a movie - I can't remember the name now - about a soldier who passes from one dream to another, never knowing what is reality and what is not. Just when you think he's finally awake, it's another dream.
I have to agree. I really thought the entire sequence was extremely well scripted. The dreams/nightmares have been on the whole actually pretty disturbing and effective. I didn't check and see who wrote that episode--Violet Welles? Or was it Gordon Russell?
The most delightful part of the Leviathan storyline right now is Elizabeth's embracing of the dark side. When she stormed out of Paul's room, thinking he was conked out, saying: "What made you think I ever wanted you back here?", or to that affect, was just brilliant. For me, this Elizabeth, and nasty-Judith-Collins-who-bricks-up-dastardly-husbands, are the most enjoyable performances by Joan Bennett.
She really does cold and nasty very well. If, however, you really want to see something, you need to go and rent Scarlet Street.
I have always, always hated this whole messy, icky storyline, but for the first time I'm starting to get into it. Don't know quite why but it's resonating with me. Even down to Barnabas, who I think is a lot more interesting right now than when he's playing "good" (and I use that word in its relative context)
While I'm an enjoyer of the Leviathan storyline (and a hater of the Adam one), it does fall apart at the end. I think they just needed to get it over so they could send everyone off to parallel time in order to get half the cast up to Lyndhurst for a coupla months to start making a movie. Time is money.
LOL! It does just sort of come apart at the seams, doesn't it? I mean to enjoy this while it lasts because I am positively dreading the moment that the family starts exploring the east wing of the house.
-
I haven't seen this storyline since way back when but you know, I think that now after seeing this again for the second time around that I find it is all not that bad. Im really starting to appreciate everyones good acting this time around also and I find Barnabas to be really great at doing his evil thing here.
Also Elizabeth is great at portraying the evil woman.
Whats good about it is that we're seeing some of the actors, who to us have been fairly good kind caring people, Elizabeth, Barnabas, (sort of) Megan and Philip were okay when they first arrived. Now, they're just the opposite of good here and I think thats whats keeping us all hooked here.
We're so use to see folks like Angelique play the bad parts, but now we're getting a taste of something else here and its facinating to watch!
Deb
-
I haven't seen this storyline since way back when but you know, I think that now after seeing this again for the second time around that I find it is all not that bad. Im really starting to appreciate everyones good acting this time around also and I find Barnabas to be really great at doing his evil thing here.
Also Elizabeth is great at portraying the evil woman.
Whats good about it is that we're seeing some of the actors, who to us have been fairly good kind caring people, Elizabeth, Barnabas, (sort of) Megan and Philip were okay when they first arrived. Now, they're just the opposite of good here and I think thats whats keeping us all hooked here.
We're so use to see folks like Angelique play the bad parts, but now we're getting a taste of something else here and its facinating to watch!
Deb
And what's ironic.............kinduva spoiler here..............is that this time Angelique plays the good character and heroine who even takes great risks and personal sacrifices! Virtually everyone's personalities have been turned upside-down for this plot, and that's another one of the reasons why I really do like the whole Leviathan storyline.
Gerard
-
And what's ironic.............kinduva spoiler here..............is that this time Angelique plays the good character and heroine who even takes great risks and personal sacrifices! Virtually everyone's personalities have been turned upside-down for this plot, and that's another one of the reasons why I really do like the whole Leviathan storyline.
Gerard
Yes Gerard! You're right, I had mentioned this in another post on how the good ones are turning bad and the bad ones are changing for the better. Angelique is really a mystery though! Who'd ever thought of her changing her ways for good?
I never really thought about all this before but now that you had mentioned it, this does make the storyline much more interesting to follow.
Deb
-
Well, she was helpful already in 1897 ... but it does seem that Angelique became a much more sympathetic character during the Leviathan sequence. The events in Leviathan helped pave the way for Angelique's eventual acceptance by Barnabas, in 1840, I believe, though with a tragic outcome. I argued during that storyline that we had been gradually prepared for their eventual reconciliation.
-
That's a very good point, Vlad. Maybe it's possible...... kinduva spoiler here......... that's why they went with a completely dark, evil, nasty Angelique during the 1970PT plot (with a few moments of good Alexis), just so there could be one, final last 100%-Evil-Angelique before her 1840/41 redemption.
Gerard
-
Well, she was helpful already in 1897 ... but it does seem that Angelique became a much more sympathetic character during the Leviathan sequence. The events in Leviathan helped pave the way for Angelique's eventual acceptance by Barnabas, in 1840, I believe, though with a tragic outcome. I argued during that storyline that we had been gradually prepared for their eventual reconciliation.
I think it depends on how you define helpful. Everything was always tied to a price. "I'll help you if you do X" Nothing she did in 1897 had any altruistic reasons behind it. And in fact, she royally screwed up a number of lives beyond repair quite casually (e.g. Beth's, Amanda's, Quentin's, Rachel's, etc.).
She does become more sympathetic in the Leviathan plot, but I have to tell you my heart's not exactly bleeding for her :)
-
I think it depends on how you define helpful. Everything was always tied to a price. "I'll help you if you do X" Nothing she did in 1897 had any altruistic reasons behind it. And in fact, she royally screwed up a number of lives beyond repair quite casually (e.g. Beth's, Amanda's, Quentin's, Rachel's, etc.).
That's a good point. And lets not forget that the only reason she decided to help Barnabas & Julia out in 1897 was IMO because she was engaged to Quentin and no longer had any use for Barnabas.
Deb
-
Barnabas' true change of heart is still to come. The whole Leviathan dream sequence episode was something they threw in literally at the last minute (as I recall it, the episode was taped very close to air date) because so many fans were writing in and complaining that they were having difficulties with "evil" Barn. (As an adult viewer, at least, I find him a lot more compelling than "good" Barn.) The episodes that follow that big dream sequence show don't really follow up the theme of Barnabas having a change of heart because they had already been scripted and taped BEFORE the episode chronicling Barn's encounter with Adlar and Marshina, Queen of Darkness.
I do remember that the Leviathan sequence all made perfect sense to me at the time because I followed the show so obsessively. So I was a little surprised when a voiceover began playing over the end titles of the show informing the audience at home that "major information regarding the nature of the Leviathan plot will be revealed on this coming Friday's show, so be sure to tune in!" The "revelations" consisted of a celebrated clip show (maybe the only one in DS' history, now that I think of it) that summarized what had happened up to that point. I'm not sure when that episode will be aired, but I think it's coming in a week or two.
Gothick
-
So I was a little surprised when a voiceover began playing over the end titles of the show informing the audience at home that "major information regarding the nature of the Leviathan plot will be revealed on this coming Friday's show, so be sure to tune in!" The "revelations" consisted of a celebrated clip show (maybe the only one in DS' history, now that I think of it) that summarized what had happened up to that point. I'm not sure when that episode will be aired, but I think it's coming in a week or two.
Thanks Gothick for informing us. I would love to see this! Do you have any idea what episode# it might be? Sounds interesting.
Deb
-
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
The events in Leviathan helped pave the way for Angelique's eventual acceptance by Barnabas, in 1840, I believe, though with a tragic outcome. I argued during that storyline that we had been gradually prepared for their eventual reconciliation.
I'm inclined to disagree with this only because I feel that the Angelique of 1840 is not the same Angelique we're seeing now. Time traveling has always made it more complicated to rationalize the plot, but as I see it, Angelique moves from 1795 to 1968, to 1897, and then back to 1970. In 1897, Angelique recalls her life as Cassandra and everything that we have seen her do up to that point both in the past and the future. However, in 1840 she does not know Julia and doesn't remember being in the future, perhaps because it hasn't happened to her yet. This Angelique is more primitive, closer to her 1795 self, and therefore very nasty when the 1840 storyline begins; we see no sign of the helpful ally that we last knew in 1970. If it were the 1970 version that he was dealing with, his actions would make more sense, but at this point, (1840) Angelique has assisted nobody and I really don't see any reason why Barnabas would feel warmly toward her.
Personally, I felt that the big reconciliation in 1840 was rather hastily tacked on in an attempt at resolution so that the show could move toward its conclusion. I believe that the current Angelique in the Leviathan storyline is the most mature version we ever see of her.
ProfStokes
-
Barnabas' true change of heart is still to come. The whole Leviathan dream sequence episode was something they threw in literally at the last minute (as I recall it, the episode was taped very close to air date) because so many fans were writing in and complaining that they were having difficulties with "evil" Barn. (As an adult viewer, at least, I find him a lot more compelling than "good" Barn.) The episodes that follow that big dream sequence show don't really follow up the theme of Barnabas having a change of heart because they had already been scripted and taped BEFORE the episode chronicling Barn's encounter with Adlar and Marshina, Queen of Darkness.
You're right ... I jumped the gun on this.
Adlar and Marshina??? [confused_ani]
However, 1840 she does not know Julia and doesn't remember being in the future, perhaps because it hasn't happened to her yet. This Angelique is more primitive, closer to her 1795 self, and therefore very nasty when the 1840 storyline begins; we see no sign of the helpful ally that we last knew in 1970. If it were the 1970 version that he was dealing with, his actions would make more sense, but at this point, (1840) Angelique has assisted nobody and I really don't see any reason why Barnabas would feel warmly toward her.
Professor Stokes, you have tracked these time changes far more closely than I have ... and possibly more closely than the writers did ...
You know I tend to get a bit analytical about things, too, but with respect to the time-travelling conundrums, I've been more of a casual viewer. From an academic perspective, I would say your argument is convincing ... but from watching the show chronologically, the emotional message I get is that we are to gradually see Angelique in more sympathetic terms.
So I'm listening to my heart, not my head!
:)
-
I'm inclined to disagree with this only because I feel that the Angelique of 1840 is not the same Angelique we're seeing now. Time traveling has always made it more complicated to rationalize the plot, but as I see it, Angelique moves from 1795 to 1968, to 1897, and then back to 1970. ( . . . ) However, in 1840 she does not know Julia and doesn't remember being in the future, perhaps because it hasn't happened to her yet. This Angelique is more primitive, closer to her 1795 self, and therefore very nasty when the 1840 storyline begins;
I agree, ProfStokes. I'd also like to point out the advantage of all the time traveling implications - is the Angelique who shows up in 1840 the same one who knew Victoria Winters in 1795 (and helped frame her as a witch) or is she the Angelique of the orginal 1795 timeline who knew Phyllis Wick as the governess? If she is the latter, it goes a long way in explaining how Barnabas might be able to forgive her past actions, given that we don't necessarily know the specifics of how Angelique behaved in the original timeline when Phyllis Wick was governess, and she may not have been as nasty in that version.
-
I agree, ProfStokes. I'd also like to point out the advantage of all the time traveling implications - is the Angelique who shows up in 1840 the same one who knew Victoria Winters in 1795 (and helped frame her as a witch) or is she the Angelique of the orginal 1795 timeline who knew Phyllis Wick as the governess? If she is the latter, it goes a long way in explaining how Barnabas might be able to forgive her past actions, given that we don't necessarily know the specifics of how Angelique behaved in the original timeline when Phyllis Wick was governess, and she may not have been as nasty in that version.
good points Dr L. but time travel does make my head[spin]
jennifer
-
I think everyone has a good point here. ProfStokes is spot on about the 1840 Angelique not knowing anything about the other timelines save for 1795, and therefore not being as far down the road to redemption as we might think.
But I think Vlad has a point too, the writers seemed to have been moving us emotionally in the direction of sympathy towards Angelique because of her 'helpfulness' in 1897, and what she did for the gang in 1970.
Dr. Lang you could be right - maybe the 1840 Ange IS the one from the original 1795, or she could be from even another thread of time. Who knows why Barnabas forgave her, that's never made a lot of sense to me...unless he thought the forgiveness would help her to rest in peace, so that she wouldn't come back to wreak more havoc in his life. It reminds me of a line from Buffy "Forgiveness isn't given to a person because they deserve it. You give it because they need it."
And of course, Jennifer I have to agree with you too. All this time travel stuff can make my head spin like I'm on nitrous oxide at the dentist's office, lol!
-
POSSIBLE SPOILER
I've always wondered, too, if the 1840 Angelique had lived through 1795 with Phyllis Wick or with Victoria. Now, as many times as I've sat through the 1840/41 storyline, I never noticed if the very old Ben Stokes, when talking with Julia who just arrived in 1840 from 1970, ever made mention of Victoria being the governess, or did he refer to Phyllis, if he referred to the governess at all. That would determine which 1795 timeline it was: Phyllis or Vicki.
Gerard
-
POSSIBLE SPOILER
I've always wondered, too, if the 1840 Angelique had lived through 1795 with Phyllis Wick or with Victoria. Now, as many times as I've sat through the 1840/41 storyline, I never noticed if the very old Ben Stokes, when talking with Julia who just arrived in 1840 from 1970, ever made mention of Victoria being the governess, or did he refer to Phyllis, if he referred to the governess at all. That would determine which 1795 timeline it was: Phyllis or Vicki.
Gerard
spoilers
good point Gerard! good old Ben would have been the key but i don't think they let him stay around long enough to find out!
jennifer
-
I've always wondered, too, if the 1840 Angelique had lived through 1795 with Phyllis Wick or with Victoria. Now, as many times as I've sat through the 1840/41 storyline, I never noticed if the very old Ben Stokes, when talking with Julia who just arrived in 1840 from 1970, ever made mention of Victoria being the governess, or did he refer to Phyllis, if he referred to the governess at all. That would determine which 1795 timeline it was: Phyllis or Vicki.
Sadly, Ben never gets the chance to make the distinction. However, the idea that Angelique in 1840 is the one from the original Phyllis Wick timeline is supported by the fact that she's alive and has been making yearly pilgrimages to Collinsport since 1796. In the Victoria Winters 1795 timeline, she had been strangled and buried. True, she was able to "materialize" as a ghost and testify at trial, but she seems solid enough in 1840 and wouldn't have been able to be shot and killed by Trask if she were already dead.
We don't know what became of Angelique in the original timeline when Phyllis Wick was governess - she may have simply accepted the money Joshua offered her and went away. There definitely would have been a difference in the course of events between the original timeline and the one Victoria Winters lived through - Phyllis Wick would not have arrived at Collinwood wearing clothes from the 1960's, would not have had the family history book, and wouldn't have aroused the suspicion Vicki did. With no history book, Josette would not have read of her own demise before the fact. It's interesting to speculate how different it was when Vicki interceded.
-
Sadly, Ben never gets the chance to make the distinction. However, the idea that Angelique in 1840 is the one from the original Phyllis Wick timeline is supported by the fact that she's alive and has been making yearly pilgrimages to Collinsport since 1796.
We don't know what became of Angelique in the original timeline when Phyllis Wick was governess - she may have simply accepted the money Joshua offered her and went away. There definitely would have been a difference in the course of events between the original timeline and the one Victoria Winters lived through - Phyllis Wick would not have arrived at Collinwood wearing clothes from the 1960's, would not have had the family history book, and wouldn't have aroused the suspicion Vicki did. With no history book, Josette would not have read of her own demise before the fact. It's interesting to speculate how different it was when Vicki interceded.
These are all very good points Dr.Lang but I was under the impression that Angelique was going to accept the money Joshua offered her anyway. She did sign the papers and told him to leave the bankbook with her and that it would be here in the morning when he returned but she would be gone. But before she left she had one more thing to do and that was to kill Barnabas before he rose from the dead as a vampire. As we know, she never got the chance to leave town or kill Barnabas because he strangled her first. So Im assuming this might have been played out the same way regardless of Vicky being there or not.
We also know that Josette did jump or fall to her death at Widows hill because Barnabas told Carolyn & Vicky the story way before Vicky went back into the past. Something must have made her run from Barnabas so IMO Im thinking it was only because of Angelique's involvment in the whole thing.
I agree with you on Angelique from 1840 being the same Angelique from the 1795 original storyline which included Phyliss Wick as the governess. The only difference I can think of as to what happened here is that Barnabas wasn't as close to Phyliss Wick as he was to Vicky. He took a liking to Vicky and firmly believed in her innocence of being charged as a witch. I don't think he was that close to Miss Wick in the same way he was with Vicky.
Everyone has such good points on this subject and I enjoy hearing everyone's comments. This time travel stuff gets so confusing sometimes and I wonder if the writers realized all the confusion they'd be causing their viewers all these years later!!
Cassandra
-
The whole dream sequence with Marsha Mason, hooker-turned-into-vampire, was absolutely wonderful. It reminds me of a movie - I can't remember the name now - about a soldier who passes from one dream to another, never knowing what is reality and what is not. Just when you think he's finally awake, it's another dream.
And here I thought that I was practically the only one who liked the Leviathan story line. I really like all the different characters and the complexity of the story. At first I didn't care much for Chris Pennock but as this story goes on, he gets better and better IMHO.
Speaking of Marsha Mason, perhaps someone else noticed that she was actually standing in the corner at one point and observing the acting going on in front of the camera. It reminds me of the time that while the cameras were filming Julia, Victoria and Liz, Jonathan Frid was standing in the corner waiting for his entrance. It's remarkable that all of this is on film and seeing them in the background doesn't bother me at all. Which is in contrast to how upset I feel about the time that a stage hand in a blue shirt is caught on camera when Barnabas emerges from his coffin for the first time to discover that he's a vampire.