DARK SHADOWS FORUMS
General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '25 I => Current Talk '02 I => Topic started by: Donna on April 22, 2002, 02:04:43 AM
-
How would Dark Shadows do if certain charactors weren't in the show? Name the actor/charactor played and why you think DS could of gone without them.
I just thought I'd try one of my own. :o
-
Thats a toughie...
A this point, the show probably could have survived without any single actor except Johnathan Frid (because he made the show what it was) and maybe Alexandra Moltke (just because she was in practically EVERY episode for a good year). As for everyone else, they really just havn't had the impact that Barnabas has on the show, and I think DS, as a soap opera could have gotten along without them.
-
I think Barnabas was very important to show. However, other characters were too.
The only character I can think of is Jason...That storyline just drag on forever, compare to later storys. That story line is clearly written before they decided to added a vampire.
jon
-
Oh that just made me think of someone even better that came off that storyline.
Buzz....
What was that character about and he was in the show like for a week. They could have totally play that storyline at with Carolyn becoming even more of a tramp!!!. But as fast as Buzz rode in and he quickly left.
jon
-
Well, they should have written out Burke Devlin when Mitch Ryan left. I literally cheered when Anthony George was no longer ruining the role.
Peter Bradford does come to mind also. And as much as I love Alexandra Moltke earlier in the show, when Vicky finally leaves it is a relief. The scripting for her part became so lame and the pairing with Peter Bradford was not helpful.
I like Chris Pennock fine, but his leviathon part was rather painful to watch and I couldn't miss it at all.
-
I'm not sure if this is what you were asking, but there are certain characters whose presence made absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, and knowing how frugal Dan Curtis was, I'm astonished that he would throw away good money to add them to the cast.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
Widow Romano (1897)--What was her purpose? She was in one episode for perhaps seven minutes and then was immediately killed. During her time in Collinsport, she accomplished absolutely nothing.
Damian Edwards (1970PT)--I never understood where he came from or why he was important. We hear him mentioned throughout parallel time, but we never learn the full story. To me, that seems like a waste.
There are also characters who were important to various story lines, but that I wish the show had done without (e.g. Amanda Harris, PT Roxanne.)
As for doing without certain actors, many of the actors and actresses took extended absences to do other projects, and so the stories had to proceed either without their characters, or work around them. I think we can get a feel for what DS might have been like without them during that time, but since most of the players eventually returned, I can't say how the show might have fared if people like Joan Bennett or John Karlen had left permanently.
ProfStokes
-
Professor Stokes .....you answered the question ok.
I'm not one for words and I wasn't sure if I was wording this right or not either.
Thanks all for answering so far. :)
I'm not a newbie DS fan but I must be having memory lapses because I don't remember half of the charactors and time periods that are mentioned here.....especially the leviathon [period.
-
Spoiler......Spoiler.......Spoiler..........Spoiler.........Spoiler
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
I can't for the life of me figure out why they needed the character of Jeremy Grimes there during the 1840 storyline? He really didn't serve much of a purpose at all except for being Mordecai Grimes' son. He seemed to take a liking to Carrie, but nothing ever became of it.
Also King Johnny's sidekick, Istvan, didn't have too much to do. He never spoke a word and Im sure King Johnny could have gotten along okay without him.
-
I can't for the life of me figure out why they needed the character of Jeremy Grimes there during the 1840 storyline? He really didn't serve much of a purpose at all except for being Mordecai Grimes' son. He seemed to take a liking to Carrie, but nothing ever became of it.
Also King Johnny's sidekick, Istvan, didn't have too much to do. He never spoke a word and Im sure King Johnny could have gotten along okay without him.
Jeremy was probably there to provide some sort of teen love interest thing for Kathy Cody's character, who was clearly way too old to be playing with doll houses and rocking horses by then. She was being built into the next SYT.
Istvan had no lines and thus did not have to be paid as much, plus he was cool, lol.
There were a variety of characters whose absence would have improved the show, but I don't think that's what Donna was asking for.
In terms of the original question Donna posed, I really don't think that there was anyone on the show who was indispensable. Not even Frid. Sure they would have lost a huge chunk of viewers, but by the time they had Selby . . . I think they probably could have survived. It would have taken time and it would have been hard, but it could have gone on.
This kind of thing happens all the time, particularly in daytime tv. The focus of the show might have shifted, but there are always new characters and new combinations of old characters to keep people watching.
I know we have a tendency to differentiate DS from soaps, but when you boil it down to the essence, it was a serial show and what keeps people coming back for more is the desire to know what happened next.
Luciaphil
-
I never really understood why they brought on Harry Johnson. They never really did anything with the character (although i think the opportunity was there), and after a short time he just faded away without any explaination.
-
I could handle the charcacters, but some actors I could deal without...
I could deal with the character of Harry Johnson but not Craig Slocum. After 1795, he should have never returned to DS. I liked the one episode second Harry Johnson beter.
Roger Davis is another actor I could deal without once Peter and Vicky exit the storyline. The characters of Ned Stuart, Dirk Wilkins and Charles Delaware Tate could have been played by different actors. Dan could have paid them for the time they were on the show instead of signing them for a longer term. Ned is introduced very close to the beginning of 1897 and was never used after 1897, so a temporary actor could have played that role. I think it would have made the Chris Jennings story better without the Jeff Clark lookalike references.
Claude North- He had so much build up and gets killed in 4 episodes. That was a waste.
-
Maybe the show could and would have survived without Roger ¢â‚¬¦ but he really added a nice touch of snob appeal that gave Collinwood and the Collins family that old money feeling. And NOBODY could do it better than Louis Edmonds! [thumb]
-
I agree with Cassandra, I think Jeremy Grimes was a pointless character. He was the one I was going to mention, but couldn't remember his name. Dark Shadows could have gone without him for sure. As for Harry Johnson, my favorite, who has also been mentioned, like it or not he's there, and on my avatar. In reply to Mike S, who said they never really did anything with the character, and that the opportunity was there, I think the character should have been more developed and that we should have seen more of him. There are some great scenes. I think the show's writers got so involved with other things that they just didn't give enough thought to Harry Johnson. He was a minor character that should have had more depth and air time. In reply to Joeytrom, obviously you do not like Craig Slocum, but I do wish you would not be disrespectful to the deceased here. Unlike you, I did not like the one episode with Edward Marshall as Harry Johnson. Maybe that's why they did away with the character, because he didn't make the grade? He just plain wasn't Craig Slocum. I for one have a problem with that! Craig should have stayed on Dark Shadows. If it weren't for him and my enthusiasm over him, I may not be here. He is what really got me back into Dark Shadows the last few years, so I am glad that he was and always will be a part of it.
-
Harry Johnson comes to my mind too.
I agree that the writers didn't think enough for Harry and that he got lost in the shuffle admist so many characters.....he showed some promise in his first episode and while he did play a bit part in the Adam saga, he just was never given the chance to develop as a fleshed-out character. We knew he was a rotter (and a coward to some degree, especially during his scenes with Nicholas) but that was about it.
-
Speaking of Jeremy Grimes (6 years ago, but the topic got revived) my sister and I were watching 1840 not too long ago and were absolutely horrified by the state of the actor's fingernails. I'll try to get a screencap when I get home from work, but from what I recall they were overly long and dirty. He looked like he'd been gardening prior to shooting the scene.
I do remember reading in one of 16 magazines (I believe) that the actor had been signed for a 5 year contract with the show. The validity of that is now a moot point, but if the show had continued, he probably would have been the "new" David, aka the kid who gets possessed.
-
You do notice the most interesting things, arashi! Maybe the dirt was specially added to the fingernails because Jeremy was a farmer's son.
Tom Happer (that was who played Jeremy, right?) seems too old to be a replacement for David. For that, they would have done better to bring Michael Maitland back.
I sort of wonder about Aunt Hannah Stokes. Interesting character, but why didn't they just bring Tim in immediately? Was Thayer David not available for the beginning of 1970 parallel time?
-
I sort of wonder about Aunt Hannah Stokes. Interesting character, but why didn't they just bring Tim in immediately? Was Thayer David not available for the beginning of 1970 parallel time?
There was a little thing called house of Dark Shadows (though it was only called Dark Shadows then) shooting. [snow_wink]
-
Oh, yeah, that.