DARK SHADOWS FORUMS

General Discussions => Current Talk Archive => Current Talk '24 I => Current Talk '05 II => Topic started by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 02, 2005, 09:06:54 PM

Title: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 02, 2005, 09:06:54 PM: I'm still a bit too out of it to make a coherent enough post to adequately express all my thoughts concerning the WB pilot. However, I will say this now: I LOVED it. And quite frankly, once it was over both Midnite and I were sooooooo depressed for what should have been. And the revelation from TV critic Mark Dawidziak (of the Cleveland Plain Dealer), who hosted the showing, that the WB actually realizes what a mistake they made by passing on it only compounded that depression. (I mean, fat lot of good that admission does us all now! ::) >:()

But the real reason why I wanted to start this topic now was to remind the people who were lucky enough to see the pilot of the "possible ad campaign" poster that I'd posted just as a joke back in 2004. Little did we know that somehow I really was tapping into Joe's first scene (with Carolyn):

Quote from: Mysterious Benefactor on April 07, 2004, 07:56:50 AM
Vlad's most recent post (in the WB ODERS FILMING OF NEW DS PILOT) about Jason Shaw's casting as Joe Haskell got me to thinking. Haven't we had enough of the comely heroine, dressed in the flowing nightie, holding the lit candelabra type of ad campaigns to promote DS? Why not go for something bolder, sexier? And when you've got someone like Jason Shaw as one of your stars, why not use his, er, attributes to their greatest advantage? Right?

So, I present to you one of the possible ads the WB might want to consider using to promote DS:
[click on the "Quote from: Mysterious Benefactor on April 07, 2004, 02:56:50 am" link]

Well, not so much with the "secrets" part - but apparently with the "bare" part. [b003] (Sorry to tease those of you who have yet to see the pilot (hopefully it will be shown again next year), but all will be revealed in due time. [wink2])
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: McTrooper on August 02, 2005, 09:54:36 PM: Wow, WB admitted it was a mistake.
That must mean they think it would have been more successful than what they did go with.
Maybe hindsight will make them consider it as a possibility for a future show.

In the mean time I hope they make plans to release a DVD of the movie so they can make some profit,
give other fans a chance to see it, and drum up interest in yet another show. Well . . one can hope . .

Or, maybe they could still use it as a pilot, but it would probably be difficult.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on August 03, 2005, 04:18:17 AM: I'm guessing that you saw the whole pilot at the fest. Please give an in depth review! I too am more depressed now that I keep hearing from people how good it was, and it wasn't picked up. I hope that WB might consider showing it on air and producing a new show!

Misa :D
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: JennieSim80 on August 03, 2005, 04:56:02 AM: I definitely want details on the WB pilot. I feel like they really cheated us now. :'(
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gothick on August 03, 2005, 03:49:31 PM: There were several attractive young men in that cast. I'm pleased to hear that the director did not neglect some of the obvious opportunities that, um, arose (?). And after all, this was a pilot for the WB. I sometimes call it the "candyboy" network because of those endless shots of pouting, doe-eyed young men endlessly rolling about in the throes of soap opera angst. Madge, cue the suds!

Did everybody have to leave their cellphones in a basket at that showing? I've heard some hilarious stories about the security overkill at some of these events.

G.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 03, 2005, 04:51:06 PM: Quote from: Gothick on August 03, 2005, 03:49:31 PM
There were several attractive young men in that cast. I'm pleased to hear that the director did not neglect some of the obvious opportunities that, um, arose (?).

Well, not only did we learn that Joe and Carolyn were quite obviously euphemistically "sexually active," but Willie actually had a girl friend with whom he was quite obviously euphemistically "sexually active" as well. (What a huge step up for the character - particularly his '91 series incarnation. ;D) Though, unlike Joe, poor Willie fell out of bed before he could, uh, get down to business. But more on all that later...

Quote
Did everybody have to leave their cellphones in a basket at that showing? I've heard some hilarious stories about the security overkill at some of these events.

No, they weren't that bad - just the usual Fest announcement that there was no photo taking or videotaping allowed. (Though, of course, that never stops some people. ::))
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: joe integlia on August 03, 2005, 10:32:35 PM: i thought the pilot was well done. it wasnt another remake of h.o.d.s. it was similiar yet different. blair brown was kind of a ditsy elizabeth. seemed like roger was the more stable one in this version. i wish the wb would reconsider. the pilot could still be used. i know the actor who played willie has moved on to gilmore girls but i have seen series where certain actors were replaced in the 2nd+ episodes. as long as they can retain the lead actors, the pilot could still be used as the 1st episode.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Barnabas'sBride on August 03, 2005, 11:16:02 PM: Wish I could've been there to see the pilot. I'm still curious about it, even after all this time. Matt Czuchry as Willie is really the only casting choice that I was really confident about (more so after glimpsing him on Gilmore Girls - he really would've been a perfect Willie, IMO. I adore him.), but I would've liked to watch it.

If the WB (or any network) ever attempts DS again, I'd expect an all new pilot though.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 04, 2005, 11:47:07 PM: What I found most fascinating about the WB pilot and what I'd like to deal with first are the things that are different from what was previously done in other versions of DS. And one of the really good things about the pilot is that it IS different. Thankfully, it isn't yet another remake of hoDS. Though, that having been said, it's also very much based in what we expect DS to be. I have to say that writer Mark Verheiden did an exceptional job of balancing the old with adding new twists.

[spoiler]First off, where Willie had no family in the original DS and hoDS, and he was Mrs. Johnson's nephew in the '91 series, Willie has a sibling in the pilot. The Sophia character, who is basically a 20-something version of Mrs. Johnson, is Willie's sister. (It could have been really interesting to see how their relationship might have developed and how it might have caused conflicts in Willie's relationship with Barnabas - but alas...)

Next, it isn't Willie who's first interested in doing some grave robbing - it's his girl friend Kelly Greer. It seems as if Kelly is some sort of research assistant to Prof. Stokes, and she's the one that figures out that gold has been buried in the Collins mausoleum. Willie is actually more interested in making love with Kelly, but she knocks him out of bed and onto the floor because she wants to go to the mausoleum right away. In fact, Willie's first scenes are really played more for humor than anything else, and that works well, though in a completely different way than humor was used with Willie in the '91 series.

Once Willie and Kelly get to the mausoleum, the same "lion's head watches the dove" clue for finding the secret room comes up. But rather than the lion's head being the way into the secret room, it's the dove. A very minor change there, however, Kelly injures her hand while trying to activate the mechanism to open the room, and that injury plays very significantly into the next few changes.

After the two open the coffin, no hand wearing a black onyx ring comes shooting out to grab anyone by the throat. In fact, Barnabas' rotted corpse looks deader than a doornail. Barnabas doesn't revive until after a drop of blood from Kelly's injured hand lands on his corpse's lip while she's searching inside the coffin. From there wildness ensues as, much to Willie's horror, in one of the most amazing sequences ever in any version of DS, Barnabas suddenly springs into action and attacks and completely drains Kelly. (Definitely check out Interview: Andrew Clement (http://www.collinwood.net/features/interview/clement.htm) over on Stuart's Dark Shadows Journal site for photos of Barn's corpse, his newly resurrected self, and a bug-eyed Kelly after Barn's little treatment.)

The next major change comes when Carolyn is attacked while walking to her car from Joe's house. Yes, we've seen the walk to the car with the Daphnes from both hoDS and the '91 series. However, the way Carolyn's attack plays out is very, Very, VERY different. There are no quick cuts between Barnabas stalking and Carolyn running, and there's no hand grabbing the throat once she gets into her car. In fact, Carolyn never gets into her car. In fact, she barely has a clue of what's about to happen to her until it's much, much too late. What she actually sees are a few leaves falling from a nearby tree. She looks up and sees nothing - but the audience soon sees a figure stealthily stalk across one of the tree's branches. Carolyn then sees a larger group of leaves fall. She looks up again, and this time she sees the withered (but now recognizable) face of Barnabas with fangs bared. He swoops down, grabs her, and carries the screaming girl up into the tree to feast upon. After having seen the attack on Kelly and then watching that sequence, basically everyone at the screening was going, "Whoa - this is amazing!!"

Another change that I suppose some might consider minor but one that I thought was very effective happens when Vicki and Barnabas first meet. As in hoDS when Barnabas first gazes upon Maggie and in the '91 series when he first sees Vicki, the pilot's Barnabas is virtually rendered speechless. But the interesting thing about the pilot is that it's Vicki who asks Barnabas if they've ever met before. It's quite apparent that their connection goes both ways.

The final major change, but one that most of us were already aware of, is that Angelique makes her appearance in the pilot as well.

What one might consider to be sort of an intermediate change is how the subject of Josette is first introduced. It isn't by way of an explanation of her history in front of her portrait, as is the case in hoDS (though a scene similar to that does take place near the end of the pilot when Barnabas shows Vicki Josette's portrait after she makes an unscheduled visit to the Old House while running after David), nor do we simply see Barnabas telling Josette's portrait that she has come back to him, as is the case in the '91 series. No, Verheiden combines other tried and true DS elements into the introduction: Barnabas shows up at Vicki's bedside, proclaims that Josette has come back to him, and prepares to bite - however, once again he can't go through with it and flees from the room. But the really interesting bit comes when Vicki awakens and looks to see if anyone was in her room, and Barnabas is hanging upside down clinging to the exterior wall of Collinwood above her window and out of her sight.

And what I suppose is the final minor change is that Julia isn't brought to Collinwood from Windcliff (as in the original DS) or from NYC (as in the '91 series) or already living at Collinwood (as in hoDS) - apparently she's already on the staff of the hospital. Liz already knows her when she arrives at the hospital after learning about Carolyn's attack.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: AndreDuPres on August 05, 2005, 02:35:11 AM: :-[ I really wish this pilot had been taken up...it sounds so awesome...especially compared to the dreck on today's TV.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Raineypark on August 05, 2005, 03:08:15 AM: It's been a year, so I don't recall......was there EVER any direct comment from Dan Curtis on the 2004 pilot, or on the WB's decision not to put it on their schedule?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: PennyDreadful on August 05, 2005, 04:40:36 AM: MB, thanks for all this fascinating information on the pilot. There are certainly some interesting differences from the original and the remakes. Did they complete the missing special effects for the Fest screening, or were some of the fx still missing from the pilot?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 05, 2005, 04:48:53 AM: I believe the only time DC publicly commented was during his Museum of TV and Radio salute before the pilot was completely edited when he said of the pilot, "It looks pretty good." However, the other two producers, John Wells and Mark Verheiden, both made comments after the WB passed on it. Wells disputed the WB's Garth Ancier's claims that he thought the pilot was "unsalvageable" (which, as anyone who has seen it knows, is an utterly ridiculous description). And Verheiden did an entire interview with Darren that appeared in issue #239 of Fangoria.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 05, 2005, 04:55:26 AM: Quote from: PennyDreadful on August 05, 2005, 04:40:36 AM
Did they complete the missing special effects for the Fest screening, or were some of the fx still missing from the pilot?

No, they didn't. But it wasn't like there was a black hole where the effects should have been. It was certainly quite easy to picture what would have been there.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: victoriawinters on August 05, 2005, 07:25:36 AM: It really wasn't going to need many special effects because the story was there. The pace could have been slowed just a bit and a few of the scenes saved for episode 2. I might have moved one of the scenes to the end instead of what they had. But, that is my thing.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on August 05, 2005, 02:16:12 PM: When TV Critic Mark Dawidziak introduced the DS pilot at the Fest he began by saying, "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times". That did sum up the pilot in my opinion. I just don't understand the WB's position that the pilot was "unsalvageable". Clearly they must have hated Alec Newman as Barnabas. I thought he could have pulled it off. My only problem with Alec was I thought he was too short for the role. Ok everybody, don't laugh. But seriously, you could tell that the director desperately was shooting angles that would make Alec appear taller than the other actors. I was happy with Angelique, Roger, David and the Willie actors. Brown was terrible as Elizabeth but perhaps the script instructed her to act in that air-head manner. I just finished reading Rod Labbe's article in Scary Monsters Magazine about the pilot. In the last paragraph he quoted Jim Pierson as saying that the pilot was alive and well. This article was published in June 2005. Perhaps the writer actually wrote the piece a long time ago. BTW Labbe did a fantastic job with all of the articles he wrote in that issue.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 05, 2005, 04:42:28 PM: Quote from: jimbo on August 05, 2005, 02:16:12 PM
I just don't understand the WB's position that the pilot was "unsalvageable". Clearly they must have hated Alec Newman as Barnabas. I thought he could have pulled it off.

The WB has never publicly commented on whom they might have thought needed to be recast. But they did come out firmly behind Alec Newman, so it wasn't him...

Quote
Brown was terrible as Elizabeth but perhaps the script instructed her to act in that air-head manner.

There I have to disagree. Yes, Liz did come off a bit ditzy in her first scene when Vicki arrives at Collinwood (but there could possibly be an explanation for that that I'll get into in a future post). However, I thought all of Liz' other scenes played very well - particularly when she's explaining, or rather trying to avoid explaining to Vicki about David's mother - and especially the scene in which she lets Roger have it when he rejects David.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on August 05, 2005, 05:39:08 PM: MB I am a bit surprised by your statement that the WB approved of Alec's performance as Barnabas. Logic would dictate that if an entire filmed pilot is deemed "unsalvageable", that the main character is largely to blame. Additionally, Rod Labbe reported in the "What Happened" to the WB pilot article, that the WB "disliked Newman's Barnabas". I would have to assume he obtained that information from JP but of course I do not know that. I do agree with you that Brown did perform better after her drug induced opening scene. lol
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 05, 2005, 06:07:51 PM: Quote from: jimbo on August 05, 2005, 05:39:08 PM
MB I am a bit surprised by your statement that the WB approved of Alec's performance as Barnabas. Logic would dictate that if an entire filmed pilot is deemed "unsalvageable", that the main character is largely to blame.

Well, technically, what Garth Ancier said was that even though the pilot was "wonderfully produced" by John Wells, Wells must have realized that the pilot was unsalvageable because Wells never approached Ancier about fixing it. Ancier also firmly placed the blame on the director (PJ Hogan) for the pilot's problems. (The report of this can be read again here: No Resurrection For Shadows (http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/art-main.html?2004-07/15/11.45.tv)) However, as we know, John Wells subsequently disputed that he'd ever thought the pilot was unsalvageable and actually said that he loved the way it turned out.

In terms of the pilot's main character, though, I'm not so sure one can say it was Newman's Barnabas, At first I was a bit surprised by how little screen time Newman actually had. But then, when one thinks about it, given Barnabas' circumstances, it really couldn't be any other way in a 40 minute pilot. If anything, Vicki was more of the main character because she appeared in the most scenes.

Quote
Additionally, Rod Labbe reported in the "What Happened" to the WB pilot article, that the WB "disliked Newman's Barnabas". I would have to assume he obtained that information from JP but of course I do not know that.

It's usually very dangerous to assume. [wink2]
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on August 05, 2005, 07:46:24 PM: Thanks MB for the link.

Yeah I never did like or trust Ancier. Boy, can he spin with the best. lol What exactly did he mean by his statement that Wells wonderfully produced the filmed pilot? In turn, I just don't see John Wells saying something like,"Hey Garthy, sorry about our distinguished production company producing a terrible pilot, so terrible that nothing can be salvaged but thanks for the compliment". Even though Wells is not hurting financially, obviously it was in his best interests to get the filmed pilot to series even if they had to recast certain characters. My understanding is that the WB never gave Wells a chance to enhance the pilot in any manner. What hurts even more is that John Wells has an office on the WB's lot. I just can't imagine that Garth and Wells never crossed paths on the lot to discuss the filmed pilot. The whole thing is beyond my comprehension. lol

Yes, I should never assume anything in this whacky world we live in. lol
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on August 06, 2005, 07:33:56 AM: What does everyone who saw the pilot think of the actors performances and the casting? Was Victoria cast well? David? What did the portrait of Josette look like? I have been really curious about how the painting looked.

Hope to hear from you soon.

Misa
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Jackie on August 06, 2005, 08:48:38 AM: My thoughts on the WB pilot: [I enjoyed it, saw some strengths and some weaknesses...I believe every DS Fan should be able to see this one at least once.]

[spoiler]It was about 40 minutes long, rough draft with little or not music or sound effects. That didn't matter because the suspense was there and the horror came through very well. I loved the effects they had for introducing Barnabas Collins. He was not a good-looking corpse to start out but the decayed DEAD cadaver. It was great make-up and there is a photo of him in the Shadowgram mail version. Anyway, when Willie and his girlfriend went looking for treasures, she cut herself on something, then blood dripped on cadaver which awoke the terror they were about to face. One survived, the other did not. The walking corpse had to claim a few victims including Carolyn to restore It's body and youth. I must say that within the 40 minutes no one actor had the most screen time. They were very busy introducing each character, each had only 2 or 3 scenes. Willie was very cute, not the babbling fool they had in 1991 and not the criminal we feared in the series. It was his girlfriend's idea to rob the grave and she even threatened him [not with bodily harm but lack of her body!] After Barnabas' influence on this Willie, he didn't appear to be as nervous and frighten of his master as the JK character but again we didn't get to see too much of the relationship in this short time. I also liked Vicki's character although I'd have to get use to a blonde. Since it is during modern time, we saw cell phones and a moment of comic relief during a rainstorm. This Vicki reminded me of the earlier series character, bold, feisty, and confident. I didn't care too much for the Elizabeth Collins Stoddard portrayal because they had her too mousy and nothing like Joan Bennett's portrayal. Roger was loud and obnoxious but we don't see too much of him. He's still curt with David. Little David was marvelous, IMO, and very spooky. He had some great lines too. I didn't like how they ended the 40 minutes but no one expected this to be perfect. They awaken Angelique and she is hit head on by Vicki's car. While she sticks out of the front window, she looks at Vicki screaming, having Vicki scream, and cowering in the seat. "The End". Hmmm?? It wasn't even a final draft so they expected to do more work on it.[/spoiler]
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: victoriawinters on August 06, 2005, 09:19:59 AM: I felt Marley Shelton made a good Victoria. She had a good mix of vulnerability and strength. She also was commanding over David. I felt she was eventually going to make inroads with him. I felt little Alexander Gould was truly strong as very disturbed David.

The portrait of Josette was a replication of Marley Shelton in a 17th Century dress with long tresses. It was a nature background I believe. She had a very pretty smile in the portrait. Very much in the style of the time period, in terms of the sitting.

I thought Martin Donovan as Roger Collins and Michael D. Roberts as Sheriff Patterson were the best of the lot.

It appeared to me that Blair Brown and Kelly Hu needed to be re-cast. Or, re-directed. Or, both. There were many points where the direction lacked er Direction. Granted it was rough cut and not polished. You could see the visual click track at the bottom of the screen. But, you can tell if the shots are there and they add to or detract from the horror/suspense or not. The director (PJ Hogan) absolutely needed recasting. Possibly a flogging. My review and fix suggestions will be part of my Fest report when I'm done with it.

Alec Newman was a bit short but they were short 200 years ago. So, it worked for me. Or, Martin Donovan is a basketball player. Your pick.

Joe was hot as was Willie. At first I had the pre-judgment, based on my meeting him at Dan Curtis' 40th Anniversary last year, that Jason Shaw was going to be weak as an actor. However, he surprised me. Matt Czuchry (Willie), Jessica Chastain (Carolyn), Alexis Thorpe (Kelly Greer), Jenna Dewan (Sophia) were all quite competent in their respective roles.

For the most part, this cast gelled for me. Mark Verheiden (writer) really understands DS. My instinct about him from my meeting with him last year was dead on. It would have worked. DS is all the poorer because this failed.

As a friend of mine who is a record producer and performer always said, when you have a new release the entire catalog sells. This really, truly hurt us that this didn't make it.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Barnabas'sBride on August 06, 2005, 01:03:33 PM: Talking about the pilot brings back the memories of anticipation I had for the potential series. I wish they had just gotten a new director and made a couple recasts. From the details of the pilot, I liked some of the new ideas they incorporated into it, and I think they could've kept the series fresh and interesting.

I thought Mark Verheiden would do a good job as the writer.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Julia99 on August 06, 2005, 08:35:06 PM: Quote from: Mysterious Benefactor on August 03, 2005, 04:51:06 PM
Quote
Did everybody have to leave their cellphones in a basket at that showing? I've heard some hilarious stories about the security overkill at some of these events.
No, they weren't that bad - just the usual Fest announcement that there was no photo taking or videotaping allowed. (Though, of course, that never stops some people. ::))

Don't forget the security guard walking around all of us. . he was big, mean and well ..i thought rather good looking but I digress. . .
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 06, 2005, 08:39:31 PM: Quote from: Julia99 on August 06, 2005, 08:35:06 PM
Don't forget the security guard walking around all of us

Was there a security guard? I didn't even notice him. :D But then my attention was squarely focused on watching the pilot. ;)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: victoriawinters on August 06, 2005, 09:42:57 PM: Oh yes, it was the same one patrolling us during the play earlier in the afternoon. But, I liked it in the end that he was there. I thought order was a bit better kept this fest. He wasn't bad on the eyes either.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Midnite on August 07, 2005, 12:45:21 AM: Well, since their praises are being sung, I'll add that I had several stressful encounters with hotel security. This is not a criticism of anyone associated with the Festival or other hotel employees, but the security department specifically. I realize that the multiple problems I had with them may been my isolated experiences, and there was one individual guard who took over a situation and became helpful after I had reached an impasse with his coworkers, but regardless of how attractive any of them may have been, I found the security staff as a whole to be uncooperative, unreliable, manipulative and nasty. There, I said it. :)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on August 07, 2005, 01:23:11 AM: I'll keep this brief, but in a nutshell I was floored by the whole thing...

I think without a doubt the pilot is one of the most densely fascinating 40 minutes of television I have ever seen. The really sad thing to reflect upon is that so much of that quality and scope is the contribution of PJ Hogan, who I think has been the recipient of one of the most sour and misplaced whispering campaigns possible.

What this DS has is a genuine sense of wonder and beauty - and looking at Dan's turn in 1991 and Rob Bowman's recent work, it wouldn't have gotten that without PJ's contribution. It's bold, assured and - love it or hate it - offers more character and identity in 40 minutes than the 1991 show managed in a dozen episodes.

A pilot is a statement of intent - showing the world your concept and getting them swept along in the process. PJ nailed that. This DS is joyously different from anything else on television - it's not a copy of an old show or a reshoot of an old movie. It lives and breathes and takes its audience on an amazing, epic ride. And that is what turns a workmanlike remake into something that stands on its own two feet and deserves a place in the schedule in its own right.

The only thing that spoiled it for me was Mark Dawidziak's introduction - a very wrong-footed and idiosyncratic speech which seemed to serve little real purpose.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on August 07, 2005, 03:03:41 AM: Stuart, I enjoyed reading your take on the DS 2004 pilot.

I too liked the filmed pilot. The only problem I had was the ending. I don't know if that very last scene with the two characters trying to out scream the other was in the script or something Hogan added on his own (there are these rumors of him shooting scenes not in the script). In any event, the ending did not work for me. Perhaps it was designed to be comical although I doubt that was the case. I don't know anything about directing so I do not know if that scene was poorly directed. I do know, however, that I would have filmed it so that it would be clear to the viewing audience that the scene meant to convey a terrifying moment for Victoria. The bottom line is that the ending was the last impression left with the WB executives at the screening and in my opinion that did not help matters in their decision making process whether to pick up the pilot.

On a whole, I thought it was brilliantly filmed by Hogan. I just don't understand why the head of the WB and perhaps DCP believed that Hogan poorly directed the pilot. Why make the director the fall guy even if he made one bad directional decision in the entire body of work?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on August 07, 2005, 02:19:47 PM: I forgot to respond to your post concerning your interpretation of tv critic Mark Dawidziak's pre-screening commentary. It should be remembered that he was scheduled to go on 7:00pm that night. I was told that immediately following that presentation he was suppose to attend a personal event. The fact that he graciously waited two hours (until 9:00pm.) to get the chance to present the pilot should be appreciated. In addition, I was told that the Fest only once told him what was going on in that two hour delay. I think we should all thank him for even showing up and for being a supporter of DS. I also did not find anything he said objectionable. Just my thoughts.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 07, 2005, 07:15:46 PM: I won't presume to speak for Stuart, but I know for myself I thought that Dawidziak did make some prejudicial remarks before the screening that might have been best left until after everyone had had a chance to see the entire pilot for themselves and to make up their own minds. I realize that perhaps due to the 2 hour delay Dawidziak felt that he wasn't going to be able to make them afterward so he made them beforehand because he wanted to share his opinions, which, presumably, was why he was hosting the screening in the first place. But at the same time, certain of his opinions could have influenced some people at the screening to look on various aspects of the pilot in a way that they otherwise might not have. Though I will concede that his remarks didn't influence everyone because after the screening I spoke with several fans who, like myself, totally disagreed with some of the things Dawidziak had said.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on August 07, 2005, 08:22:29 PM: Yeah, that's pretty much my feelings too... It presented instances of opinion as fact, which isn't particularly helpful or necessary. It's all very well summing up with "make up your own mind", but preceding that with a bullet-point list of personal bugbears pretty much renders that null, because that's not what the audience is being invited to do at all.

Delays don't really excuse this at all. There is a big difference between introduction and instruction.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on August 07, 2005, 08:55:29 PM: Quote from: Stuart on August 07, 2005, 08:22:29 PM
Yeah, that's pretty much my feelings too... It presented instances of opinion as fact, which isn't particularly helpful or necessary. It's all very well summing up with "make up your own mind", but preceding that with a bullet-point list of personal bugbears pretty much renders that null, because that's not what the audience is being invited to do at all.

Delays don't really excuse this at all. There is a big difference between introduction and instruction.

Well I certainly will not act as Dawidziak's agent. lol That being said I am not sure what you wanted him to say during his introduction. Prior to his comments we all knew that he is a supporter of DS and that he was invited by DCP to present the pilot. He did state facts such as the WB now realize that they were wrong to pass on the DS pilot especially in light of the fact that the horror genre is back on tv this fall. Irregardless, I am an independent thinker and I would not be swayed by whatever he said prior to the screening of the pilot. I would hope that there were other independent thinkers in the audience as well. I just think it was nice that he came to the Fest. I don't believe he intentionally tried to influence how the audience should view the pilot. I don't think he did any harm.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Fletcher on August 08, 2005, 01:51:40 AM: What can anyone tell us about the Old House? How did it look on the outside? I understand the entire exterior was computer generated. So -- how did it look? Did it resemble the original in any way?

How about the interior? Tell us about it. Give us a "full report."
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Miss_Winthrop on August 08, 2005, 05:17:42 AM: I was able to see roughly the first 30 minutes of the pilot before I had to leave. What I saw I liked and would make a few minor changes. David, Roger, Liz, Vicki, Willie, Kelly and Carolyn can stay. I was unimpressed with Joe and would like to see a guy who looked like he could do a hard days labor but still be attractive to a Carolyn type. In addition to recasting Joe, I would change Barnabas, Dr. Hoffman and Sophie. Vicki supposedly has some background in psychology which seems odd. Despite perhaps being a tad young to be so experienced, she was definitely an asset. She's definitely a keeper. Loved David's character!

The actor playing Dr. Hoffman is totally wrong. I don't know why, but I just don't care for her. I just can't imagine her getting even a itty bitty drop of blood or guts on her immaculate looks and finger nails. Barnabas is too short! Barnabas needs to be imposing and tall. A man who catches your eye and attracts you too him. He needs to be elegant but not too refined because afterall he lived hundres of years ago while American was still finding its way as far as fashion, society, etc. While I don't remember the Sophie character I'd like to suggest that she be a little more conversative and provide balance for the younger characters. I picture her as a salt of the earth type character who is the glue that keeps the house running while Roger and Liz deal with each other and the rest of the family and acquaintances. I see her as an employee who knows a lot about what's going on and can handle it.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gothick on August 08, 2005, 04:47:31 PM: Just a line to say many thanks to MB for that fascinating exegesis on the pilot. It does sound like an amazing bit of film. I like your description of the touch, so reminiscent of Dracula, of Barnabas hanging upside down on the outer wall of Collinwood--magnificently Gothic.

The articles I saw around the time of the pilot's rejection made it pretty clear that the series was caught in the cross-fire of some sort of political upheaval among the suits at the WB. They made all that hoo-ha about switching away from dramatic series and into the "reality" sludge. I don't follow it enough to know whether they made a volte-face on that decision but they certainly do seem to be still pumping out the sudsy teen soap operas (my housemate is a Smallville addict and I often spot the latest commercials for those endless, glossy things). Anyhow, regardless of the statements made by various suits, it was pretty clear to me--if ANYTHING is clear in Horrorwood--that the rejection of DS had everything to do with upper-echelon executive politics, and NOTHING to do with the quality of the actual product, which sounds quite respectable.

On an unrelated topic, I wonder whether the Lost in Space pilot has been screened at the LIS convention and whether it turned out to be as good as the DS pilot. Odd about both those shows coming so close to revival in the same year.

goodbye-ee-ee,

G.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Miss_Winthrop on August 11, 2005, 12:53:52 PM: I've been talking up the pilot with a number of people and there is definitely a lot of interest in a DVD of it. Does anyone think that there is any plan to release a DVD of the pilot? Who actually owns the rights to it besides DCP?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: McTrooper on August 11, 2005, 02:35:14 PM: Well, the market is definitely looking up for Dark Shadows. I mean I actually saw a few classic DS DVD collections at Best Buy once.
A DVD of the 1991 version is going to be released soon.

I'm not an expert at this, but I think this primes the market for Dark Shadows stuff.

If they do a cost-benefit-analysis and think they can make a profit of a DVD of the 2004 pilot I think we might see it sometime in 1 to 3 years.

Though someone here posted the idea of using the 2004 pilot as a pilot for another try at a new series, so . .
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: MsCriseyde on August 12, 2005, 03:30:57 AM: Stumbled across this blog entry from Tuesday by critic/commentator Ed Martin that might be of interest:

Dark Shadows Failed Pilot Generates Buzz at Fan Festival (http://www.mediavillage.com/jmentr/2005/08/09/jmer-08-09-05/)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on August 12, 2005, 04:01:21 AM: Quote from: MsCriseyde on August 12, 2005, 03:30:57 AM
that might be of interest

Definitely of interest. It's a nice change to read some positive Internet spin for the pilot, as opposed to what we were getting last year. Thanks so much for sharing the link. :)

I still have quite a few more things that I want to post about it. Hopefully soon.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Raineypark on August 12, 2005, 11:33:01 AM: Doesn't a review like that make you want to beat someone senseless for failing to get the show on the air? [90d1]
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gothick on August 12, 2005, 03:40:57 PM: Angelique Dupres?? Oh Dear.

Don't tell me that in this version, Angelique turns out to be Josette's bastard sister, sired by Andre on a sugar plantation slave with magical powers of her own...

That final scene does sound hilarious. But still not as hilarious as the cover for the new DS 1991 DVD.

Perhaps it should be retitled Goodbite, Moon?? *shrieeek*!

G.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on August 12, 2005, 05:13:26 PM: She's not called Angelique 'Dupres' in the pilot. That's a mistake from the writer of the article.
The pilot only refers to her as Angelique in dialogue and in the script as well.

BUT, oddly enough, the big blooper in this year's VENGEANCE AT COLLINWOOD at the Fest was that the script has her constantly referred to as 'Angelique DuPres.' Caused much quizzical looks and head scratching during the drama, I can tell you.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Raineypark on August 12, 2005, 06:23:10 PM: Quote from: Gothick on August 12, 2005, 03:40:57 PM
Perhaps it should be retitled Goodbite, Moon?? *shrieeek*!

Rainey HOWLS laughing......[lghy]
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Miss_Winthrop on August 17, 2005, 04:01:07 AM: Don't know if this has been mentioned on this site before but there is a very good review of the Dark Shadows Vol 1 DVD release. The site is called TVShowsOnDvd.Com. The fellow that reviews the first 10 episodes (I'm sorry but can't remember his name) had been introduced to the series by his wife who had been a fan in the early days. He talked about how his wife raved about how good the show was and how she ran home from school, etc. This guy has a really interesting take on the show and if you haven't read it, I highly recommend that you do. This site also might be a format for talking up getting the WB pilot released as a DVD. People are voting for TV related things that they want to see on DVDs.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Midnite on August 17, 2005, 04:31:19 AM: Quote from: Miss_Winthrop on August 17, 2005, 04:01:07 AM
Don't know if this has been mentioned on this site before but there is a very good review of the Dark Shadows Vol 1 DVD release. The site is called TVShowsOnDvd.Com.

Thanks! A link to the review can be found here:
Quote from: Midnite on June 01, 2002, 08:39:32 PM
Re: an extensive review
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on August 18, 2005, 07:09:57 AM: There is also a review on the 2nd set here's the link
http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/sitereviews.cfm?ReviewID=85&ReleaseID=1326

This guy really seems to like the show.
Misa
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 12:30:46 AM: Wonder how the WB would react (minus its legal concerns) to the DS 2004 pilot being leaked on the internet like in the case with the WB's Global Frequency pilot-who's writer seems to think is not a bad thing (outside of the legal concerns) as it could lead to a release on DVD etc.... Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot and then judge the WB's decision to pass on the pilot. Whats fair is fair. Of course this is all a "what if" post.

http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,67986,00.html
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Midnite on September 06, 2005, 02:10:59 AM: Quote from: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 12:30:46 AM
Wonder how the WB would react (minus its legal concerns) to the DS 2004 pilot being leaked on the internet like in the case with the WB's Global Frequency pilot-who's writer seems to think is not a bad thing (outside of the legal concerns) as it could lead to a release on DVD etc.... Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot and then judge the WB's decision to pass on the pilot. Whats fair is fair. Of course this is all a "what if" post.

I think the answer to how they would react is in this quote from the article: "Whether the pilot was picked up or not, it is still the property of Warner Bros. Entertainment and we take the protection of all of our intellectual property seriously," said Craig Hoffman, a company spokesman. "While Warner Bros. Entertainment values feedback from consumers, copyright infringement is not a productive way to try to influence a corporate decision."

I understand you're just speculating, so this is nothing personal, but I don't see how this issue (leaking TV pilots via P2P) can be separated from any legal risks, which include injunctions, costs, damages, and even criminal sanctions. That having been said, would I pay to legally download the pilot if WB were to release it? In a New York minute. However, I think the WB execs have already shown that they can't recognize a good idea even when it's right in front of their faces. :-
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 04:06:37 AM: Quote from: Midnite on September 06, 2005, 02:10:59 AM
I think the answer to how they would react is in this quote from the article: "Whether the pilot was picked up or not, it is still the property of Warner Bros. Entertainment and we take the protection of all of our intellectual property seriously," said Craig Hoffman, a company spokesman. "While Warner Bros. Entertainment values feedback from consumers, copyright infringement is not a productive way to try to influence a corporate decision."

I understand you're just speculating, so this is nothing personal, but I don't see how this issue (leaking TV pilots via P2P) can be separated from any legal risks, which include injunctions, costs, damages, and even criminal sanctions. That having been said, would I pay to legally download the pilot if WB were to release it? In a New York minute. However, I think the WB execs have already shown that they can't recognize a good idea even when it's right in front of their faces. :-

I do agree absolutely with your position and we are on the same page. The WB first had said negative things about the pilot and more recently did a 180 and admitted it was a mistake on its part to have passed on the DS pilot. What the powers that be did with the leaking of the Global Frequency's pilot for the sole purpose of attempting to create a positive buzz was downright unethical and illegal. That being said, it will be interesting to see if the WB is persuaded by the results of the "positive" reaction to the GF pilot. Apparently, its producer is very proud of the pilot and has not given up on convincing the WB to take it as a series.
Yes the WB executives clearly do not have the ability to see a good pilot when its right before its noses. And I am talking about the DS pilot. lol
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on September 06, 2005, 10:29:08 AM: Quote from: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 12:30:46 AM
Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot...

No, the public doesn't have any right to see it. It's the property of a private corporation, and what they choose to do with it, or who they choose to show it to is entirely their call.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 11:21:09 AM: Quote from: Stuart on September 06, 2005, 10:29:08 AM
Quote from: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 12:30:46 AM
Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot...

No, the public doesn't have any right to see it. It's the property of a private corporation, and what they choose to do with it, or who they choose to show it to is entirely their call.

I would appreciate in the future if you do not take my words out of context. You are better than that. My statement was not based on a legal foundation but one on a moral basis and I used the word "perhaps". I clearly indicated in my posts in this matter that I was fully aware of the legal ramifications regarding the illegal downloading of tv pilots by someone behind the GF tv pilot. Taking someone's comments out of context to make a point is by itself unethical.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on September 06, 2005, 05:25:42 PM: Quote from: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 11:21:09 AM
I would appreciate in the future if you do not take my words out of context. You are better than that. My statement was not based on a legal foundation but one on a moral basis and I used the word "perhaps"...

Sorry, but I don't see how I have taken anything out of context. Even, taking your own clarification of arguing a "right" on a moral basis, I'm having a tough time following your logic. Each to their own, though.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 11:36:17 PM: Quote from: Stuart on September 06, 2005, 05:25:42 PM
Sorry, but I don't see how I have taken anything out of context. Even, taking your own clarification of arguing a "right" on a moral basis, I'm having a tough time following your logic. Each to their own, though.

Instead of asking me to clarify my post, you responded by taking a sentence out of the initial post and issued an authoritative-like post. Only now you are stating that you are puzzled by the statement in question. You can't have it both ways. If you had requested a clarification, I would have been happy to have offered you one. I just don't subscribe to your style of taking words out of context without requesting a clarification from the poster but as you said, "each to their own, though".
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Midnite on September 07, 2005, 01:54:56 AM: When the Quote button is clicked, a direct link to the original post is created. The purpose of this link is so that visitors can be taken to the original post should they wish to read the quote in context. In order to conserve bandwidth, it's actually preferable that posters only quote the part of the original post that s/he is responding to, and since this feature is available context needn't be an issue.

I'll add that the topic of this current discussion appears to be the right to leak pilots onto the net vs. copyright infringement. Unfortunately, the debate has become personal and that type of comment needs to be taken to private correspondence. Thanks!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: LdyAnne on September 07, 2005, 03:04:30 AM: Quote from: jimbo on September 06, 2005, 12:30:46 AM
Perhaps the public does have a right to see the DS pilot

Just my two cents

I see this issue from an artist POV. As with any great work of art the artist may want to share it with the world and let them judge its worth. But alas there are many great works of art that are held in private hands and away from the world. Do we have the right to view those masters held by private individuals. Is it morally wrong to withhold a great treasure from the world? I mearly pose these questions as an explaination from both sides. Makeing no Judgement for either. It would be ashame if the Mona Lisa were to be sold and never seen again.

LdyAnne
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mark Rainey on September 07, 2005, 04:02:34 AM: (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v665/damnedrodan/MonaLisa.jpg)

"I know I'd be bloody incensed!"
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on September 10, 2005, 02:54:28 AM: I was wondering just how unfinished was the pilot? Did it have beginning credits and music? If it had music what was it like? I know that they didn't have the correct music put in yet, but was it good anyway? I can't understand why they don't spend just a bit more to patch this up and then release it. At least then maybe they could recoup some of their money. And if it sells well maybe they might think about recasting and putting the show on the air.

Misa
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: LdyAnne on September 11, 2005, 10:57:23 PM: Quote from: Misa on September 10, 2005, 02:54:28 AM
I was wondering just how unfinished was the pilot? Did it have beginning credits and music? If it had music what was it like? I know that they didn't have the correct music put in yet, but was it good anyway? I can't understand why they don't spend just a bit more to patch this up and then release it. At least then maybe they could recoup some of their money. And if it sells well maybe they might think about recasting and putting the show on the air.

I don't recall any music or credits. I would say it was 80% complete. Some sceens needed to be reedited (the last scene was too long for effect)

LdyAnne
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on September 12, 2005, 05:18:22 AM: Thanks LdyAnne. I sure wish I could have seen it! Did they say who was responsible for getting the OK to view it at the fest?

Misa
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Fletcher on September 14, 2005, 08:42:38 PM: To those of you who've seen the pilot -- tell us about the Old House. I have read that the entir exterior was computer generated. How did it look? Can you describe it? Anything like the original Old House? How about the inside? Was it impressive? Appropriate?

During this entire discussion, there has been little talk of the sets. I'd love to hear some opinions . . .

Can you share?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on September 14, 2005, 10:45:17 PM: Quote from: Fletcher on September 14, 2005, 08:42:38 PM
To those of you who've seen the pilot -- tell us about the Old House. I have read that the entir exterior was computer generated. How did it look? Can you describe it? Anything like the original Old House?

Unfortunately, we only get a very brief glimpse of the exterior, so it would be very hard to descibe it with any detail. But it looked nothing like the Old House in the daytime series or in hoDS. It was far more elaborate and certainly not in the Greek Revival style. If anything, it reminded me more of the Lockwood-Mathews mansion, which was used as the monastery in hoDS.

Quote
How about the inside? Was it impressive? Appropriate?

The interior was also quite elaborate. In fact, one of the articles on the pilot describes it as Barnabas' "most opulent home yet."

Some of the interiors were shot at the Los Angeles Theater. Check out this topic for a link to some Web sites depicting the inside:

Quote from: Mysterious Benefactor on May 11, 2004, 11:46:18 AM
... Speaking of the LA Theater, I came across two interesting photos of the interior...

Quote
During this entire discussion, there has been little talk of the sets. I'd love to hear some opinions . . .

Can you share?

Sorry about that. I keep meaning to come back to this topic to post quite a few more opinions, but I haven't found the time as yet. :(

Speaking of which, I keep meaning to post that the pilot did indeed include background music. It didn't feature Bob Cobert tracks, though - instead music from the films Jennifer 8, Klute and Deep Red were used to what I thought was great effect.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: PennyDreadful on September 16, 2005, 01:05:45 AM: I had another question if I may... I read somewhere that Barnabas' cane and ring were either going to be eliminated, or not shown very much in the new show. Was this the case?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Barnabas'sBride on September 16, 2005, 03:51:33 PM: I don't know the answer for sure, but I don't think he had the ring or the cane in any pics. I would've been surprised to see them in the show.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on September 16, 2005, 06:00:10 PM: He did not have the cane in the pilot.

He had the ring but it wasn't dwelled on...
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: PennyDreadful on September 17, 2005, 04:12:51 AM: Thanks for the reply Darren. Hmm. IMO Barnabas without his cane is kinda like Popeye without his pipe! ;)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on September 17, 2005, 03:50:54 PM: Quote from: Mysterious Benefactor on September 14, 2005, 10:45:17 PM
[Speaking of which, I keep meaning to post that the pilot did indeed include background music... from the films Jennifer 8, Klute and Deep Red were used to what I thought was great effect.

Also "In My Place" by Coldplay is heard playing in Joe's cabin. I'd love to know what the music was playing during Carolyn's attack and David in the graveyard... very creepy and unsettling.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on September 30, 2005, 04:41:54 PM: Quote
Did everybody have to leave their cellphones in a basket at that showing? I've heard some hilarious stories about the security overkill at some of these events.

No, they weren't that bad - just the usual Fest announcement that there was no photo taking or videotaping allowed. (Though, of course, that never stops some people. ::))

Actually, they were Nazi's, even making, or rather, TRYING to make, one of the "official" Fest videographers UNPLUG and remove from the tripod, his camcorder. This was brought to Jim Pierson's attention and Jim told him to not worry about the security guys, that he was okay leaving his camera on the tripod. This videographer btw has been on the Fest Committee since it began over 20 years ago!! Some rent-a-cops think they are more important than they are. >:D
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on September 30, 2005, 05:24:33 PM: In a word, the WB pilot was AWESOME! In my humble opinion WAY better than the entire '91 series, which I frankly hated and was more than glad to see get cancelled (in fact, I think when I read in the paper NBC had cancelled it I did a jig of glee). But anyway, this new version had better casting than the '91 series (Alec Newman as Barnabas was *inspired*, he is MUCH hotter than boring, unsexy Ben Cross!) I liked that Vickie had connected brain cells that were actually capable of cognizant thought processes and that Willie had a girlfriend (he was HOTT too!). I like that they didn't re-hash HODS as the '91 show did (I swear I think NBC ripped off line by line the HODS script!).

But back to the casting, the new actors were ALL better than the '91 series, with two exceptions. Blair Brown as Liz?? Um, no, doesn't work for me! Don't get me wrong, I *like* BB, but she doesn't have the class to pull off Liz the way Joan and Jean did. They needed someone more like those two to play Liz. The other problem I had was w/Julia. Since when is an attractive Asian chick the right person to play Julia, who in my opinion should be played by a man in drag, LOL! Let's face it, Grayson was mannish, which is why, I'm sure, there are so many men dressing up as her at the Festival's costume gala! ;) I personally think the contrast between an attractive Vickie (who of course caught Barnabas' eye) and an unattractive Julia is necessary in any recreation of the classic original. I mean really, do we honestly think Barnabas WOULDN'T be attracted to this new Julia? Not unless he'd been dead for 200 years, oh, wait..............! ;)

The only other things that I think should have been redone is they needed to eliminate about 80% of the RED they had in the background of every scene! It was a bit much. Having it when Barnabas is first introduced at Collinwood was okay, but can it after that. They also should have had Angelique not scream repeatedly at Vickie at the very end, that was cartoonish and corny. One scream would have sufficed I think. Anyway, it's too bad the WB passed on this show as I would have welcomed this one more warmly than I did the '91 series. The fact that they now admit they screwed up makes you wonder why they don't call DCP and buy back the property, or is that not a realistice idea? Given all the other "out there" shows on the tube today (Charmed, Medium, Ghost Whisperer and Invasion) it no doubt would be warmly received not only from us DS fans, but newbies as well.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on September 30, 2005, 06:01:44 PM: Quote from: victoriawinters on August 06, 2005, 09:42:57 PM
Oh yes, it was the same one patrolling us during the play earlier in the afternoon. But, I liked it in the end that he was there. I thought order was a bit better kept this fest. He wasn't bad on the eyes either.

Tue, but he was a jagoff. ;)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gothick on September 30, 2005, 06:07:51 PM: Thanks for sharing those thoughts, Buzz. You and I are in agreement about the 1991 series (although I still think it deserves better the treatment being meted out to it in the forthcoming DVD release), so your comments make me all the more curious about the 2004 pilot. Of course, it is highly unlikely I will ever see the latter, but those are the breaks in that tough town called Holly Wood! *cackles*

G.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on September 30, 2005, 06:08:54 PM: The only thing that spoiled it for me was Mark Dawidziak's introduction - a very wrong-footed and idiosyncratic speech which seemed to serve little real purpose.

Quote from: Stuart on August 07, 2005, 08:22:29 PM
Yeah, that's pretty much my feelings too... It presented instances of opinion as fact, which isn't particularly helpful or necessary. It's all very well summing up with "make up your own mind", but preceding that with a bullet-point list of personal bugbears pretty much renders that null, because that's not what the audience is being invited to do at all.

Delays don't really excuse this at all. There is a big difference between introduction and instruction.

OMG Stuart! Astrid and I were ready to string that twit up! We just wanted him the shut the hell up and roll tape!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on September 30, 2005, 06:38:50 PM: Quote from: Gothick on September 30, 2005, 06:07:51 PM
Thanks for sharing those thoughts, Buzz. You and I are in agreement about the 1991 series (although I still think it deserves better the treatment being meted out to it in the forthcoming DVD release), so your comments make me all the more curious about the 2004 pilot. Of course, it is highly unlikely I will ever see the latter, but those are the breaks in that tough town called Holly Wood! *cackles*

Gothick, I strongly feel, as do many others, that they will re-show the WB pilot at the 40th anniversary Festival in Brooklin next August. So, if you can manage to get to Brooklin, you'll probably get to see it. ;)

To those suggesting a DVD release of it, I for one would be the FIRST in line to buy it!! ;D
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gothick on September 30, 2005, 07:51:56 PM: That's an interesting idea that they would roll it again for next year's Festival, Buzz. I was under the impression that it was locked away, full fathom five, with no likelihood of ever seeing the light of day again, due to legal stuff around the use of the material. but what do I know?

G.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Raineypark on October 01, 2005, 12:10:12 AM: I didn't make it to LA either, Steve, so if they DO show the pilot again in Brooklyn, 2006, you won't be the only one there who's seeing it for the first time.

I'll save you a seat..... ;)

rainey
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Heather on October 01, 2005, 12:33:28 AM: Quote from: Raineypark on October 01, 2005, 12:10:12 AM
I didn't make it to LA either, Steve, so if they DO show the pilot again in Brooklyn, 2006, you won't be the only one there who's seeing it for the first time.

Ditto...

-Heather, fest virgin who'd love to have a glance at the pilot...
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 01, 2005, 02:29:43 AM: The 2004 version is very much how I think the show should be done. I didn't like the 1991 version. This was much better. I would do some correction, of course; but this recent version was very much in the right direction, in my opinion.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Fletcher on October 01, 2005, 03:59:12 AM: Wes, tell us what you liked about the pilot. What parts did you enjoy most? Also, what parts of the pilot need some correction, in your opinion?

Since I wasn't in LA and haven't seen the pilot, I enjoy hearing the opinions of those who have. I'm sure other enjoy it too. The more details the better. LOL
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 03, 2005, 12:45:54 AM: Quote from: Fletcher on October 01, 2005, 03:59:12 AM
Wes, tell us what you liked about the pilot. What parts did you enjoy most? Also, what parts of the pilot need some correction, in your opinion?

Overall, I thought the show had style. The original had style. I liked the style, direction, and camerawork. I thought the direction very well done, despite what I heard. I thought the arrival of Barnabas shot well. The shot of Collinwood's interior and exterior were excellent. They made the house and grounds look splendid.

I believe Curtis said, while promoting the 1991 series, he wanted to update the look of Collinwood... so, that it would look as grand as it seemed, originally. That was not achieved in the 1991 series; for the 2004 show, it was realized.

I really don't like the idea of re-making DS endlessly; rather, I would take the "Next Generation" approach. Still, I liked the way the characters/script were updated. All of the opening scenes were improved. Vicki's arrival... the train ride and the station were wonderful. I thought the "cameo" man on the train would have suited Frid. he should have accepted it, but I don't blame him for passing on it... I would have, too. But, after seeing the spot, I think it would have fitted Frid's post-DS tour persona.

[spoiler]I liked Barnabas flying around the trees of Collinsporta and crawling on Collinwood's outside walls.[/spoiler]It souunds silly, but it was very well done. I thought the casting was much improved over the 1991 version. The key roles of Barnabas and Vicki worked. In the 1991 series, I liked Joanna but not Ben. I was prepared to not like a short blonde Vicki... so unlike the established character's look; but, she was Vicki.

The re-working of the Vicki character's qualifications was nice... she would need Psych training for a case like David. The updates all worked well... Willie and his girlfriend releasing Barnabas was fantastic. I'm glad they didn't play up Maggie Evans as a mistress seer of Roger's. It fit with her original concept, I suppose, but most people think of Maggie as Vicki... she pretty much took over Vicki's role before handing it over to Kate Jackson.

Of course, Moltke, KLS, or Jackson would have been a marvelous choice to play Liz. I'm not sure WB could reach an agreement with Kate; so, I can't imagine why KLS wasn't offered the part. If not those, it should have been someone in the tradition of Joan Bennett/Jean Simmons...

Blair Brown is not acceptable as Liz. Though I've praised the direction, I think something went wrong with the direction of Brown as Liz. Someone needs to be taken to the woodshed. It could be that, despite his strengths, the director needs some assistance with staying on course (the course being the integrity of DS). I think most of the pilot is workable, with Brown... but a couple things need to be re-shot, dubed, or explained (like maybe she's frazzled over Paul Stoddard, or something).

Even worse is the portrayal of Sheriff George Patterson. It's nice to see a Black actor cast on DS... but he seems like a stereotype! I'm not Black, so I shouldn't try to explain. Any African-American fans see the pilot? It seems, to me, that the role was borderline racist. I would have to look at that again... Maybe he was just supposed to be "goofy." I will guess that they wrote the Sheriff as dumb... and it just came off badly...

I liked, aslo, the casting of Kelly Hu. However, she didn't have enough airtime for me to judge anything. I thought the casting of color was a good step. It was claimed the cast was all teenagers... didn't look thgat way to me.

I thought the red hues were overdone. I guess that was going to be part of the "look." I would have minded it less if it didn't switch back from red to normal several times in the same scene. It hurts the eyes. The ending was very strange. I would have trimmed that... again, I don't favor the re-make approach, because you have the combination of Laura/Angelique, but, if they HAVE to do it that way, this was fine.

The pilot was so touted as a ROUGH cut... very rough... not airable... rough, rough, rough. WELL, it was pretty well put together for a rough cut. It was much farther along than I was led to believe. I've seen rough cuts before, and this was (if rough), the best put together "rough cut" I've ever seem. Indeed, it looked one or two steps awau from totally presentable on TV. Considering some of the garbage they show on TV presently, this "rough cut" is quite possibly Emmy-winning material -- it was a very entertaining show.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 03, 2005, 12:56:59 AM: PS

I should add one thing to the above... The show had not only style (like John Yaeger would say), but also art. It seemed, at times, like art. (The original DS seemed like art a lot of the time, too.)

Especially in the introductions of the Vicki & Barnabas characters... the train ride, train station (Vicki outside in the rain), finding Barbnabas and how [spoiler]he is revived (the drop of blood)...[/spoiler]

Later, the scenes from Barnabas' perspective as he surveys Collinsport looking for a victim. I don't want to say too much... I'm sure it will be seen, eventually, by all...

arty, but nice arty
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: PennyDreadful on October 03, 2005, 03:05:41 AM: Arty? Hmm. I like that. DS should be visually different from anything else you see on television. In a sense, Collinsport exists in its own world, just somewhat askew from the world we know. A stylized approach, reflecting the singularity of this world, makes a lot of sense for DS. IIRC, the original series used a lot of eerie green lighting, which I always thought was pretty cool.

I haven't actually seen the pilot, but my one "WTF?!" over the whole thing is:

1967 -Grayson Hall... Check
1991 -Barbara Steele... Check
2004 -Kelly Hu???... WTF?!

Dr. Hoffman should be portrayed by a classic actress with major presence. From what I've seen of Hu (X-Men 2), she doesn't fit the role at all. I suppose I could be wrong though, as I haven't seen the pilot.

Why is it that most everyone on TV nowadays, female and male, has to look like a model and have the acting ability of a dead fish? ::)

On a related note, I agree with another poster that the new Barnabas is hot. BUT could he act the role? THAT is what's most important IMO. Barnabas should be a class act, with a really nasty dark side and a dose of guilt on the side. What was all this nonsense I heard awhile back about Alec Newman being a "blue-collar Barnabas?" From what I've read here though, I take it he was quite good acting-wise?

~Penny Dreadful~
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Miss_Winthrop on October 03, 2005, 04:48:01 AM: Well since the show is not being picked up by anyone and they might show the pilot again at next year's fest, why not also show the outtakes and extra shots, interviews with the actors, behind the scenes and any other miscellaneous things that DS fans find interesting.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on October 04, 2005, 02:26:01 AM: That would be great fun if they showed any outtakes and bloopers that they might have, also any promotion if they had gotten that far, would be very interesting too.

I really have to say that I am all for the remake, rather then a next generation thing. A next generation thing wouldn't have much to go on. Unless they cast Ben Cross and the 1991 company again. I couldn't imagine Dark Shadows without Barnabas, and having a next generation show with a new actor playing Barnabas would not cut it IMO.

A new actor playing the Barnabas role in a retelling, however, is okay. The story itself is great, so why not retell it? wes you seemed to enjoy most of the Pilot, and it was a retelling. I think, too, that a next generation story of Dark Shadows wouldn't have the size of audience that Star Trek had, and as more time goes by without a nationally shown Dark Shadows the more it is going to fade into TV history.

I want my Dark Shadows.

I also think that Dark Shadows was often great story telling. So remake it, and then add new stories to it. They are constantly redoing great stories, sometimes they do it really well. Look at all of the plays that get redone.

And who would want to see the next generation of Romeo and Juliet's families, what did they do after the kids killed themselves?

I would be interested in hearing as much as possible from those here who have seen the pilot. There is a chance that the pilot may never be seen again. So, while it is fresh in everyone's mind let's hear all about it.

Misa
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 04, 2005, 02:42:25 AM: Quote from: PennyDreadful on October 03, 2005, 03:05:41 AM
1967 -Grayson Hall... Check
1991 -Barbara Steele... Check
2004 -Kelly Hu???... WTF?!

Well, you don't see enuf of Kelly's Julia to get an impression. I think the casting was interesting... could have added an element.

The casting of Grayson was interesting, too. I think that was going to be another Dr Guthrie... but, it worked out rather well...

They could have come full circle & gone back to the original Julian Hoffman. A gay doc as straight Barnabas' ally would'ive worked very well, too. There are so many possibilities with the DS property... what a loss we aren't seeing them!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 04, 2005, 02:51:12 AM: Quote from: PennyDreadful on October 03, 2005, 03:05:41 AM
Barnabas should be a class act, with a really nasty dark side and a dose of guilt on the side. What was all this nonsense I heard awhile back about Alec Newman being a "blue-collar Barnabas?"

I thought Alec was fine. I think he would have gotten better; but, that's not to imply he was bad. He played just what you said, "...a class act, with a nasty dark side and a dose of guilt..."

He portrayed the part of the "reluctant" vampire Barnabas Collins. TPTB gave him the direction and he followed perfectly... just like the producer & director said... he really did play what he was given to play. He understood direction and the part he was given. It was a fine job...

I don't know where the "blue-collar" thing comes from? He was hired for a job, which he did very well.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 04, 2005, 02:56:00 AM: Quote from: Misa on October 04, 2005, 02:26:01 AM
I really have to say that I am all for the remake, rather then a next generation thing. A next generation thing wouldn't have much to go on. Unless they cast Ben Cross and the 1991 company again. I couldn't imagine Dark Shadows without Barnabas, and having a next generation show with a new actor playing Barnabas would not cut it IMO.

I meant a "next generation thing" which would ignore the whole 1991 series! Certainly, I would have done the re-make with Barnabas. Sorry if that wasn't clear...
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Fletcher on October 04, 2005, 04:19:06 AM: My biggest concern about the casting of Kelly Hu as Julia, actually has little to do with Julia. I don't mind that Julia is Asian and exotic. In 2004, I think that could have worked perfectly well -- in my opinion , it probably would have added to the character.

But, my concern about Hu in the role actually has more to do with the time-travel/multiple role thing. What role would an Asian woman play in a 1795 aristocrastic New England household? 1840? 1897? I hope this doesn't come across as racist (that is farthest from my intent), but other than Julia, I don't believe an Asian woman could have played any of Grayson Hall's multiple roles on the show. She certainly couldn't play a French aristocrat or a gypsy. Well, she could play them, but would she be convincing?

Yes, they probably could create some new characters specifically for her in each time-period -- characters of Asian decent, but that would seem to be done more as a casting device, than a sincere need for character.

I am reminded of the original Star Trek and one of the Star Trek movies. Anytime the original crew went back in time, Spock was forced to hide or explain his physical differences in some comedic fashion. Somehow, I don't think that kind of comedy would work on DS -- once maybe, but not time after time.

On the other hand, perhaps I am getting ahead of myself. We don't even know if the producers of the 2004 DS were planning on using the "tried-and-true" multiple roles method. Perhaps they would have used an entirely different cast for each time period. Hmmm -- something to think about.

Did any of you have similar concerns concering Kelly Hu?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on October 04, 2005, 08:00:06 AM: Quote from: Fletcher on October 04, 2005, 04:19:06 AM
My biggest concern about the casting of Kelly Hu as Julia, actually has little to do with Julia.... my concern about Hu in the role actually has more to do with the time-travel/multiple role thing.

Mark Verheiden has stated he was not interested in doing the flashback sequences like the original, so it wouldn't have been an issue.

Also, for people asking about Blue Collar Barnabas - that's more an image thing than anything else, touted more in the planning stages than the execution. Accordingly, Alec Newman's first scene shot (Barnabas in Vicki's bedroom) features him with designer stubble, which disappears for the rest of the pilot. They decided afterwards that the look wasn't right, and so that scene would have been picked up and reshot had there been a series.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: FireRose on October 04, 2005, 10:58:11 AM: I have always wondered if one of the reason's it wasn't completed was that they thought it would be to difficult and expensive to do each week in the style it was being done in. From what I have heard. The special effects were elaborate and state of the art in the style that you would see in a big screen movie.

Not to leave out... I have always heard it said that Dan Curtis expects things done his way and he will not bend. It is either his way or the highway.

The fact that it was not seeming to follow what Dan Curtis saw as Dark Shadows original concept. Kinda makes one wonder if the network changed their mind or if Dan Curtis pulled the plug himself.

FireRose
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:10:38 PM: No way Curtis could have pulled the plug. It was up to the network- they licensed the rights and paid Curtis and provided the budget for the pilot...

That'd be like the cabbage deciding to sell the refrigerator because it didn't like sitting next to the eggs and tomatoes.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Raineypark on October 04, 2005, 09:14:20 PM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:10:38 PM
That'd be like the cabbage deciding to sell the refrigerator because it didn't like sitting next to the eggs and tomatoes.
[lghy] [laughing4] [stfl]
Brilliant!!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:19:31 PM: Showing outtakes would be a major faux pas and would get the fest runners in deep trouble with several actors and creative people's lawyers. That kind of thing has to be approved by the talent and it would make the network look bad for not protecting the talent, so there would be network repercussions also.

It's unknown how far the Eletronic Press Kit presentation (with interviews etc. that were shot on the 'Old House' interior set at the LA Theater) got in the production chain and whether they were actually edited together into anything presentable. (At that time Hu and Roberts weren't hired yet so they wouldn't have recorded interviews either.)

That said, all that material is vaulted at Warners and it'll be a cold day in hell before you'll see that material released or shown at a fest.

If TPTB decide that the pilot should be released on DVD (and that in itself would be a miracle unparalleled) then they'd probably make use of those bonus interviews.

I'd love to see them, but I don't think you'll be seeing them any time soon.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Josette on October 04, 2005, 09:30:42 PM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:19:31 PM
That said, all that material is vaulted at Warners and it'll be a cold day in hell before you'll see that material released or shown at a fest.

I would think they would realize what a pre-existing audience they have for it. Since they spent all lthe money to make it, with it coming to nothing, it would seem reasonable for them to capitalize on it and issue the DVD. Perhaps someone should start a campaign to let them know how interested we are in seeing it.

Edit - perhap I should clarify that I'm talking about a DVD of the main show, although, I assume if they did that some of these other materials would be included.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:35:52 PM: I completely disagree that Michael Roberts' Sheriff Patterson was in any way racist in any way shape or form.

I didn't find him bumbling at all. I found him a warm, friendly hometown Sheriff, a wonderful contrast to the cold stiff portrayal by Michael Cavanaugh in the 91 series.

For the Sheriff who is destined to be an antagonist to Barnabas, making him disarmingly friendly and likable would do wonders down the line to create real drama. If you have two characters who your audience is invested in and you have them trying to kill each other it can become unbearably tense, and wonderfully gripping.

I didn't find him stupid at all, just a nervous laugh at what he thought was a ridiculous, out of left field suggestion, (Carolyn being bitten by a person for their blood) and his disturbed reaction to Kelly's body having the same marks later on gave the audience an appreciative frisson as we could feel him and Julia would be investigating it further, in the traditional, "Watson, the game's afoot" type way.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Fletcher on October 04, 2005, 10:51:35 PM: My interpretation Verheiden's comments regarding the "time travel" issue, is that he said he "preferred" not to handle the telling of Barnabas's history through time travel, but that Curtis was still pushing for it to be handled in his traditional way. So, it seemed to me that this decicision was still up in the air. Perhaps I misinterpretted.

Also, I seem to remember some interview with somebody (Verheiden?), where it was suggested they might tell Barnabas's history through memories and flashbacks, rather than actually having someone (Vicki) go back in time. Had this been the case, then the casting concerns remain.

Additionally, even if they had told the entire initial (Barnabas/vampire) storyline without any flashbacks, memories, or time travel, they would have moved on to other story-arcs (Quentin for instance) where this decision would need to be pondered again.

Somehow, I can't imagaine a successful incarnation of Dark Shadows with no time travel stories, EVER. Especially if the show had been successful and ran for seven or eight years.

As I mentioned, I could be wrong about this. Just my interpretation of what I have heard and read. And admittedly, the information flow was sketchy.

So, I guess my point is -- I would still be concerned (for the same reasons) about Hu's casting.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: FireRose on October 05, 2005, 12:06:55 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:10:38 PM
No way Curtis could have pulled the plug. It was up to the network- they licensed the rights and paid Curtis and provided the budget for the pilot...

That'd be like the cabbage deciding to sell the refrigerator because it didn't like sitting next to the eggs and tomatoes.

Depends on whether the contract they had was completely decided upon are an open ended contract.

Quote from: Fletcher on October 04, 2005, 10:51:35 PM
My interpretation Verheiden's comments regarding the "time travel" issue, is that he said he "preferred" not to handle the telling of Barnabas's history through time travel, but that Curtis was still pushing for it to be handled in his traditional way. So, it seemed to me that this decicision was still up in the air. Perhaps I misinterpretted.

See I also got this same impression that Dan Curtis wasn't going to let his original concept of the show be done away with.

If it was an open ended contract. Then Dan Curtis could still have been the one to cause the show not to be picked up due to his ideas and the networks ideas not meshing together. It could have been creative differences at work. So technically Dan Curtis could still have been involved in the plug being pulled.

FireRose
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on October 05, 2005, 12:12:40 AM: Quote from: wes on October 04, 2005, 02:56:00 AM
Quote from: Misa on October 04, 2005, 02:26:01 AM
I really have to say that I am all for the remake, rather then a next generation thing. A next generation thing wouldn't have much to go on. Unless they cast Ben Cross and the 1991 company again. I couldn't imagine Dark Shadows without Barnabas, and having a next generation show with a new actor playing Barnabas would not cut it IMO.

I meant a "next generation thing" which would ignore the whole 1991 series! Certainly, I would have done the re-make with Barnabas. Sorry if that wasn't clear...

Okay, but who would play Barnabas? Someone who sort of looks like Jonathan Frid? Someone with a possible different look? How about the other characters?

If you had never seen Dark Shadows, how are the writers to make these characters interesting to you? As a continuing story you have to know what is being continued. These character might be interesting to those of us who have already seen Dark Shadows, but for new viewers how are the writers to hook them?
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 12:48:59 AM: Quote
See I also got this same impression that Dan Curtis wasn't going to let his original concept of the show be done away with.

If it was an open ended contract. Then Dan Curtis could still have been the one to cause the show not to be picked up due to his ideas and the networks ideas not meshing together. It could have been creative differences at work. So technically Dan Curtis could still have been involved in the plug being pulled.

FireRose

Is it possible that a producer could have made such a deal. Absolutely.
All kinds of deals are made everyday in Hollywood, but you've got to have real clout to ask for that which he doesn't and didn't have. Also, even if he wanted to cancel the show purely because he didn't like it, he'd have to be a complete rube. Who would toss away the possibility of millions of dollars of revenue from a prime time television show out of 'good taste'?

Certainly not Curtis.

Curtis is a producer first and foremost and making money is his primary concern.

Anyhow, I'm not speculating. I'm telling you exactly how it is from what I know.

Curtis had no power in the decision to kill the potential new DS series. Neither did Verheiden. It was all on the network execs. While Wells could have campaigned within the WB to re-film or re-work the pilot, according to Garth Ancier he didn't. (That said, Ancier's quotes have proved a bit foggy in relation to the truth so how true that last is is up to speculation.)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 01:18:25 AM: Sorry if these make me come off like a know-it-all. 8)

I'm not trying to do that at all. I was luckily at a unique viewpoint during the pilot production and simply want to give you guys a better view of the processes, the thinking and what actually went on. :o

Without getting into to much trouble, of course. ;)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 05, 2005, 02:15:56 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 01:18:25 AM
Sorry if these make me come off like a know-it-all.

Not at all. There's a difference between someone who's showing off and someone who's simply sharing facts. Your posts fall into the latter category. :)

Quote
I was luckily at a unique viewpoint during the pilot production and simply want to give you guys a better view of the processes, the thinking and what actually went on.

Without getting into to much trouble, of course.

And it's much appreciated. ;)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on October 05, 2005, 02:40:45 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:35:52 PM
I completely disagree that Michael Roberts' Sheriff Patterson was in any way racist in any way shape or form.

Agreed... It's no more valid than saying Roger is a racist reflection on the white community. I liked the pilot's take on the role a great deal - he projects unquestionable decency and intregrity, but is clearly massively out of his depth. Patterson in the 1991 show was a total cypher and a thankless role. You don't get any sense of who he is, whether he has family, friends - anything!?! The 2004 Patterson gives the audience so much more - I get a real sense of a wife-and-kids guy driven by rugged values, who's never had to question any of his outlooks or beliefs... until now.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 05, 2005, 03:23:11 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:35:52 PM
I completely disagree that Michael Roberts' Sheriff Patterson was in any way racist in any way shape or form.

I didn't find him bumbling at all. I found him a warm, friendly hometown Sheriff, a wonderful contrast to the cold stiff portrayal by Michael Cavanaugh in the 91 series.

For the Sheriff who is destined to be an antagonist to Barnabas, making him disarmingly friendly and likable would do wonders down the line to create real drama. If you have two characters who your audience is invested in and you have them trying to kill each other it can become unbearably tense, and wonderfully gripping.

I didn't find him stupid at all, just a nervous laugh at what he thought was a ridiculous, out of left field suggestion, (Carolyn being bitten by a person for their blood) and his disturbed reaction to Kelly's body having the same marks later on gave the audience an appreciative frisson as we could feel him and Julia would be investigating it further, in the traditional, "Watson, the game's afoot" type way.

It's interesting to hear your take on the 2004 Sheriff -- I was very glad to see a Black actor as Patterson... then wondered if they were making him "comic relief." I got the impression, perhaps wrongly, that Patterson was ridiculous. I would have to see the pilot again, but can see your points/description (...the game's afoot") as a reasonable take on the character. Still, I would have made some different character/casting choices... and those decisions are not mine to make.

I agree about the 1991 Sheriff. The actor can be wonderful... I just didn't like Patterson played that way. I like the Dana Elcar model.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 05, 2005, 03:46:25 AM: Quote from: Fletcher on October 04, 2005, 10:51:35 PM
Also, I seem to remember some interview with somebody (Verheiden?), where it was suggested they might tell Barnabas's history through memories and flashbacks, rather than actually having someone (Vicki) go back in time. Had this been the case, then the casting concerns remain.

So, I guess my point is -- I would still be concerned (for the same reasons) about Hu's casting.

I am only GUESSING, but I don't think Hu would be playing a Natalie duPres role. They could create an "exotic companion-to-Josette character" for Hu to play. The character could be re-written for another actor, in my opinion. There is no need to follow original casting patters, either; someone else could play Natalie.

I think they would have done the flashback, but differently.

I wish there was more of Kelly as Julia to judge. She doesn't have much to do... She doesn't stand-out as either "the bomb" or "a bomb."
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 05, 2005, 04:05:47 AM: Quote from: Misa on October 05, 2005, 12:12:40 AM

Okay, but who would play Barnabas? Someone who sort of looks like Jonathan Frid? Someone with a possible different look? How about the other characters?

If you had never seen Dark Shadows, how are the writers to make these characters interesting to you? As a continuing story you have to know what is being continued. These character might be interesting to those of us who have already seen Dark Shadows, but for new viewers how are the writers to hook them?

I would have had a grown-up David "return" to Collinwood with his new wife (a Vicki-type character. David's first wife is thought to have died mysteriously). The new Mrs. Collins must become an instant mom to a troubled tyke... Naturally, mysteries ensue...

I would have recast the "immortals": Barnabas, Angelique, Quentin... they could be "lookalikes" as you suggest, or not. I don't think an actor HAS to look like the prior role player. Some of the original cast could play their roles... Nancy Barrett as a Liz-type, etc...

That being said... I still liked the 2004 pilot.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: wes on October 05, 2005, 04:14:16 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 01:18:25 AM
Sorry if these make me come off like a know-it-all.

That's not the impression I got.

Anyway, the more you know, the better!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: FireRose on October 05, 2005, 07:25:15 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 01:18:25 AM
Sorry if these make me come off like a know-it-all. 8)

I'm not trying to do that at all. I was luckily at a unique viewpoint during the pilot production and simply want to give you guys a better view of the processes, the thinking and what actually went on. :o

Without getting into to much trouble, of course. ;)

I don't think you are a know it all. It just seems that there is abit more going on in the background than TPTB are revealing. I understand what you are saying. But I would love to have read the contract Dan Curtis and the WB signed. I can't quite figure out why they didn't at least complete it since they were so close to completion. It is abit interesting that they went as far as they did and then decided we no longer want it. Did Dan Curtis bring it to the WB as an idea for a remake or did the WB contact him? Just curious.

FireRose
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 05, 2005, 04:25:03 PM: Quote from: FireRose on October 05, 2005, 07:25:15 AM
Did Dan Curtis bring it to the WB as an idea for a remake or did the WB contact him? Just curious.

Neither, actually. It's my understanding that John Wells approached DC about redoing DS, and when DC agreed, Wells pitched it to the WB.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on October 05, 2005, 06:25:49 PM: Quote from: wes on October 04, 2005, 02:42:25 AM
A gay doc as straight Barnabas' ally would'ive worked very well, too. There are so many possibilities with the DS property... what a loss we aren't seeing them!

Now THAT would have been very interesting! I would have liked seeing how 18th century Barnabas dealt w/the issue of homosexuality in the 21st century. That could have been very interesting indeed! :)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on October 05, 2005, 07:00:13 PM: Quote from: wes on October 03, 2005, 12:45:54 AM
I really don't like the idea of re-making DS endlessly; rather, I would take the "Next Generation" approach.

I feel the same way basically, let's see something NEW! Having said that, I do agree w/the poster who said unless one is a DS fan like we are from the get go, how do you hook a new audience. I must say, if they MUST do yet another re-make, this was the way to do it!!

I really hope they show it again at the Fest in Brooklyn next August as I'd like to see it again and also would like others who weren't in LA to have the opportunity to see it. It really should be shared. ;)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on October 05, 2005, 07:05:38 PM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 01:18:25 AM
Sorry if these make me come off like a know-it-all. 8)

I'm not trying to do that at all. I was luckily at a unique viewpoint during the pilot production and simply want to give you guys a better view of the processes, the thinking and what actually went on. :o

Without getting into to much trouble, of course. ;)

I am pretty sure 99% of the cousins here are thrilled to have you inform us on the behind the scenes stuff to bring a touch of reality to all of the speculating we do. Having you provide us with confirmed information enhances this board and separates us fom other discussion boards. I am sure the people here are very appreciative anytime you provide us with DS information. I know I do. Thanks. Jim
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: PennyDreadful on October 05, 2005, 07:39:48 PM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 01:18:25 AM
Sorry if these make me come off like a know-it-all.

Not at all. I really enjoy reading your very informative posts.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 10:39:29 PM: Quote from: jimbo on October 05, 2005, 07:05:38 PM
I am pretty sure 99% of the cousins here are thrilled to have you inform us on the behind the scenes stuff to bring a touch of reality to all of the speculating we do.of reality to all of the speculating we do.

Only 99%?! :o

I won't live until I've converted that last 1%! ;D
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on October 06, 2005, 12:22:13 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 05, 2005, 10:39:29 PM
Only 99%?! :o

I won't live until I've converted that last 1%! ;D

Well as the song goes ,"You can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself". lol
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Fletcher on October 06, 2005, 10:44:30 PM: Is it true that, in the 2004 pilot, the Old House appears larger and more opulent than Collinwood? And if so, was this explained in any way?

Also, how far did Barnabas get with his renovation of the Old House, within the one-hour pilot?

How would you describe the exterior shots of the Old House?

I guess those of us who haven't seen the pilot, are curious about these sorts of details. Thanks
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Stuart on October 14, 2005, 10:33:17 AM: Quote from: Fletcher on October 06, 2005, 10:44:30 PM
Is it true that, in the 2004 pilot, the Old House appears larger and more opulent than Collinwood? And if so, was this explained in any way?

Collinwood looks much bigger in the episode - the exterior is digitally extended in a couple of shots and we see several rooms along the way. The Old House we see a little of - mainly a large reception hall and staircase and Josette's room. It doesn't necessarily look more opulent - it looks more European, though, with a Renaissance vibe running through the decor; Collinwood has more of a manor house feel. The Old House exterior is based on a French chateau, and is much smaller than the main mansion.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Misa on October 14, 2005, 09:50:28 PM: Thanks so much for the discription of the Old House Stuart. I wish that I'd been able to be at the fest to see the pilot. I agree with Fletcher that those of us who haven't seen the pilot thirst after every thing we can get in way of information about it. So would everyone who saw it please give in depth, their feelings and observations about it?

Thanks,
Misa
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Raineypark on October 14, 2005, 10:10:56 PM: Personally, I'd rather go on hoping against hope that it's going to be shown again at the 2006 Fest and that I'll be there to see it, and judge for myself.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on October 14, 2005, 11:37:00 PM: I looked through my architecture books, and the house that I came across that people might be most familiar with that came closest to resembling what the Old House looked like is Biltmore, located in Asheville, North Carolina:

(http://www.dsboards.com/images/Biltmore.jpg)

The Old House wasn't anywhere near on the grand scale that Biltmore is, but it was all very much spires and pinnacles.

As for the pilot being shown again at the 40th Fest, I really hope it will be. I'd love to get the chance to see it again - and I'd especially like to see other fans get the opportunity to see it because it really should be seen by as many fans as possible. But according to Shadowgram Update #138's DS Fest "Hollywood Weekend" Report: "The 2004 DS pilot for the WB was shown in an exclusive one-time-only screening." I suppose all we can do is hope that something can and will be worked out to show it again...
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Patti Feinberg on October 15, 2005, 01:22:01 AM: quote from MB
Quote
I looked through my architecture books, and the house that I came across that people might be most familiar with that came closest to resembling what the Old House looked like is Biltmore, located in Asheville, North Carolina:

uh....nice digs...

Patti...who wouldn't want to have to keep that house clean!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: BuzzH on October 17, 2005, 03:21:21 PM: Quote from: Mysterious Benefactor on October 14, 2005, 11:37:00 PM
As for the pilot being shown again at the 40th Fest, I really hope it will be. I'd love to get the chance to see it again - and I'd especially like to see other fans get the opportunity to see it because it really should be seen by as many fans as possible. But according to Shadowgram Update #138's DS Fest "Hollywood Weekend" Report: "The 2004 DS pilot for the WB was shown in an exclusive one-time-only screening." I suppose all we can do is hope that something can and will be worked out to show it again...

Don't believe everything you read in Shadowgram. [hall2_wink] I have a sneaking suspician they WILL show it again, since it's the 40th anniversary and everything.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Taeylor Collins on August 26, 2008, 02:21:12 AM: Quote from: Darren Gross on October 04, 2005, 09:10:38 PM
That'd be like the cabbage deciding to sell the refrigerator because it didn't like sitting next to the eggs and tomatoes.

That has got to be the funniest shit I have ever heard in my life. ROFLMAO. DYING OVER HERE. Great Darren. Simply genious!!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Taeylor Collins on August 26, 2008, 02:44:47 AM: Reading all this about the 2004 pilot is quite saddening. Thankfully I have the Depp movie to look forward too. NEVERTHELESS, I STILL want to see the pilot as I followed it fervently and was beyond consolable when it wasn't picked up. OVER IT for the whole 2004-2005 season!
Title: Re: hoDS/NoDS DVD Release?
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on March 01, 2010, 03:59:47 PM: Quote from: B.Collins on March 01, 2010, 10:30:18 AM
i hope they'd put the remake pilot on it as well as a bonus.

Just recently I was rereading an article about the '04 pilot, and it makes it seem as if ever seeing the '04 pilot released is highly unlikely. The pilot's producer/writer Mark Verheiden is quoted as saying, "Since the editing was never finished, more money would have to be spent to polish it and fix the FX. In addition, the cost to use the temp track music would be incredibly cost-prohibitive, so it would need to be replaced with library music or a cheap new score. After spending $5.5 million for the pilot, it's highly doubtful the studio will 'throw bad money after good.'"

True, Verheiden made those remarks six years ago, so things could change. But given today's economy, it seems more likely that they've changed for the worse and not the better, so it seems even less likely that the studio would be willing to spend money on fixing the pilot...
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: jimbo on March 01, 2010, 04:53:11 PM: I don't remember why they had to use an expensive temp track when they could have used Dark Shadows tracks previously used and very available? Doesn't DCP own some of the rights to the music? The also failed Lost In Space WB pilot filmed in the same year made its way to the public domain although it seems more polished and complete. This is from Youtube probably taken from a bootleg. Just wondering if people here would want to see the 2004 DS pilot in this type of poor quality on Youtube or not see it at all?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAT4tjjzOCk&feature=related
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gothick on March 01, 2010, 05:15:43 PM: Having seen the unreleased pilot--it's not like some fabulous gem to swoon over or anything. Mostly what it is, is an unfulfilled promise. There are a couple of good scenes in it, and the Scots actor who played Barnabas (Alec Newman???) was brilliant, and the guy who played Willie had a tousled sexiness that was alluring (Matt Czuchny??? my short term memory is in tatters now). I absolutely hated the ending (apologies to those who loved it) because it was so corny, dumb, and typical WB crapola--but for those who like that sort of thing...

I really can't believe they spent five million dollars (plus) on it--cha ching, cha ching cha ching--not much of the money shows up on screen...

G.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: frank b on March 01, 2010, 05:36:06 PM: For the life of me, I can't imagine why they would want to fix up and release the 2004 pilot, a show that never made it on the air, and that doesn't stand alone as its own movie. I've seen it shown at the festivals. Since the show never continued, the pilot is a mere curiosity to DS fans, not a marketable product.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on March 01, 2010, 06:50:12 PM: I love what they accomplished with the WB pilot, but something we tend to forget is that it's just a rough cut - it's not polished. There's two primary reasons for that: 1) it was going over budget, and 2) postproduction was ceased before it could be completed. It's common practice to use a temp music track while editing (which is why the pilot feature already existing music cues from Jennifer 8, Klute, and Deep Red) and time simply ran out before an original score could be done. Time also ran out before all the CGI sequences could be completed (about 80% of them were done - and there are simply place holders where the CGI is missing) and all the scenes could have been edited to where they wanted them. One of the scenes that was not completely edited was the scene at the end.

Sometimes we also forget that a pilot is designed to show the networks what a show could be and where it could go. It's not necessarily supposed to be perfect, which is why many pilots (at least as shown to the networks) are never shown on the air and many are actually reshot.
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Taeylor Collins on March 01, 2010, 11:07:00 PM: Well I would love to see it as is! Even if I get to the festival I would like to have the pilot on DVD perhaps as bonus. I am one of those people who likes all of the DS interpretations. According to the Fangoria article as MB said the ending wouldn't have ended up being like it was presented! As for the WB churning out crapola I guess it's a matter of taste. I would have been bored if is wasn't for the WB the last decade! It still saddens me that this wasn't reworked and made into a series. As I have said before I am really excited about the movie. However a series (as we know) can delve so much deeper! My thoughts perhaps may change after seeing it but I have read so much about it I feel like I know the pilot. I liked a lot of the chances that were taken with casting a blonde Victoria, a Asian and beautiful Julia and African American Sheriff Patterson! Just my two cents!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Mysterious Benefactor on March 01, 2010, 11:56:40 PM: Quote from: Taeylor Collins on March 01, 2010, 11:07:00 PM
Well I would love to see it as is!

Don't get me wrong. As reading the comments I'd posted in this topic in '05 after having seen it show, I believe the pilot is definitely well worth seeing. In fact, parts of it are amazing. [thumb] It's just that, barring some sort of miracle, the likelihood of it ever being "officially" released to the public would seem slim. :(
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Taeylor Collins on March 02, 2010, 01:44:22 AM: I gotcha MB! My luck they will quit showing it at the fests! I am so suprised it has never leaked. Somebody has it under lock and key for sure!
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Gerard on March 02, 2010, 02:23:01 AM: Since it's highly unlikely that the pilot will ever enter the public domain (like the LIS pilot), can somebody maybe give a detailed synopsis of it? Obviously, the overwhelming majority of us will never see it, so it certainly wouldn't be a spoiler. And even if it was made available, most of us, even after knowing the plot, would like to see it anyway.

Gerard
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Taeylor Collins on March 02, 2010, 02:53:44 AM: I actually think if you look back through this thread u will find what you are looking for! :)
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: Zahir on July 18, 2010, 06:53:52 PM: Revisiting this topic here:
Quote from: Zahir on July 18, 2010, 07:00:41 PM
WB 2004 Pilot Redux
Title: Re: The 2004 WB Pilot
Post by: B.Collins on July 20, 2010, 10:12:49 AM: 1stly it's been awhile since i last popped up in here. so my apologies for being away so long. i accidently deleted the bookmark awhile back. plus i didn't have a computer for quite a long time. anyways, so 2ndly they have the "Lost In Space" pilot on You tube? i've gotta watch that tomorrow IF it's still there!

that's my favorite show of ALL time. "DS" is my 2nd favorite show of all time. anyways, i still have yet to see the DS pilot though. maybe someday. by the time i make it to a convention the entire cast & crew will prolly be passed on unfortunally.

so i hope it won't be THAT long from me. oh well anyways, i was just reading on the discussion Boards on 'IMDB" & people were talking about the johny Depp film & all that. since this thread isn't about that film i don't need to ramble on what was said. my point is it got me thinking about this site. & it said which i did forget about was about the original show, they are going to repackage it? how ? i didn't see a thread here about it so i ask here, it's also 5 am & i came home from work not to long ago so i'm a bit tired & that's why i didn't start a new thread. my point in asking about that in this thread is simply this,

i noticed someone posted my talk about this thread on another thread. which i found quite funny since i haven't been here for awhile. anyways, also reading this thread it got me wondering if they are going to repackage them for some reason?
if anyone knew if the pilot that is talked about in this thread is perhaps going to be on it? anyways thanxs for your help ahead of time. & i hope to talk to you all soon. i have to go to bed you see. so nite for now.