Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Gerard

1771
I'm always surprised at how anal retentive DCP or MCI or Mr. Pierson are at anyone using DS material when it comes to money, money, money.  Again, one would think they would be more receptive to anything (within limits, I do realize, but give us a break) that garners more publicity for DS and thus will bring in more money for the franchise at no expense to the franchise.  This is a scholarly book designed for a limited public usage (including in universities and colleges with a dramatics department).  Neither the author nor the university publishing it will make much in the way of a profit.  I have friends who are university professors and who have written text books that are used across the nation in universities in their field.  How much, on an average, are they paid for often years of hard work?  Around $500.  They spend more doing research and in the end it comes out as a loss.  University publishing arms generally make little in profit (which is used to fund education) and some just make a wash.  Sorry for my French here, but it's about time that DCP/MCI/Pierson gets the stick out of their butt and  realizes that they can only make money off the DS franchise if more exposure is given to it, at the expense of others, including fans.  It costs DCP/MCI nothing for this publicity and it can only garner profit for future fans.  If it wasn't for the fans who dished out of their own pockets, would DCP/MCI now be seeing a possible major motion picture, that can bring in hundreds-of-millions in profit to them?  If I could afford it, I'd buy the book and if it doesn't make a dollar for DCP/MCI/Pierson, that would make it all worth it.  People need to take that stick our of their butts (sorry for my French again) and whack them up the side of their heads with it.  I know that there are people (including here), who will defend the "rights" of DCP/MCI/Pierson and say "the law is on their side," but I have no sympathy for any corporation that has garnished millions of dollars because of fans, and then cries when it can't get a paltry couple thousand from them.

Gerard

1772
Julia:  "Barnabas, just swallow your pride already and pay the electric bill!"

1773
...because I was using some superglue to fix the wolf's head on my cane and, well, do you have any nail-polish remover in your purse?

1774
Happy birthday, Annie!  You're such a wonderful person!  Hope it's been a good one!

Gerard

1775
The main problem, of course, is that Barnabas, Julia and Eliot radically changed history.  Originally, Edith's (and, hence, Gabriel's) children were the heirs, but now it's Quentin I's son, Tad, who has become the heir and all future generations would be passed down through that lineage.  Therefore, no Elizabeth or Roger, Carolyn or David (at least living in Collinwood).  When I did my Charles-Delaware-Trollish version of continuing the series, I did just that:  when Barnabas, Julia and Eliot return to the present day (1971), they find an entirely different Collins family living there.  Whoopsadasie!  Now how do they get out of that pickle?  (And the subplot dealt with another problem:  Barnabas used the I-Ching to travel to the past, sending his astral-self to 1840 to possess his own body.  He returned to the present in that body.  So what happened to his body sitting in a comatose spell?  Won't there be two of them back in '71?  Another uh-oh.)  But in true DS spirit, I managed to get them out of another fine mess they got themselves into.

Gerard

1776
Current Talk '11 I / Re: How to explain 1840 Angelique...?
« on: January 30, 2011, 10:42:33 PM »
But, of course, I doubt anyone would have seriously thought that 1841 would have ever been the last of her, so her return in 1971 wouldn't have exactly come as a complete shock to anyone.  [wink2]

I think I mentioned this somewhere before.  When I did my own Charles-Delaware-Trollish of what-happened-if-the-series-continued schtick, in a plot-line, the warp to present-day parallel time reopens and Barnabas sees Angelique there, frightened and confused, trying to hide and he crosses over to rescue her and bring her back.  He discovers that, because of her human sacrifice of herself in 1841, this time the demonic forces don't resurrect her, but angelic forces.  However, her "purgatory" was to be sent to parallel time along with the promise she would never use her powers again (they remain dormant, as a "test" for her - does she ever use them again? - maybe, maybe not in one of my other plotlines).  Anyway, while she's trapped there, she is in hiding because the survivors from parallel time (primarily Quentin and Maggie) think she's their Angelique and hunt for her.  The subplot invoves Quentin and Maggie, living in the former Loomis House (since Collinwood was burned and the ruins were razed to the ground), at each other's throats, both telling the returned Baranbas (who also manages to convince them that his Angelique is not their Angelique) that they are trying to gaslight each other to the point of murder.  It turns out that it was actually the emotionally-distrubed Daniel who was doing it, traumatized by what happened to his mother and blaming his father and step-mother.  And Roxeanne, thrilled to see her Barnabas back again, is thrown in for good measure.  Anyway, all is resolved, Daniel is packed off to Wyndliffe, Quentin and Maggie are reconciled, and Barnabas and Angelique return to their own time (with Roxeanne vowing she will somehow find her Barnabas again - another later plotline?).

Gerard

1777
Current Talk '11 I / Re: How to explain 1840 Angelique...?
« on: January 30, 2011, 10:23:48 PM »
Or, instead of killing Roger off if he found out about Barnabas (because Mr. Edmonds wanted to leave the series), they could've just had him go bleeblableebla and pack him off to Wyndcliffe in the hopes that Mr. Edmonds would change his mind down the road.  They could've even brought up his name every once in awhile, such as when Julia has to go back there to do some work, or when Elizabeth went to visit him with a bundt cake.

But, anyway, back to on-topic about Angie-Baby.  I still think that after Barnabas gave her the pushing-daises in 1796, she was resurrected and would secretly return to Collinsport every few years or so to check on her handiwork (the 1840 storyline said she did).  In 1968, she made her return visit only to discover Barnabas not only released but cured, so she stopped off at a hair salon in Bangor, got a new colored-and-permed do, and plotted how to get herself back into the Collins family so she could practice more mischief.  Of course, being a super-powered witch, she didn't age.  Rumor has it that Joan Rivers even consulted her.

Gerard

1778
I strongly suspect that someone saw this topic here or similar ones and/or articles on other Web sites and informed someone connected with the Curtis estate.

Zooo, zomeone here is zee mole, eh?  Now, who could it be?  Letz zee.  Hmmmmm.  You all look zo zuzpeezhoiuz.  Well, I think...oui...yez, zat's it!  It eez none other than..................da-da-da-DAAAAAAAA!

Gerard

1779
Current Talk '11 I / Re: Laura The Phoenix --Your Thoughts?
« on: January 28, 2011, 04:18:32 PM »
I, too loved the Laura storyline, from its plot to writing to acting.  Diana Millay was so good, especially when she took her characteristic defensive posture:  head held up, eyes looking down, mouth closed tightly while speaking but with that smirky grin.  But I have to add that my favorite Diana Millay scene wasn't from the present-day Phoenix story, but from the 1897 one, where she and hubby Edward verbally duke it out over who was the bad parent.

Gerard

1780
I just don't get the corporate mind.  Yes, of course, DCP is well within its legal rights to go after anyone and anything that it considers an "infringement" upon its material.  But, for crying out loud, get the stick out of the patoot.  These were fans that were creatively giving another tribute to the company and its work and wasn't making a penny of money from it.  This is something called free publicity.  It not only keeps current and long-time fans interested (and thus making them want to go out and buy more DCP products) but opens the market up to possible first-timers who will then check out the "real thing" and purchase DCP stuff and at no cost whatsoever to the business.  And whatever happened to "imitation is the highest form of flattery?"  Exactly what is in the heads of the DCP heads?  If you want to keep and gain customers, treat them right; if you want to lose them, treat them like criminals.  Does DCP have a full-time member on its staff that does nothing but google "Dark Shadows" all day long looking for stuff so it can go after them with threats?

Gerard

1781
Current Talk '11 I / Re: Collinsport Must Be Colder Than...
« on: January 25, 2011, 12:02:53 PM »
It never got very cold in Collinsport, even in the dead of winter.  That's because it was situated on a craggy peninsula of Maine where the Gulf Stream took a sharp turn inward with its warm waters.  We know that for a fact because no matter what time of the year it was, it was always thunderstorming there.

Well, somebody had to try to explain it!  You didn't expect Dan Curtis to do it, did you?

Gerard

1782
Current Talk '11 I / Re: How to explain 1840 Angelique...?
« on: January 23, 2011, 10:36:07 PM »
DS did create paradox problems with travelling through, and altering, time, but here's my take on the whole thing regarding Angelique.

Original timeline:  1795/96, curses Barnabas, is killed by him, but because she is a powerful witch she does have a semi-immortality and is quickly resurrected; she leaves Collinsport for other parts of the world, creating Endora-ish mischief here and there, but sneaks back to Collinsport every once in awhile to check on her previous "work" and, finding Barnabas still in his coffin, she goes back to harassing Samantha and Durwood; in 1968 during her latest sneak-back, she discovers that Barnabas has been released and is cured so, to restore her curse, she disguises herself as Sarina, I mean Cassandra.  When all that fails, she temporarily is punished by Diabolos and then allowed to go on her way but she decides to keep a wide berth away from the Collinses.

First changed timeline:  see above until you get to 1897; Barnabas has gone back in time and Quentin, along with his shifty lawyer, cast that spell to bring forth someone to help in their battle against Barnabas and guess who they get?  Why her?  She probably wasn't planning to do one of sneak returns that particular year; she was probably somewhere else with Hexaba but the strength of the spell grabbed her, maybe because of her relationship with Barnabas.  After everything is resolved, she goes on her way.  But does she still can't stay away forever so, seventy years later, she still pulls her Cassandra schtick.  But then, seeing how everything she did because of her obsession with Barnabas always backfires, she decides, this time for sure, to stay away and get herself a new lifestyle, so she decides to play mortal and ends up dating and marrying a total bore named Skye.

Second changed timeline:  everything from 1796 up to 1840 - she sneaks back to check on Barnabas only to discover, because he's gone back in time again, that he ain't in the coffin.  When, in 1841, she's turned totally mortal, she, well, we all know what happened to her.  Back in 1971, she no longer exists.  Or does she?

Gerard

1783
Calendar Events / Announcements '11 I / Re: OT The Invaders
« on: January 21, 2011, 11:20:20 PM »
I know in my neighborhood, Gothick, all us kids watched and loved both LIS and DS (and like I said, we would "play" both).  One of my best friends had a playhouse, a rather sizeable, one-room structure his dad had built on a solid foundation, and it would serve as both the Jupiter 2 and Collinwood.

And don't forget the LIS-DS connection:  Dennis Patrick.

Gerard

1784
I am one of the few who enjoyed the Leviathan story line during its initial run.  The only thing that disappointed me was never seeing the monster (and you know how kids are about seeing monsters).  The plot I didn't like in the least bit was the Adam schtick (although I liked the dream curse subplot), but I stuck through it and was not only grateful when it ended, but became enamored by the Quentin haunting story.

Gerard

1785
The webseries is really good and a lotta fun!  It's interesting that they intend to use totally different actors/actresses to perform the 1795 characters (I imagine save Barnabas [and Vicki, if they go that sent-back-in-time route]), rather than using the ones doing the current-day characters.

Gerard