Given the nature of the show, which has a lot of mystery and suspense with cliffhanger endings, if they repeat the same story, they would lose almost all of the initial "built-in" audience.

There isn't a "built in" audience - existing fans might number 50,000 at a very generous estimate...  Fine to keep an old entity alive, but not very much for a new show that needs an audience of millions to survive.

It's kinda strange... when that casting started trickling out I was a little blase about it, but now that filming is upon us and everything, I'm sooooooooo excited about the whole thing.  Seriously, when I heard today's news, I was grinning from ear to ear.

Suddenly the project really seems to have so much going for it - it's shaping up to be such an exciting time

Hmmmmm... it doesn't sound very promising to me.  The comment about the Angel 'universe' is very telling, I think.

I dunno - that sounds more to me like the writers will be sneaking in references in the show in their new projects than any return of "Angel" as its fans know it.

Do YOU think they would have hired someone who looked like a young Jonathan Frid for this role?  I doubt it.

Turning that on their head, why should they?  The role needs a talented, versatile actor, which you won't get by narrowing your search to a lookalike or a mimic. What's the point?  It might be a fair copy, but it will always be a copy.  Barnabas Collins is a broader character than simply Jonathan Frid's contribution, and there's no reason to assume that Alec Newman can't make the role his own.

Another thing I'd point out is that it's very easy for us to mutter darkly about casting choices, but we're not the ones making decisions that millions of dollars are riding on.  Jonathan's casting versus casting Barnabas today is a totally different ballgame.

In 1967, they were looking for a short-term guest for a daytime soap - today casting Barnabas entails finding the lead actor for a key primetime drama. 

I don't know what the deal is for television screenings of DS, but MPI does pay the actors some residuals from their merchandising activities.

One thing I'd like to clarify is that the stuff about Jonathan Frid is only my opinion.  It may be that other elements influenced Jonathan's change of heart, but many sources and interviews seem to suggest that the movie was a turning point for him - certainly more so than other obvious factors.

Jonathan has stated in interviews that he found the movie to be inferior to the series - citing the violence and gore, amongst other qualities.  My own instincts from my research is that HODS was a turning point across the board for the show.

I think in the wake of direct comparison with a bigger, more technically accomplished version, the impetus for "Dark Shadows" on television rapidly diminished from cast, crew and the network.  Rightly or wrongly, I suspect it was viewed as a transition time, creatively and career-wise (note how many cast members migrated to California soon after the cancellation), so maybe the gut instinct was simply that the TV show's work was done.

I loved the Angie's ghost effect - it still looks perfectly respectable after 13 years, which isn't bad going...  She's meant to be a terrifying apparition, it's a great image and a wonderful florid set piece.

DS frequently isn't a subtle show - the characters and stories are painted in big, broad strokes and I thought it fitted in perfectly.

It's now due out in the Summer, likely around the time of the Festival in August.