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 - Pansity

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 »
586
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Leviathan story vs 1970PT story
« on: July 09, 2006, 11:45:38 PM »
I mean, can Quentin be more of an a-hole and Maggie more of a DOORMAT!?  She makes Beth Chavez look like a bra-burner!  I don't understand why the hell she doesn't tell Q to take a flying leap of Widow's Hill and then laugh all the way to the bank w/a huge divorce settlement.  That man can't get through a freakin' day w/out shouting at someone, usually her!  He makes me want to KICK the TV!  Quite a statement to David Selby's acting talent because I *love* RT Quentin, but HATE his PT counterpart!  Anyway, mainly I just want to plow through the rest of the plotline to get to 1995 and 1970 RT.  BTW, I *love* Leviathan, don't know why it's so maligned in fandom.   :-

LOL -- yeah it would be hard for him to be more of an ass and her more of a doormat unless you go back to the original Rebecca. PT is kind of fun for me, cause I like trying to spot all the stuff they swiped.

On the other hand, Leviathan is more original, and satisfying.  I think a lot of the problem is it suffers in contract with 1897 and its large multilayered story and (mostly) well developed characters.  That said, I do remember offhand certain issues in Leviathan which bugged me.  Main one that comes to mind is Professor Stokes not being quite up to his usual reasoning standards.  And the way Quentin was wasted in that respect  -- anyone with his background, not to mention another 70 years bouncing around the world seeking the cure to his curse would have been contributing much more to the supernatural knowledge needed to save the day.  I find it very unlikely that given the places and people he would have been encountering trying to remove his curse, he wouldn't have knowledge or contacts with knowledge who could have been contributing to the efforts.

Then again, I'm the warped person who is of the opinion that Professor Stokes would have (shades of Carolyn in Return to Collinwood) have called in his old professor as well  -- and I am of the decided opinion that Stokes did his grad work under one Indiana Jones.  Of course, given that Quentin might have encountered Professor Jones as well in his peripatetic travels, that could have been quite an amusing scene -- all and sundry trying to pretend they've never met before.   >:D

587
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 09, 2006, 10:50:18 PM »
Thanks for the images, Arashi -- they're great.

Oh and I went digging and found some more period costuming links:

http://www.fashion-era.com/index.htm
This one has a lot of detailed info and images from 1800-forward.  Large sections on the Regency, and Victorian(which covers for DS purposes both 1840 & 1897 storylines).  Mostly women's, because once you hit the Victorian era, mens clothes changed very little throughout the era -- think mens suits now and how little they changed throughout most of the 20th C.

http://www.victoriana.com/library/harpers/funeral.html
More stuff on mourning customs and costumes

http://www.victoriana.com/Victorian-Fashion/
General stuff on Victorian fashion.  The parent site has resources on just about everything victorian, from furnishings to history.  Really addictive for those into accuracy when they write fanfiction.

http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide-2974454-action-imgsearch-house_of_victorian_visions_bridal_museum_anaheim-i
The site for the victorian bridal museum I mentioned seems to be gone (hope the museum didn't meet a similar fate!) but this is a link where the images from the site are stored for some reason.  Note the dress in the forefront of the picture marked P23 -- and compare it in your mind to Ghost Beth's dress. Those who are inclined toward fanfiction might then wonder about the original pre Barnabas interference reality in which Beth died wearing a wedding dress....

And a link to some amusing factoids about marriage in Victorian times: http://members.aol.com/alfson102/marriage.htm

Now that I've started wondering -- thanks to the great posts here -- about the 1795 costuming, I may go digging for some similar resources for that time period.  Until I get to dig into the dvds all I have is a general memory that the costumes seemed close to if not exact for period, and no costume I saw stuck out like a sore thumb and made me howl at its obvious inaccuracy.

588
Happy birthday to both of you.  Hope the day is great.

 [occasion5] [occasion16] [occasion17] [occasion18]

589
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Info on Pre-Barnabas DVDs
« on: July 09, 2006, 06:12:21 PM »
I just hope that the DVD cases and artwork will be consistent with the initial 26 Barnabas/Bramwell collections.  That just makes it look much better on the bookshelf.

Hmm, maybe it's just me.  Until recently the only dvd's I had were the 1897 ones, which are in nice slim cases. But the 1795 ones which I just got during Deepdiscountdvd's sale came in a different kind of a box.  A lot larger, thicker and CLUNKIER.  I hope it's just old stock and the cases for the later dvd's are the kind they will be using for the new releases.

590
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 07, 2006, 11:28:55 PM »
I think the period around Gone With the Wind was pretty close to when Albert died, and Victoria turned mourning into a cottage industry. I have (or had, since it's gone a bit moribund from lack of interest) a yahoo group for discussion of real history and Dark Shadows, and I found a link I had posted there on mourning customs.  (URL)

Thanks for the link! Period mourning customs have always fascinated me.

Glad you enjoyed the links.  If people are interested, I will try and find time to go in and dig up some of my old links (once I see if they're still active that is!  Alas, a once WONDERFUL and totally completist Victoriana site was gutted some time in the last year or so, though there is enough of it left up to give you a good flavor for the lifestyle, clothing, etc.)

And thanks to Midnight for fixing my glitch when I copied the url, leaving the last L behind on html.

One thing to keep in mind on this topic, too, is the difference between stage costumes and what the International Costumers Guild classes for masquerade purposes as HALL COSTUMES.

Stage Costumes are meant to give an impression when seen from a distance, as a presentation during a masquerade, or, as with DS, a dramatic presentation.  What matters for these purposes is the general impression of authenticity.  A Hall Costume, on the other hand, is meant to stand up to close on scruitny, including detailed examination of the needlework and materials, and, depending on the venue, period materials used.

This just reminded me of one of the best humorous costume presentations I have seen, done at a Costume Con in I forget what year.  The contestants did what they called a BODICE RIPPER, where, in true bodice ripper fashion the hero was to grab the heroine by her decolletage and the fabric would rip.  However, if done with true to period materials, in cluding buckram, IT WONT RIP.  It was a hilarious skit with the hero throwing the heroine from place to place acroos the stage by the neckline of her dress, which wouldn't even develop the slightest tear.  >:D

591
Current Talk '06 I / Re: Getting the year wrong
« on: July 07, 2006, 02:21:40 AM »
Pansity, when you come across the scene again, do please share it!  :)

Be glad to, whenever it may be.  I now have three dvds of 1795 calling my name...

592
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 07, 2006, 02:11:52 AM »
As to 1840 and 1841 PT, the best suit Barnabas wore in 1840 was that purple job, we told Mary McKinley-Haas (costumer for 1840/1841 PT) this when she sat at our table at one of the Fest banquets.  I also loved the grey dress Julia wore in the same scene.  The two really complimented one another.  That striped dress she wears in 1841 PT was just too much!  I call it her Fruit Striped Gum dress, LOL!  ;)

LMAO on the Fruit Striped Gum dress.  Really sad thing is that, like Samantha's cocker spaniel hairdo (see any pic of Elizabeth Barrett Browning to check the accuracy of that one), the OOGLY stripes WERE accurate to period.

Early Victorian had a lot of carry overs from late Regency/Georgian -- hideous color combinations on those tight tight britches and their frockcoats, and the matress ticking stripes.

Then again, you also have the sudden switch from those colors to NO COlOR for men.  As a costumer friend of mine puts it, "Beau Brummell has a LOT to answer for".


593
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 07, 2006, 02:07:05 AM »
The family could have worn mourning garb for Jeremiah, but as far as the rest of the world was concerned Barnabas had sailed off to England. How strict were standards for widows at that time? I know about wearing black for a year, but I've just recently begun reading Gone with the Wind and in it it's mentioned that Scarlett would have to wear knee length veiled black bonnets for three years, shortened to shoulder length after three. Were widows expected to wear mourning regalia for that long?

I think the period around Gone With the Wind was pretty close to when Albert died, and Victoria turned mourning into a cottage industry. I have (or had, since it's gone a bit moribund from lack of interest) a yahoo group for discussion of real history and Dark Shadows, and I found a link I had posted there on mourning customs.  http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/Quarter/2926/Mourning.htm

This covers some of Colonial times as well, and they claim that there wasn't much in the way of mourning rituals then, so the whole thing of mourning for Jeremiah, Barnabas, Naomi et al may be a moot point.  Of course, when it comes to net resources your mileage tends to vary, so I would check this against a google of other similar resources. I used to have a bunch more links on this, but can't put my hands on them at the moment.

594
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 07, 2006, 01:53:21 AM »
discussing the d.s. costuming is my favorite subject on earth!

for me the most memorable thing about the historical costuming is the juxtaposition of 18th and 19th century period dress and 1960's make-up and hairdressing styles.like the sets and the music this is to me one of the most distictive things about the show.

the costuming was accurate to a degree but great liberties were taken as well.it's the 18th and 19th centuries as seen through the 1960's.the color combinations could get pretty wild.josette's false eyelashes in 1795 were probably not accurate and vicki's hairdo(at it's most awe-inspiring during this storyline)was not likely the type of thing worn by servant girls at the time.this was all very distict to the late 60's.

but this created a very memorable affect.for me any future version of the show(as much as i'd welcome one)would lack this and thereby be missing some of the charm of the original.

Goodie, another costuming junkie!  [bounce].  Interesting, I hadn't thought of the makeup, etc as one with the costuming, but just of the clothing itself.  Those eyelashes in EVERY period made me cringe, so I think I blotted them out of my memory.  I know repectable women didn't wear makeup then (funny thign is G. Trask even refers to that when bawling out Pansy/Charity, yet we see ALL of them wearing "lip rouge" even Judith) so I think I just ignore that for that reason. Then again, in 1795 with the Countess and her beauty marks, it does approach period accuracy.

595
Current Talk '06 II / Re: Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 07, 2006, 01:44:45 AM »
Now that you mention it, the only character I can think of (in 1897 at least) who 95% of the time remembered his hat when out and about was the infamous Reverend Trask.

Speaking of 1897, wouldn't the servants have been given some sort of standard uniform to wear? Or were servants allowed to wear garments of their choice within reason?

Incidentally three of my favorite costumes on the ladies were Josette's form-fitting striped dress she wore just after Angelique put the whammy on her in 1795, and Beth's striped dress (that's in your icon!) I also loved the pink dress Angelique wore with the fur lined cape when stalking Aristede on the docks. That really was a spectacular dress, I wonder why they only used it (to my knowledge) that one time.

No matter the time period I *love* the suits on the men. Three piece suits are so damn sharp looking. I admit to being incredibly partial  frock coats though.

Oh good, I was wondering whether there would be interest in this topic and I come home to all these great posts!  Think I better break up my responses though else this post will be longer than Moby Dick.

The hat thing is amusing -- I remember ONE instance in 1897 where Quentin wore a hat, and I think only one with Edward.  Both were at the beginning of the storyline.  Edward wore a beaver the whole time he was bringing Rachel to Collinwood, and MIGHT have worn one once or twice after that.

With Quentin, its amusing -- in the first scene where we see him, he wears a hat for I think the first and last time -- might even be that hat of Edward's which I think might be the same one they used for Trask.  But what cracks me up with that scene with Quentin is that he's NOT wearing that suit that went all through 1897.  Or rather, he's only weaaring the frockcoat of it -- with a pair of fawn colored riding britches and riding boots.  Makes sense, he HAD just gotten in.  But the humor was in Selby's handling of the frockcoat -- he keeps swishing it around and wrapping himself in it like a bathrobe.  And it was far from the first time the guy had done Victorian for a role, so one wonders whether it was nervousness, lack of props to play around with for business with his hands -- or whether the riding britches that were never seen again were way too tight for him to be comfortable.

Servants having a uniform?  Might have, maybe something simple like a plain black or navy dress for the women. Beth wore that a couple times, along with the silly maid hat (as opposed to the silly hat that went with that nice striped outfit of hers  - I like that dress too!).   Beth is an anomaly though, being a LADIES maid, which was NOT really a maid the way we think of one, but a combination dresser, social secretary and companion.  They were usually from good family who either had no money or who had lost their money and they looked after the ladies rooms, things and kept up her clothing. They tended to get the mistress' cast off dresses, which they remade for themselves, which certainly explains how well Beth always dressed.

Favorite costumes -- most of the specific ones I can think of are from 1897, simply because I haven't seen 1795 since it was on Sciffi (though I just got the dvds and its just a matter of getting the time to watch).  In addition to Angelique's pink one (I really disliked her green one by the way) and Beth's striped number, I also liked Ghost Beth's dress, which WAS likely a wedding dress.  I found one which was almost its twin on a site for a Victorian bridal museum. (amusing thing when I was trying to get a screen cap of the dress, as I was using it in a story I recently finished.  -- in the scene where Chris is poisoned in the cottage, she bends down to look at him and you see that Terry Crawford was wearing generic ladies white pumps, NOT period.  The Dan Curtis budget strikes again!)

Judith also had a number of lovely dresses throughout the storyline despite the fact that in reality, by the end of the storyline she wouldnt' even have been out of mourning for Grandmamamama yet, much less Jenny and Carl, etc.

596
Current Talk '06 I / Re: Getting the year wrong
« on: July 06, 2006, 02:06:09 AM »
Miranda is telling Barnabas what became of her following her exile from Bedford:
Robservations 11/17/03 - A Curse is Lifted - 1169-1170

I went to the West Indies, she says, long after that to Martinique, where I met Josette and finally you--but I always knew that someday Judah would return for me.

The only character that I think mentioned the British West Indies was Gabriel in 1840.  I'm not sure if the actor misspoke or that's how the line was written, but is this necessarily a blooper?  Couldn't Mirangelique have arrived in the British West Indies in 1692 and eventually settled in French Martinique by the time we meet her in 1795?

Either of your suggestions is plausible, but I really wish I could remember more about that scene.  I only saw 1840 through the last time it was on SciFi, and although I taped off the air, I really haven't gone back and watched them.  As to narrowing it down, it doesn't sound like anything from 1795 -- they were pretty decent with continuity there.  It also couldn't be 1841, as there was no Angelique in that one.  That's what makes me pretty sure it's in 1840.

The thing popped into my head a few days ago; it was something I thought of when I first read the thread, but forgot by the time I had gone to post, then I just remembered it tonight.  I am pretty sure it was just one of those throwaways that DS specialized in -- great if you are looking for snippets to build character development in fanfiction, but the sort of thing either you catch on the first viewing or if you are power watching for some reason.  All I remember about it is Angelique telling someone about where she was from, so it MIGHT have been one of the examples you give.

Of course it's quite possible I am misremembering it and its one of those things you find out later didn't happen the way you think it did.  It 's just SO strong in my memory though, cause it struck me as so odd and I wondered at the time if LP who I'm sure knew better tried to correct the error and got brushed off by the director.

Oh, well, thanks for looking into it and giving those two possibilities.  I guess I have to see if I hit it again when I have time to watch 1840.

597
Current Talk '06 I / Re: HODS cast returns!
« on: July 06, 2006, 12:34:45 AM »
No wonder David Selby was so whiney in PT. He was wore out.  ;)

And don't forget that in this same time period he also had a young infant at home, who, if I did the math right, wasn't yet two.

 [help]

Forget Grandmamamamamma Edith's secret -   I'd settle for Selby's secret of how to operate on all cylinders with that little sleep.

 [sleepy7] [sleepy3] [sleepy5]

598
Current Talk '06 II / Period Costuming in Dark Shadows
« on: July 06, 2006, 12:19:01 AM »
One thing that's always struck me with the period timelines in DS is the costuming.  I've been involved with costuming fandom, have recreated both historic and movie costumes, and their costuming never fails to impress me with its accuracy, especially given the tight budget the production ran on.

In 1795, Naomi's costumes were spectacular.  And the other characters, too wore dresses and other clothing which might not have been, if torn apart, 100% period, but they without exception gave the right feel for the period in which they were used. (Needless to say we close our eyes to the visible zippers in the back of all the period dresses -- that's necessary on stage too, for changes that don't take a period accurate amount of time to make!)

1897 - again, with the possible exception of Magda (and after all, who DOES know what the well dressed gypsy was wearing in Maine in those days >:D), the costumes were just so right.  Even the hair, most of the time, was spot on (though you do wonder when Beth the sleepless marvel found the TIME to do that elaborate hairstyle on herself.  Maybe the one thing she refused to give up from her previous life before she had to become a servant?)

Even 1840, headache causing though it is for continuity, got the period right, as did 1841 right down to Julia's OOGLY beyond OOGLY striped dress.

My only gripe, in total, was the men didn't wear hats "outdoors" near as much as they should have been.

So, anyone interested in discussing the costuming or their favorite costumes?

599
Current Talk '06 I / Re: Getting the year wrong
« on: July 06, 2006, 12:04:39 AM »
But, we do this show got by on the seat of its pants.  Continuity was not a strong point.

That's putting in mildly.  One glitch which I never see mentioned is one I think I only noticed  because its a fact I just happened to know.

In one of the last storylines, must have been 1840, Angelique is talking about her background and happened to mention being from Martinique, IN THE BRITISH WEST INDIES.   [jawdrp] [jawdrp]  Nice little adjustment of the Space Time Continuum there.    Would I have noticed that if my grandmother hadn't been born and raised in the British West Indies?  Who knows.

600
Polls Archive / Re: Trask taken to task.
« on: July 05, 2006, 11:43:09 PM »
Yeah, in fact, he went so far as to say that the original Trask was his favorite of the Trask's for this very reason.  ;)

Makes a lot of sense from an actor's POV.  We knew so little about Lamar, and Gregory was SUCH pondslime that as much fun as it might have been to be that full out evil, he might have needed Prof. Stokes disinfectant after a long run of playing the guy.

The original Reverend, though, would be more straighforward to create, being just a zealot who had gotten the totally wrong end of the stick.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 »