Nancy,

Thanks for posting. Very interesting comments from Frid. Frid could not get away from the character of Barnabas because the audience would not accept him as anyone else. Barnabas became the focus of the show and anytime his role was diminished it was felt. Barnabas as a vampire was no longer needed, and in fact was gone for a while in the storyline. Julia and Barnabas became more heroic, more like Holmes and Watson, and that was not a bad idea. I think Frid made a mistake in that asking DC to eliminate the character of Barnabas from the series. Instead, he should have fought to keep Barnabas away from the "vampire bit" and try to develop the character in different ways. Perhaps he was too close to the series to understand the appeal of the character, why it was essential.

I do agree with him that there was a lot of repetition on the show and that had to have an effect on him. It obviously disturbed him that too many were taking it seriously and he did not want to be associated with those elements.

DS had a nice run and likely would have grown even more repetitive and dull if it had continued without a fresh injection of writers with new ideas. Its too bad Frid didn't get to do more on TV or movies, but he diversified, doing plays and seems to be content with his life. Good for him.           

I would have like to know what the writers came up after the 1841 Parallel Time. We have read about a possible return to 1971 where Liz and Roger finds out that Barnabas was a vampire and Julia travels to Asia to search for Adam. That would have been a great story.

It sounds like an interesting idea. The removal of Adam was very abrupt and it would have been interesting to present the return of an educated, scarless Adam, perhaps with the ability to assist Barn, Julia or Stokes in some supernatural dilemma (hmnnn...involved with Nicholas Blair, perhaps?).

As someone stated, many storylines were incomplete or abruptly ended to go on to another situation, which was unfortunate. A little more time to develop stories and characters would have been an asset.     

I think the Beatles and the Dave Clark Five would have been nice, although Bob the bartender might be a little square for that "modern" music. 

They softened up all the characters later, didn't they? Neither David, Carolyn or Roger have many redeeming traits early on. I was surprised when I first watched these episodes for the first time how nasty they were, since I first started watching DS in its original run sometime after Barnabas appeared. I guess Roger was the worst of the lot in many respects, but this aspect of his personality was glossed over in later years. 

I actually enjoyed his work as well, but as Jeremiah.  I think his more gentle approach worked better than if Mitch Ryan had done the part, making the character of Jeremiah more sympathetic and what happened between him and Barnabas more tragic.

I really liked Mitch Ryan as Burke, but after watching Anthony George again I've had second thoughts about his performance. His approach was different but he was likable.  I certainly would have prefered a return of Burke than the appearance of Peter Bradford.

He wanted to jump-start his career, which had been languishing since the cancellation of his primetime series Checkmate.

BTW, Checkmate is out on DVD. I got the first season on Netflix and saw the first episode, although Anthony George was hardly in the story. From watching the first episode it doesn't look like its going to be a very good series. A better 1960's crime show was Arrest and Trial, featuring Ben Gazarra and Chuck Conners.   

Midnite, I apologize for the error. I forget that there are some who may not have seen these episodes. You can certainly change the topic line. How about "Whatever Happened to Burke Devlin?"

Early on the character of Barnabas became conflicted and not the typical monster. In the Jason storyline he takes an interest in his cousin Elizabeth's problems and offers assistance when she is prepared to jump from widow's hill. The introduction of Sarah helped to futher humanize him. It was a combination of the qualities of Jonathan Frid and the writers recognizing what they had to work with.