I remember well this sad, sad day.  It seems very odd but I recall tuning in every day for those final months expecting that at any moment, they would return to 1971 and show us what Barnabas, Julia, and Prof. Stokes were up to!  I kept wondering what was happening at the REAL Collinwood during that time.

At the same time, I did get involved in the new PT 1841 story.  I remember how my heart went out to Melanie in particular, and how fascinating the new costumes were, and the mystery around the locked room (very Horace Walpole/Ann Radcliffe-ish!).

For the final weeks, one of the ABC affiliates in Washington started showing the episodes in the evenings, in an 11:30 pm slot, I think.  For many years, these wound up being the only DS episodes that I had gotten to see TWICE.

G.

Well, the way John Yeagar "appreciated" Maggie Collins' hairbrush in one scene I don't think I'll ever forget was certainly "adult"--I also love Yeagar's scene with AngelExis (which I think is in the same show).

In some ways, AngelExis' attempts at Witchcraft were more realistic than the "SuperWitch" stuff Angelique was pulling in our time--AngelExis wasn't really in control of her own powers and kept over shooting the mark, which I thought leant more tension and suspense to the way in which the Witchy stuff was used in this storyline.

And then, with the murder mystery we get a combination of the old Agatha Christie country house mystery genre, which is another perennial favorite--yep, PT 1970 really was "the stuff"!

G.

Thanks, Midnite!  I realize Howard was on the more average-looking side, but I still saw potential for cuteness in that shot.

G. the indefatigable (!)

Sorry to post OT, but is Chiller running the old 1990s series Poltergeist: the Legacy as part of their regular schedule? I ask on behalf of a friend who has the channel and would probably like to tune in. She was a Poltergeist fan way back when (as I have been).

G.

Thanks, Midnite, for the input, and I'm so sorry about the horrendous gaffe made on that list you were on.  No matter how often the individual responsible apologises, there's no way to get the kitten back into the bag, is there?

I will continue to err on the side of excess as much as possible when it comes to posting spoiler warnings.  I'm not copping an attitude in saying I don't understand--I really don't.  For instance, I would presume it is considered a spoiler that [spoiler] the series basically ended with Barnabas "realizing" that the all-time love of his life had been Angelique all along.[/spoiler]  Even though there've been many threads that have cited this particular development, I would still use the spoiler feature for referencing it, particularly in a thread such as this one dedicated to discussion of a particular episode.

I toy with the idea of starting a thread on Spoilers in general, because I find it on a certain level an intriguing topic.  I am afraid that at my advanced age, I no longer care about spoilers--for ANYTHING.  The reason is that I've read so many novels, seen so many films and television shows and plays, that very little really surprises me any longer.  If I am watching something, it is because something to do with the characters, the aesthetics (such as the photography or underscore), or just the actors involved engages me.  We're getting Wild Wild West on Netflix now, and I watch that mainly for Robert Conrad's tight pants and the women's campy hairdos and makeup.

All that to one side, when I went to see the Crying Game in 1992 I had managed to avoid hearing about "the surprise secret," and it did provide an amusing sensation when it hit--all because of how the director cleverly staged it, as I had already had doubts.  So, I'm obviously not above being surprised.  Then again, that was 17 years ago.  And now I *really* feel old.

cheers, Gothick 

Hi MSC,  I think you said that you've never seen 1897--is that correct?  Anyhow, the 1897 Laura did carry within her the 18th century Laura's memories.  Barnabas in a ceremony that came from the Book of the Dead was able to summon up the ghost of the 18th century Laura (btw, in a typical DS continuity lurch, they revised the dates so that I think the 18th century Laura had died in the 1780s instead of the 1760s), which made the then "current" incarnation disappear for a few moments.  Clearly, the two on some plane both were--and were not--identical.

The 1897 Laura was much more explicitly linked to ancient Egyptian religion, specifically the cult of Ra.  I don't recall that figuring at all in the 1966 story, apart from vague references to the homeland of the Phoenix in Laura's dreamy, rather scary "soliloquies."

G.

I'd planned to go at least for part of the weekend to visit friends, but I am re-evaluating those plans given how inaccessible and bloody DREARY this venue sounds.

How could Pierson choose something so hard to get in and out of in such a generally well-served area as great NYC?

G.

I think I've seen references to there having been discussions of doing a mummy story. I believe, although I could be misremembering, that DC blew the idea out of the water because he didn't think mummies were at all scary, and were even ridiculous because of how they shamble along in the 1940s series and you would think anyone would be able to outrun the creature.

If Laura had come back a third time, it would have been cool to have incorporated a mummy into the story--perhaps a High Priest of Ra who was in thrall to her and could be summoned not to kill, but to drive variouis people in Laura's way temporarily insane, speechless, and exiled to Wyndcliffe so she could proceed with her monstrous plans.

G.