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 - michael c

136
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 31, 2016, 07:07:31 PM »
Wow, Parker didn't even bother to look up an online entry on the Victoria Winters storyline when she wrote that thing?

That "research" would have taken her all of about five minutes.

she gets the train ride right and makes an "inside joke" about Maggie calling Vicki a "jerk". and describes Liz as a "recluse" garbed in jewels and black evening gowns. so i gather her "research' consists of watching episode one.  [santa_rolleyes]

137
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 31, 2016, 07:01:32 PM »
I think you're onto something there, MB. I think that the fact that it has the name Lara Parker attached to it has a lot to do with it. If it was written by another writer, who has not been established as a brand name, I doubt if it would have been as successful.

in the past i've been told i was "mean" for being critical of Parker's writing. but i treat her as fairly as any other author in the same position.


the 2012 Burton/Depp film was skewered but for many in the fandom anything associated with the original cast gets a pass. i don't care for the BF audiodramas. to me they are dreary and depressing. and Parker's Mary Sue fiction veers so far outside OS canon i cannot take them seriously. but because the OS stars are involved in these productions they are considered the "real deal" by many fans.

again it's Parker's story. and ifs she simply had gotten the basic structure of the series accurately she could have decided Vicki came from outer space. but you have to get the framework right to effectively launch the story.

138
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 28, 2016, 03:24:39 PM »
it really gets more ridiculous by the page...

i think Parker is trying to create some sort of larger "mythology". a "grand sweep" across the centuries by randomly dumping a bunch of 1897 characters..Charity Trask, Magda, Quentin, Aristede..characters who would have been long dead, into the narrative. even though it doesn't make sense.


and needless to say Parker has her "Mary Sue" moment by describing this iteration of Angelique (a character she herself played) as a radiant, ravishing, incomparable beauty. it really reads like bad fan fiction.

and again simple details, like when Vicki was written out of the OS and how, could easily be referenced with a quick glance at one of her BFF's almanacs or episode guides.  [santa_rolleyes]

139
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 27, 2016, 10:08:54 PM »
when KLS goofs in the Pompress books it's one thing. it's really just a recollection...

she's not trying to craft a story out of this source material. that's why Parker's fiction is so frustrating.


here she has Vicki leaving Collinwood..on her own two feet..to move to Bangor in 1970. that simply IS NOT what happened to the character. she "disappeared in time" with Peter in 1968. ALL she had to do was get that simple, easily referenced detail right and this story could have launched effectively. she could have taken it anywhere. but getting basic framework like that so wrong makes the rest of the story impossible to follow.

140
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 27, 2016, 08:27:13 PM »
under ordinary circumstances i wouldn't hold someone accountable to accurate recollections of things that happened 40-odd years ago.


but Parker's made a decision to write and sell books based on this show. the VERY least she could do is familiarize herself with the basic framework of the series.


she gets almost EVERYTHING wrong. timelines. dates. backstories. the fates of most of these characters. she simply has no understanding of this material. just typing the name "Barnabas" on a page doesn't really make it a DS story.

141
Current Talk '16 II / Re: Discuss - Ep #1123
« on: December 27, 2016, 01:15:44 PM »
all the assorted and sundry "Quentins" are essentially the same character. they all look and and act and talk exactly the same. i think the writers just wanted the viewer to equate one with the other and bothersome details about how they were all "related" were not considered important.

similar to the various "Trasks". they were supposed to "represent" the same thing to the audience.

142
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 26, 2016, 12:17:51 PM »
apologies for the blow-by-blow but this book gets weirder by the page...


in a bizarre attempt to, i guess, merge the Elizabeth character with the actress who played her here was have Liz as having been a winsome blond movie star in the 1930s!


this totally random detail adds nothing to the overall plot of the book. just another example of Parker's staggering lack of understanding of the basic structure of this story.  [santa_rolleyes]

143
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 25, 2016, 12:39:39 PM »
i only consider the OS to be "canonical" but for many fans the RTC presentation and subsequent BF audio dramas have become "official" continuity. and Parker clearly doesn't try and mesh her work with what's happening with that timeline. this story goes completely outside the structure of the OS and all other subsequent attempts at continuity.

it's a self contained story. fine. but it really doesn't make any sense at all.  [santa_rolleyes]

144
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 05:43:06 PM »
in one of the most laughable attempts to i guess to tie the story into a "larger mythology" the founder of the Hammond Foundling Home, in New York City, where our dear heroine was brought up, was none other than...

MISS CHARITY TRASK. who subjected a young Victoria to all manner of Victorian cruelties.


i "guess" this throwaway detail is mean to illustrate now Vicki was "persecuted" by the Trasks "across the centuries" but it makes absolutely no sense.  [santa_shocked]

145
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 05:11:52 PM »
there's also a misfired attempt to "modernize" Vicki by making her more progressive and sexualized.

granted a 1960s Gothic ingenue wouldn't "read" particularly well today. her preternatural naivete coming across as dated and dim. but this character doesn't "feel" like Vicki at all.

146
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 04:51:25 PM »
here she's not just twisting canon to suit her own agenda...

she simply doesn't understand, really at all, the underlying foundation of the show. particularly characters and storylines she herself did not play in.


at the end of the day these were just actors who simply memorized the scripts they were handed. they did not write or create the story. and it's obvious Parker's basic grasp of the material is minimal at best.

147
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 04:34:54 PM »
i turn each page with increasing mystification...

Vicki "seems to recall David mentioning his mother". forget that she knew Laura well and was intimately involved in her storyline.


she gets EVERYTHING wrong.  [santa_tongue]

148
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 03:49:35 PM »
there are also multiple references to present day Quentin who of course Vicki never knew. something like that is extremely easy to cross reference even without first hand knowledge.

149
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Re: Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 03:45:28 PM »
the "present day" sequence takes place in 1972 of all years. was Barnabas still "cured' when he and Julia returned from 1840? was that even addressed? i forget.

apparently Julia is not even referenced once in the entire book.


and there's just sloppiness. when Vicki's rummaging through city records she finds "newspaper articles" about Jason McGuire's "disappearance" (which of course there was not) but she also knows what really happened to him (which of course she didn't. no one ever did).

and since Parker wasn't in the first year it's obvious her extremely limited knowledge of that period and the original story setup is based on skimming synopsis and maybe watching a few episodes just as a cursory reference point. i recall in TSB she described Liz in the black gown and jewels getup she wore only in the pilot episode as if that was how she dressed daily. and here she has Liz a "recluse" into the 1970s when, of course, that period ended in 1967.

she also knows Barnabas is a vampire, as does the entire Collins family, which is completely innaccurate in terms of the original story. the whole thing is bizzaro land.

given the title i'll assume the big "reveal' is going to end up being the fan favorite Liz-as-Vicki's-mother theory but with all the other major continuity gaffes i can't even consider that "resolution" or "closure" although many fans already consider that mystery to be "solved".

150
Calendar Events / Announcements '16 II / Heiress of Collinwood
« on: December 24, 2016, 12:52:19 PM »
is anyone reading Lara Parker's latest DS fiction 'Heiress of Collinwood'?

i'm not generally a fan of her writing but this one is centered on Victoria so i picked it up. without "spoiling" too much i'm on page 110 in a state of complete bewilderment.

i suppose it's her story and she can take it where she wants to. but what i'm most struck by is her complete lack of understanding/memory of the basic structure of the original story.  her work seems to take place in some sort of "parallel time"variation of events. i have no idea how she came up with the outline of this plot?

Vicki as a television reporter in Bangor in 1972? she really seems to have no memory at all of what actually happened to the character in the OS. or that Maggie replaced her as Collinwood governess. the dates and timelines of everything is completely wrong. none of it lines up with OS canon. none of it makes sense.

not surprisingly she also doesn't seem to understand the fundamental nature of the character. what made Vicki "tick".

i'm trying enjoy it as a "stand alone" story but the huge gaps in continuity are extremely distracting. i can really only compare her work to an "inspired by" story along the lines of the Ross novels or the Dynamite comics more than OS continuity.

anyone looking to her work for OS plot "resolutions" is in for a rude awakening.  [santa_rolleyes]