i think that the loathsomeness that is jeff clark is a bizzare cocktail of the scripts and roger davis' acting style.

the character was supposed to be "confused" because he didn't know who he was(only on d.s. folks!)but because of davis' belligerent acting style he always seemed angry.

and the way that the dialogue for jeff and vicki was written it always seemed like they were bickering even though they were supposed to be in love.what's more alexandra moltke's placid acting style gave their scenes together an odd dissonance.

it was said recently on another topic that peter(jeff)and vicki actually look "cute" together.i never really thought about it but yes,physically.they do make an attractive couple.

yes!

among the many crimes-of-fashion committed in this series is the unforgivable blunder of putting the imperious elizabeth collins stoddard in pants!

i don't think the costume supervisor understood the importance of liz looking 'regal' at all costs.

dr. hoffman wore a few too many pleated trousers for my taste as well.

the styles of the early 1990's were very strange indeed.

i don't like to think of any of our characters as "losers"...

however in the dark shadows universe nobody ever really "wins".it seems to have at it's core themes of loss,despair and unrequited or unfulfilled love.

everyone gets brief reprieves but some new catastrophe is always lurking around the corner.

b.

the acting in the early episodes was quite good because i think the pacing was slower and the plots more realistic(to say the least)then they were in later years.

later on when the pacing becomes extremely frenetic and the plotlines outlandish it was probably harder for the actors to absorb the material as easily.

that said there are moments of acting genius throughout the series for me.

i watched another episode last night and i too was intrigued by the references to laura...they definitely seemed to be setting up a possible entrance for her in season two which to me would have made much more sense than getting into the quentin/chris jennings stuff so soon.for the laura storyline to have alot of impact david has to be quite young.it's odd that in the same episode that they introduced angelique they were referring to laura as a "witch".that's sort of confusing to viewers unfamiliar with the story.i would have been like "so who's this witch who cursed barnabas...laura or angelique?".maybe they thought that the whole "pheonix" thing was too obscure.

i do think that even in 1991 joan collins would have been much too old to play david's mother.

again i'll say most of the characters were woefully underwritten and underdeveloped.i don't know what to think of maggie as a "psychic" having an affair with roger.it's kind of random.i think maybe dan curtis wanted to include maggie but didn't really know how to so he just pulled this out of a hat.

one thing i really don't like is that by episode two everyone in collinsport is running around shouting "vampire!".it takes all the suspence and mystery out of it.in the original it was way cooler how no one knew what was going on just something strange and undefinable.if everyone in town knows there's a vampire it's sort of too much of a "spook show".oh,and those yellow contacts are so "thriller"!

for whatever reason i've never had much interest in the 1991 revival series...

however i found the dvd set at a local record/video store priced at a cool $14 so i just couldn't resist.plus all my favorite shows at the moment are in reruns/pre-emptions due to this seemingly interminal writers stike.

i'm only four episodes in so i can't say i dislike it but what i can say is it has me dumfounded.baffled.perplexed.

let's get the most glaring implausibilities out of the way first.for a show set in maine it's obviously shot i the blazing california sun(and no amount of dry ice can disguise this fact).what's more there are numerous shots of barnabas wandering around in said blinding sunlight.

a few fashion notes of course.even though this is technically a product of the 1990's it looks 1980's to me.three things i hoped to never see i my life.joe haskell with a mullett.david collins in 'coogi' sweaters and 'members only' jackets.barnabas collins in tight black t-shirts.and 91' maggie evans needs some serious hair conditioning...talk about frizz!the fashions,hairdos and make-up trends of the 1960's hold alot of charm for me.the early 90's not so much.

what i found most astounding is the pacing.why on earth did they try and cram an entire year's worth of storyline into a twelve episode season???why before they even established the present day characters did they thrust the show back to 1795?talk about blowing your wad.what were they going to do in season two?1897?

major characters like carolyn,maggie and liz are woefully underwritten.i'm not sure why maggie's original storyline went to this unknown "daphne" character.willie loomis is an idiot and seems to be a composit character of the original willie,matthew morgan and harry johnson.

that said i am getting sort of a kick out of it.i do think that if i wasn't familiar with the original material i would think this was the dumbest thing i had ever seen...there's just too much crammed in.the 1960's version get slammed for it's "campiness" but sixteen years later this "big budget" version is looking almost just as dated and cheesy.

like i said i'm only on episode four so i'll have more to say i'm sure.

b.

dvd collection one should have a series introduction by alexandra moltke isles(victoria)as well as a collinsport history read by kathryn leigh scott(maggie).

there is additional commentary by alexandra and other members of the cast and crew throughout the collection.

if your set doesn't include these i would contact mpi.