DARK SHADOWS HISTORY! (merged with: The Original Ended 38 Years Ago Today!)

From Marlene of Val d'or, Quebec, Canada: "I feel that it generally does sound like Jonathan.  I have that article in question and have reread it many times.  Since Jon seems capable of great mental reflections, it woudl appear natural that he should analyze his past, present and future quite thoroughly, which the article seems to indicate.  My impression of Jon is that he is honest with himself and others, reason why he answered whatever questions the reporter may have posed him personally and honestly.

"The part I find questionable though is where he denied interest in the occult. Considering the fact that he protrayed the supernatural character, he must have had some interest in this field, even if only at the beginning. I realize that the whole aspect of occultism would become boring after portraying a character such as Barnabas in a show like Dark Shadows whcih resolves around the parapsychological belief for so long.  But if I should be mistaken, I would appreciate correction from you, since you know Jon."

From Barbara of Brooklyn, New York: "If Jon did say what the article quoted him as saying I am very hurt.  I'm sorry that he felt that way about playing Barnabas on DS.  If he feels that way, where does that leave us his fans that loved Barnabas and enjoyed DS. Right now I feel rather stupid.  I rather think that it is a compliment that an actor does a role so well that when fans think of the character that the actor is playing they immediately think of the actor.  Another thing I didn't know.  I thought that actors were grateful for fans of all ages, whether young or old as long as he had fans.  I can't believe, I don't want to believe, that Jonathan said those things.  I just want to think about this some more. I've been blaming everyone under the sun for the demise of DS, but I never dreamed that Jon could be connected with it.  Jonathan Frid brought Barnabas to life for us.  It's his portrayal of Barnabas that endeared him to millions of fans.  Then to learn that Jon disliked being Barnabas well that's just too much.  I hope now he is happy he has all the time he needs to do whatever it is that he wants to do.   He still remains my very
favorite actor. If he was so unhappy being Barnabas I hope that he finds something that he will being happy doing.  I only hope that I will see him somewhere again, be it movies, TV or on the stage."

From Dee of Huntley, Illinois: "I read this article some time ago, and I questioned it then. Now, I have never had the privilege of meeting Jon, and so I can't pretend to know how he would think of feeling regarding -- well, anything really.  But I DO know that sort of man I would choose to admire, and that type of man just would not make some of the comments that were printed in this article.  I don't think he would display such an uncaring attitude, particularly toward the vehicle which brought him stardom. Even if he felt that way privately, I can't see him ever making any such statements in public. Now, some parts of it could very well be more authentic - I can well understand his not wanting to be typed in the vampire role, and being eager to move on to other things. But other parts - the statement that quotes him as saying he should have left the show at its peak in order ot capitalize on its success, for example -- that is such a self-centered remark that it might well have changed my entire attitude toward Jon -- if I didn't doubt so strongly that he actually said it.  On a recent Dick Cavett show, Ralph Nader made an appearance and he and Sandy Duncan were discussing movie magazines and their habit of printing just about anything as 'truth' -- be it true or not.  'Reporters' from these publications will interview stars and then twist those interviews any way they choose -- or they won't interview them at all, but will simply make up anything at all from their own imaginations, throwing in enough well-known background material on the performer to make their garbage sound authentic.  And readers swallow it as fact. I have a strong hunch that much of this article was exactly that -- a product of Stephen Lewis' imagination.  You and other members may or may not agree with me -- but those are my feelings."

The club president Carol Gould then wrote: "I want to thank each and every one of you who responded to this article.  I am sorry that I could not print all of the letters I received, however, that feel that these few are indicative of the controversial potentials for such a questionable article.  Personally, I feel that it is important for all of us to be wary of movie and TV fan magazines, many of which printed exaggerated or fabricated stories, just for the sake of sensationalism. Be careful of these magazines, and make sure they are legitimate before believing the stories they tell."  -- Carol Gould

I doubted I'd ever see the show again

I was floored one day in the 1980s when I came home for dinner, turned on the TV and there was DS on New Jersey Network. I could not believe it.  It was exciting to see and hear the opening of the show. My grandmother, who was dining with me, rolled her eyes and said "Oh no! Here we go again!"

Nancy

Thanks Nancy for all that.. I actually got through it all.   JF sounds pretty reasonable here.  Those are the things that actors say.   He emphasized negatives because on any given day, you emphasize positives or negatives, and that point in DS history was something of a downer.   If you give him the benefit of the doubt, nothing here is really negative.   If I'd read the interview on a different day, I'd have reacted negatively myself I guess.

True but remember we are reading this interview as adults.  The end of a series we love would not be met with such a sense of tragedy or bereftness as felt by pre-teens and teens.  Their perspective on what makes up life is much less than what an adult's would be.  We know through our experience that unhappy things happen and we won't always get our way but life goes on.  When a beloved show ends for us now, as adults, we are bummed out but it doesn't hae the same emotional toll as it would have in our youth.  We have other things to be concerned with, other things that make us happy, and always new interests to get into.  When you are a pre-teen or teenager, you tend to not have that perspective.  The end is more upsetting.

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.           

Two thoughts that occur to me from skimming this fascinating article--one is the fact that everyone on the show knew "long before the final date was announced" that the cancellation was approaching adds grist to my theory that DC was the one who pulled the plug--and no one else.  I always thought it was just way too "convenient" that DS went off the air right in time for the start of the NoDS filming schedule.

It's ironic that the two main projects JF went on to do in the next couple of years were occult themed.  In that 1973 interview in a monster movie magazine he spoke of wanting to do a film with Jeanne Moreau.  That would have been fascinating to see.

G.

Yes, that was ironic.  JF loved stories with a deep psychological pinnings and he was provided with the chance to engage in those stories even though they were occult themed.   He was told there would be more to his role in "Devil's Daughter" but that wound up not happening.  Still, I liked his performance very much. 

As a person, JF doesn't understand why anyone gets caught up in the occult in real life.

nancy

It's ironic that the two main projects JF went on to do in the next couple of years were occult themed.  In that 1973 interview in a monster movie magazine he spoke of wanting to do a film with Jeanne Moreau.  That would have been fascinating to see.

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.

Barnabas the Vampire gave the series the higher ratings.  I've read and heard that numerous times.  The audience was less interested in Barnabas the non-vampire, the good guy with less conflicts.  It wouldn't have helped DC much.  I think JF knew the ratings were high with Barny the vaccillating vampire. I think he was just bored more than anything else.  Other actors got to strut their stuff and show their range.  JF was capable of playing a completely different character but the audiences would not have accepted that from him, you are right about that!
      
I wish I could tell you all the TV and movie offers Frid has turned down through the 80s, 90s, etc.  The reality is he prefers the stage and as a performer is more comfortable there. 
Nancy

His perspective may been skewed a bit by the tradition on DS of actors playing multiple parts.   On any other show the situation wouldn't even have come up.   It wouldn't have occurred to the star of any other successful show to ask to switch roles.   It's not just the actor the audience tunes in for... the lead character is crafted not just by an actor but by writers as well.  A lot of thought and work is put into it.   It isn't just an overcoat to throw off and replace with a new one.   It's the specific character the audience cares about.    Caroll O'Connor was an accomplished actor who played many different roles over the years, but he didn't say "Let me play a different role on 'All in the Family' than Archie, please."

Well, that sounded far more critical than I intended.  It was just a passing thought.   And I would have loved to see human Barnabas, who could have been written with conflicts too, over past actions to start with.   And I'm sure Mr. Frid did what was best for him at the time, as we all need to.

Caroll O'Connor was an accomplished actor who played many different roles over the years, but he didn't say "Let me play a different role on 'All in the Family' than Archie, please."

O'Connor even played Archie in nightclubs.  He took his TV act on the road so he was more involved with the role and playing it outside the studio than JF was.  JF didn't like to play the vampire outside of the DS studio.


Nancy