how $14 and a writers strike got me to 1991

But where is the humor that was in the original Dark Shadows?

IIRC, all the humor (term used lightly ) was written into the chraracter of Wille "Ihaven'tbathedorbrushedmyteethsinceIwas12" Loomis.

Yes, that occurred to me after I put my post in.  It reminds me of really old fashioned musicals in which the leads and everybody around them are serious, except that there are one or two Comic Characters who, unless they are played exceptionally well, get very, very tiresome.  The example that springs to my mind is Desert Song.  (I adore that show, by the way.)  It seems odd that this revival series, which was supposed to be so modern, strikes me as a throwback to the Twenties.

I watched episode two yesterday.  Now that I'm viewing this Willie in the right perspective, I'm finding him easier to accept than apparently a lot of people do - but shouldn't there be a bada-bing drumroll every time he delivers a line?

i find the willie character to be unnecessarily gross and stupid.i'm not sure why they chose to write the character that way.this show seems to want to take itself very seriously but he's written in a very camp way.plus he gets too much screen time.

jean simmons is completely wasted as elizabeth.

on the plus side ben cross does nicely as barnabas,barbara steel makes a suitably duplicitous julia and joanna going a charming victoria.

but as a whole this version lacks,as as been said,the humor but also the charm,naivete and whimsy of the original.

mscbryk, if I remember correctly, you are similar to me in not liking the horror genre outside of Dark Shadows.  I fear that, odd though it seems, we are not the audience that the revival series targeted.

The sound of the revival series seems much harsher than that of the original.  Lots of echoing, and Ben Cross's voice is more strident than Jonathan Frid's.

I couldn't see much difference between the Old House and Collinwood, whereas in the original series there's never any doubt about which house you're in. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they used the same foyer for both Collinwood & the Old House and just shot it at different angles!

lydia,

that's a very interesting point and one i never really thought of before.

other than d.s. i'm not remotely interested in the scifi/fantasy/horror genres.this version of d.s. seems to want to appeal to fans of those types of shows.

funny,the original series aired for many years on the sci-fi channel and the actors often appear at fantasy/comic book types of conventions but that's not my approach to it.for me it was always a soap opera with a supernatural element to it.it's of a secondary concern.the fact that a vampire is the star of it is almost incidental.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they used the same foyer for both Collinwood & the Old House and just shot it at different angles!

You're not wrong that the same mansion represented both houses!  Greystone was used for the interiors and exteriors of both Collinwood (except for the foyer, huge entrance hall, and drawing room, which were sets) and the Old House (except for Barnabas' bedroom, also a set), and was also used as the Sheriff's office, jail cells, courtroom, and Maggie's studio.  Its stables, swimming pool, gardens and grounds (for Widow's Hill) are seen too.  Even the specially created miniature represented both by altering some of its details.

I have to agree about 91 Elizabeth.  Speaking as a big fan of ECS as played by Joan Bennett, and respecting Jean Simmons' abilities, I was very disappointed in how little she was used, and how blandly she was written.  Not even a hint of mystery (was Liz' 18 year self-imprisonment even mentioned?)  Even as Naomi , she was wasted.  I mean there is such a think as back story.  How much richer would the 1790 tapestry have been if Naomi was quietly, in the background, a sot?  How much more memorable would ECS in the 20th C would be, with just a few hints about the tragedy in her past, laying seeds for a possible storyline to come?

Maybe part of my problem is the slacks...I am not sexist by any stretch of the imagination, but the very idea of the imperious Collins' Family Matriarch Elizabeth Collins Stoddard, who can quell any and all opposition with a glance in khaki trousers is just ... wrong ... somehow.

It always startles me when Ben Cross gets star status in the opening credits.  The Great House of Collinwood becomes subordinate to the Old House, and that's just not right.  But if the Old House and Collinwood are played by the same house, then I guess it's not surprising.

I've made it through episode 7, and I've grown to like the Maggie Evans character.  She's nothing like the Maggie Evans in the original series, and that probably has something to do with why I like her: no comparison is possible.  In a previous thread, somebody wondered who would fill the function of the original series's Professor Stokes, i.e. the authority on the occult, given that the obvious candidate bit the dust in the first season.  I'm guessing that Maggie Evans was slated for that job, and I like the new twist.

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 finished watching the revival series this past weekend.  Given how they rushed to get to 1790 (it was 1790 in the revival series, right?), it was disappointing to see how they whizzed through it.  Most of the wonderful personalities from that period got dropped.  Naomi is a nice, ordinary American lady.  Natalie is a nice, ordinary French lady.  Millicent is a stereotypical rich bitch.  I don't see any particular reason, at the outset, for Barnabas to fall in love with Josette rather than with Angelique: the Josette-good/Angelique-bad dichotomy just wasn't clear.  And Angelique's love (or whatever it was) for Barnabas isn't made clear, either, so the relationship between the two of them isn't interesting.

In the Dan Curtis interview on one of the later DVDs, he said his idea with the revival series was to tell the Dark Shadows story as everybody thinks they remember it – which means, I guess, with expensive sets and a lot of horror.

There are some interesting ideas in the revival series, though, and it would have been fun to see them developed – but I suspect their development would have been as cursory as the development of the storyline from the original series was.

Ang's motivations in the Revival are so vague.  Barn and Ang have maybe two or three scenes together in the whole of the 1790 story so the idea that Ang is in love with Barnabas (and thus is her motivation for everything that comes after) just doesn't fly with me.  Plus I really don't like the actress playing Ang.  However evil or twisted her motivations were, I had no trouble believing that Lara's Ang really did love Barnabas.

I liked the revival at the time, and looking back, I can see where Curtis might have had that impression, Lydia, because it was mine.  At the time I watched the revival on original broadcast, the only original DS I had seen up to then was the syndication package starting with Barn's arrival and ending just after Vicky got back from 1795.  The revival, certainly does cover all the important bases, and looking back ISTR ticking all the boxes as they occurred. but now it really comes across as just a going through the motions exercise.  All the events are there but hardly any of the emotions, the character, the depth, and given that a years worth of weekday episodes are being shoehorned into 12 episodes, perhaps that not very surprising.  I find myself wondering if the Revival had taken a slower pace and did the modern day Barnabas story in those 12 episodes cliffhanging on Vicki's trip into the past, if the show might not have been renewed?  Or at least aged better? 

One wonders how does the 2004 Pilot compare to the revival?  Pity I will probably never get a chance to see it...

If DS were ever to be given a new least on life as a primetime series, I think it still has a very workable concept.  One only has to look at Heroes (the only other broadcast TV show I really watch) to see that serialized high concept storytelling is still alive and well and can be done well and is certain proof (in my mind) that the show doesn't have to pander to a WB style audience to be popular with that demographic.

I don't think there's any evidence in the Revival series that Lysette's Angelique loved Barnabas at all. She wanted to possess him, to own him, and that's something completely different.

I don't think there's any evidence in the Revival series that Lysette's Angelique loved Barnabas at all. She wanted to possess him, to own him, and that's something completely different.

Agreed.  And far more succinctly put than my own ramble....

 

As for Elizabeth's 18 year self-imprisonment.... I think there might have been a nod to it in the cut scenes included on the VHS release... but I might be thinking of the comic book adaption.