Depp/Burton DARK SHADOWS Is In Release!!

[madscntst]

I enjoyed the film, though I do think it could've been more, and I think I'm actually a bit more bothered by a few of my pet peeves now than when I first saw the film.  But at the end of the day, I liked it and am glad for its existence. 

I definitely respect the opinions of those who didn't like it, or even those who hated it, AS LONG AS they respect my opinion, too.  In other words, I don't want to feel bullied or put down because my opinion might differ from theirs, and when I heard that this happened on Facebook and other places, I just had to wonder why some people have to be so childish.  I am so very grateful for this forum, that the folks here have been so civil and willing to let everyone express their own views.  But I'm sorry if people left this place because it was more accommodating toward the film than they wanted.  It seems a silly reason to leave.  Can't we all just get along?

[michael c]

unfortunately the situation is not just one of "respecting one's opinions"...


it's gone beyond that. a line has been drawn in the proverbial sand. one is either "for" or "against" the darn thing. there's no gray area.


it's not just a question of "opinion" but overall tone within the fanbase. a sourness. a discontent. a lack of unity or cohesion. the whole thing feels unpleasant.

because registration at this board has been disabled for years, well before the film was released if i'm correct, we've been spared a lot of the hysteria because it's a self contained group and the malcontents have largely been kept at a distance. but the film has really upended the entire community in a permanent way.

[Gerard]

This is why I will never become a member of something as insipid as facebook (or "fazebook," as I call it).  As "trendy" as it is (along with other things like tweater-or-whatever), all just the current fad, like pet rocks, smiley buttons, pogs and cabbage-patch-kids.  It's time will pass (even now, it's starting to become "untrendy" among the "tweenties," as it's become something someone's grandma uses to exchange recipes and pics of the grandkids).  The only thing with face/fazebook is that, even in mint condition, it can't be sold for big bucks on e-bay down the road.  I wouldn't take anything serious anyone says on that website.  Pics of kitties and finding out a "friend" had toast for breakfast?  C'mon.  How can anyone take it serious?  As Betty White stated:  "It's an enormous waste of time."

Oh, dear, I think I've just opened another can of worms.

Gerard

[David]

Facebook is also a place where simpletons shove their beliefs down your throat. I'm getting ready to leave it.

[michael c]

not a can of worms. just off topic...


the point is the schism within the fanbase is real and unpleasant. the delivery system..."fazebook", this site or any other online message board...is sort of irrelevant.

[Gerard]

You're right, Michael, it is off-topic.  "Fazebook" just completely rubs me the wrong way and when I see that it's used by fans of DS to tear and rent each other apart over what's considered "correct" DS and what's not just got my dander going.  Why don't they just stick to those inocuous things no one cares about like that toast for breakfast?

Anyway, it's interesting to see how vociferous fans are, and even rabidly "protective" of their beloved show.  I really, really liked DS12; I saw it three times in the theater.  When I finally got the DVD, over a year out, on sale, I've watched it three more times at home.  Is it a perfect film?  Heavens, no.  It's no Citizen Kane.  And from what I'm finding out here about all the cut scenes which would've added greatly to it, I get saddened (I have the DVD which doesn't contain all the Blu-Ray stuff since I can't afford a Blu-Ray player).  Do I begrudge those who don't like it?  No.  Everyone has their own cup of tea.  But to go to war over something like this?  Heavens, no.  It's like the fans who get all upset when adaptations of DS, like Ms. Parker's latest novel, break with the "canon."  In the case of her latest book, she didn't have to, but she wanted it placed in a certain time period that would violate it.  So Liz, in 1929, is not a twelve-year-old but an almost grown-woman who's a flapper and has had quite a few adventures under he chemise dress and cloche hat.  So what?  It's not like DSOS didn't violate its own canon a gazillion times.  The whole 1970/Gerard-haunting-1840/41-flashback mess had so many discrepencies that it left holes big enough for a Let's Make a Deal final-curtain-grand-prize Chevy (with tax and license included) to drive through with Carol Merrill at the wheel.  Does anyone complain about that?  Are their fazebook and other websites dedicated to bashing the OS over it?  Heavens, no.  I was a 13-year-old watching it and when it was over I felt like I was taken.  I was glad to shift to PT41.  By then I was ready for Bramwell over Barnabas as a break.  Despite a few incredible scenes, everything - to me - about 1840/41 was aggravating, including the characters.  When it initially started in 1970 (and 1995), it promised much and delivered nothing.  Well, I still considered it "my" DS and appreciated it, warts and all.  If I can do that with DSOS, why can't people accept how others take it in other forms and fashions?  All the squabblers (and I don't mean anyone here; maybe just those who lurk and have their fazebook and other social media to tear and rip), get a grip.  Like William Shatner said in that classic SNL skit where he was attending a ST convention and fans were getting all wild:  "People, it's only a show.  Get a life."

Gerard

[michael c]

shatner's remarks(though meant as a joke)certainly strike a chord in this situation...


if nothing else this has the cast the DS fanbase in an unflattering light.

[David]

Three times on the third:

Depp Shadows will air three times on Sunday, 11/3 on HBO Signature.

[mm#7]

I haven't really been here in a while, but I do agree with what some of you have to say regarding the new film, and those ds fans that blasted  it. I enjoyed it very much. It was different. I enjoyed that. Even my late friend Bernie, whom passed this summer enjoyed it and wanted the Blu ray, and he was not a fan of the original series.. Speaking offans complaining that it was too different. Rememmber back when the 1991 series started. Do some of you remember what the biggest complaint was, or  at least one of them. That Dan remade House in the pilot. I loved that show, and remember even over 20 years ago, original   fans were blasting that show. Some people are never happy.Star Trek has survived because its fan base accepted all the different  versions that came about through all the years. Many DS fans did nothing but complain, and yes, I guess bother and harass other. I wish we could just enjoy what we have had.Considering that the original series was a different type of daytime show, that did spawn many different things from it. We truly have been very fortunate.Thankyou for letting me air my feelings about this, I love all versions of DS!

[michael c]

my feelings originally were that after the first outburst of hostility the film would gradually get absorbed into the DS culture along with all of it's other weird manifestations...


but as of yet that has unfortunately not happened. the "outrage" is as fresh as it was the day that stupid trailer was released and everyone blew a gasket. as much as the actual content of the film a lot of the anger seems to be directed personally at burton and depp. they've become the "villains" in this tale.

outside of DS i'm totally unfamiliar with "fan" culture, behavior and decorum. so perhaps it's "normal" for grown men to weep and threaten suicide over a film. but to me it's been a tremendous turnoff.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Though, as I said a couple months back:

it took decades for many fans to finally see and to finally admit that NoDS wasn't a disaster, so it may take just as long if the same ever happens with the Depp/DS film...

And the same also holds true for the '91 DS.

And since Star Trek fandom has been brought up, I must say that back in August I found this fascinating:
Into Darkness voted worst Star Trek film by trekkies

So, it's not just a phenomenon that happens in DS fandom.

The Depp/Burton Dark Shadows played in US theaters for at least 161 days/23 weeks!!

The Depp/Burton Dark Shadows is now out on DVD/Blu-ray!!

[mm#7]

Hi Mysterious Benefactor, I did not know that the recent Star Trek film was voted upon so badly. They did a lot of  freedom with the original Star Trek history. I also was wondering how in the world Khan shows up. Thankyou for letting us know that. I appreciate your response.

[Gothick]

I may be wrong, but from what I have observed, there is a similar factor at work with the latest Trek film as with the Burton/Depp Shadows opus.  There is a growing cabal of people out to "get" JJ Abrams just as there are those determined to hoist Burton and Depp upon their own petard.  So, some of the expressed displeasure may have nothing to do with what was actually shown or done, but part of a continuing personal vendetta against the director.

G.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

On tonight's edition of Entertainment Tonight the stars of the upcoming Vampire Academy interviewed each other. Why does that relate to this topic? Well Sarah Hyland (from Modern Family) asked Zoey Deutch (Lea Thompson's daughter) if she would rather be bitten by Brad Pitt in Interview with the Vampire or Johnny Depp in DS? (A clip from the first confrontation scene with Angelique in the drawing room of Collinwood accompanied the question.) Zoey enthusiastically said "Oh both, thank you very much." Which was probably cheating. But what do we care? 

[Mysterious Benefactor]

While glancing through the new issue of Entertainment Weekly, I just discovered that Eva Green has an article entitled "Fierce Beauty." Not really surprising considering she has 300: Rise of an Empire opening in theaters on March 7th and Penny Dreadful coming to TV in May. But the most interesting part for us comes after the part of the article in which Green laments that even though she embraced her role as Vesper Lynd in '06's Casino Royale, she feared what it might do to her career to be perceived as a Bond Girl (given the stereotype that's often associated with being one). But then the article goes on to say:

Turns out she'd needn't have worried. The actress has been much employed in the years since cozying up to Daniel Craig (most memorably as a Johnny Depp-tormenting witch in 2012's Dark Shadows)

I did a search for the article on EW's Web site, but it doesn't seem to be posted there. Perhaps in a few days...