the witchcraft nonsense in 1840

I see and acknowledge (and respect) what people are saying in this thread but I can't hold it in any longer...I loved 1840, flaws and all. I also liked Leviathans....so there.     

Sincerely Love you all, and hugs,

Heather

i liked leviathans too heather. and i loved 1970 parallel-time. flaws and all.


i just can't take this.

This is my least favorite period of the show. DS always required a certain suspension of disbelief from viewers. But there was usually something to anchor it in some small level of reality. None of the story drew me in, nor did I ever get emotionally invested in any of the 1840 characters. I liked Flora a bit but she really wasn't a pivotal character.

I do wonder if Samantha would have turned into such an ultimate bitch if KLS had done the part. Initially, she seems to be a sympathetic character.

Another thumbs up here for Leviathans.

Two cents: On the fence with 1840 -- saw it in it's entirety once and don't remember not liking it but do remember not liking most of what others in this thread have said they do like about it -- namely: Virginia Vestoff. At least now I am looking forward to seeing it again.

Unlike 1795 & 1897, the writers didn't really make any of the main Collins family likable.  We are supposed to care for them as they are surrounded by evil forces.  In this timeline, they are the evil ones!  At least Gabriel & Edith should have been sympathetic as Edith had been established in 1897.

An important character missing in 1840 is the "male legacy character", who will continue the family into the present.  In 1795 it was Daniel and in 1897 it was Jamison.  But here he is away at boarding school and unnamed, so there isn't a direct link to the present family.   His parents, Gabriel & Edith, aren't likable at all, where at least one of them should be.

Evidently the Quentin of 1840 and Daphne didn't have any children, because it's Edith and Gabriel's grandchildren Edward, Quentin, Carl and Edith who are the heirs of the family in 1897.

true.

pretty much everyone is a creep. it makes for some fun exchanges, but it's emotionally disengaging. and really, after five years it's almost impossible to muster any enthusiasm for yet another round of temporary, disposable characters.


and it's so all over the place it's hard to remember, or care about, why barnabas and julia are even there. even they don't seem to know.

i've said this before but frid, hall and bennett seem particularly exhausted. the five-day-a-week grind seems to have finally worn them out.

And, if the core audience had trouble following the story, casual viewers must have bailed.

dear jesus!!!


i just watched the episode where quentin is formally charged with WITCHCRAFT and threatened with BEHEADING.

and who's the judge responsible for this outlandish charge but dr. lang himself ADDISON POWELL! back in action after a two year rest cure. and if he doesn't amp up the camp value of these proceedings no one can!

There WERE some great Julia moments in 1840, but the fact that Grayson was away for nearly a full month didn't help the later storyline.  I really liked Grayson's work as Aunt Julia Collins in 1841 Parallel Time... I think I am in a minority here, but her scenes really rock that storyline for me, and she was in it consistently and a lot.

I liked the initial characterizations of both Gerard and Flora.  With Gerard, I found him a lot less interesting after a certain plot development.  Flora started out as a frivolous, gushing novelist, but after awhile for some reason just became the latest iteration of the standard Joan Bennett matriarch, but without the edge we got to see in Liz, Naomi and Judith.

The 1970 mysteries WEREN'T resolved in what was shown of 1840.  We never knew just why this particular quartet of ghosts was haunting the ruined Great House in 1995, nor what special role Tad and Carrie were meant to play.  I thought there was a hint of a nasty sexual edge in Gerard's interest in David in 1970, somewhat reminiscent of the Quint character's implied paedophilia in the original Turn of the Screw novella.  The fact that David Henesy left the show during 1840 meant obviously that nothing could be done with the Tad storyline.  I've always wondered whether Tad grew up to be the Thaddeus who died in the Civil War.

I don't think the Java Queen was even mentioned in the 1840 scripts.

G.

yes i was surprised to see that barnabas, julia and angelique...really the only three characters providing the viewer with any story continuity...disappear for many episodes at a time.

they're almost supporting players. the "stars" are the weird 1840 characters.

Having Eliot Stokes show up was a nice surprise but after his first appearance, the character only appears once before it's time to go home. Why even bother? Were they hedging their bets in case Frid decided to really quit?

And he knows that Angelique is a witch. The Eliot Stokes I remember would not have accepted the idea that Angelique had time travelled and was obsessed with Barnabas. This could have spun into a plot far more interesting than what ended up on screen.

Gothick, you have nearly broken my heart with your suggestion that Tad grew up to be the Thaddeus Collins who died during and possibly in the Civil War. His death would have cleared the way for Gabriel and Edith's grandchildren. (In an earlier post I mistaken wrote "Edith" instead of "Judith.") But didn't Thaddeus's gravestone at Eagle Hill say that he was BORN in 1840? I just don't remember.

The plot of 1840 was completely off the wall, but the beginning had some great moments. I loved Virginia Vestoff as Samantha, especially the scene where the long-lost Quentin walks in moments after she has married Gerard. Hilarious!

Another good moment is the meeting of the (not-yet-Judah) Gerard and Barnabas, who manage to become enemies in mere moments.

And what about old Daniel meeting Barnabas (again) and telling him, You haven't aged a day!

What a pity that the arrival of Professor Stokes didn't really have much effect on the story line. He was always one of my faves.

But really the best part of 1840 was the whole lead-in from the 1970s mysteries. But I guess I'm almost the only one who liked that part.

even at it's worst it's still DS which in and of itself has moments of great pleasure.


and obviously watching a series about vampires, witches and time travel demands a major suspension of disbelief on the part of the viewer. still for me the whole thing works better when the foundation of the storyline is based in some sort of reality. and a witchcraft trial in the 1840's is NOT based in reality. while i don't doubt that some of the yokels in a dumpwater town like collinsport still believed in witches in 1840 to base an entire plot on the legal proceedings around it is ludicrous. and that' what the plot in question is based upon. not what the hoi pilloi are thinking but a trial in a court of law.

and i'm sorry but the reverend trask character is a clown. a bozo. a joke. why this guy gets taken seriously in every storyline he shows up in a complete mystery. even jerry lacey himself says in interviews that it was "mustache twirling at it's best". the character is too broad and too campy. it's like watching a cartoon. and nothing ever differentiates the "trask" character no matter what the time period. it's played like it's the same person. sort of like quentin. trask is a "brand" more than a character. to the viewer he's meant to represent the same thing every time. you don't even have to question it. it's boring.

Maybe the writers were trying to (ahem!) humanize Lamar Trask in 1840 by giving him a love interest in Roxanne--or at least the nearest to love that he's capable of. I enjoyed Jerry Lacey's performances as all of the Trasks. In 1840, he seemed to enjoy the pride that Lamar took in his work.