Can DS possibly come back from the dead one more time after diasterous Depp Film

[KMR]

And in re the opera idea:  Hey, if the infamous Carrie can make a prominent Off-Broadway comeback (and receive multiple award nominations!) then who's to say DS hasn't a chance on stage?

[MagnusTrask]

MB, to me Burton is so idiosyncratic that a non-Tim-Burton sequel to a Tim Burton movie seems insane and unworkable.   That was why the 90s Batman movies got worse and worse.

[David]

Burton said from the beginning that he only wants to do one DS film.

[michael c]

it's true that it received some positive notices from critics. while many fans(present company included)whose initial reaction to it was quite negative have warmed to it's offbeat sensibility...

still depp and burton must have known(even if they don't read reviews or blogs)how many fans were apoplectic with rage the minute the first still of depp in whiteface was released. i'll certainly never forget it. while "we" number in the thousands, as opposed to the millions needed to make a film a financial success, they just might not want to involve themselves in it anymore.


even the very topic of this thread, operating under presumption that the film was a "disaster" that might have "ruined" permanently the "franchise", oozes with the sort of open hostility that has surrounded it from some camps from the get go.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

even the very topic of this thread, operating under presumption that the film was a "disaster" that might have "ruined" permanently the "franchise", oozes with the sort of open hostility that has surrounded it from some camps from the get go.

Well, yeah, the title of the topic would presume that all of DS fandom feels the same with regard to the film. Though, of course, that isn't actually the case, as dozens of posts and at least one poll on the forum shows. And there are even positive groups on facebook nowadays, which is something that might have seemed impossible at one point. So, as you say, many people, including DS fans, who initially had a negative reaction to the film have warmed to it over the last year. And Midnite and I are certainly happy about that development because, well, it's no secret that we've been advocates for the film, particularly after seeing it and enjoying much of it as we do. 

[David]

the film is a beautifully shot, well acted, fun tribute with a few brief comic bits that don't work. but it's still an enjoyable film.
the sheer number of dead on references the script has to the original series is impressive.

[Cousin_Barnabas]

I'd say that there are as many great things about the film as there are lackluster, so it works as a mediocre (flawed) tribute.  It certainly captures the DS spirit in parts, but the comic bits are not brief.  For me, they really overshadow what is otherwise a fun film - save for the monster mash ending.  I don't hold much against Burton except for his role (whatever it was) in driving the script in the direction it went. 
I'd love to watch the film sans "comedy" and a certain doctor/patient scene and see how it would work.  I think I'd love it.  But, as it stands, I have mixed feelings and would really love the opportunity for a more serious project to come along and be successful.  I think that the main inspiration for this film was 1968.  If you really think about it, you'll see what I mean.  1968 is my least favorite year of the series, and, as such, it doesn't please me that it became the inspiration for the tone of the film when 1966, 1967, and 1969 are such better representations. 

[Mysterious Benefactor]

I'd love to watch the film sans "comedy" and a certain doctor/patient scene and see how it would work.

I suppose it's to each his own, but as I've said before, that certain doctor/patient scene is one the bits I've laughed at the most. Not only because I honestly do think it's funny, but also because there is that possibility that's been mentioned that somehow it may have been inspired by our very own MagnusTrask's post on the "Complete This Phrase / Fill In The Blank(s) - Blackmailing Liz-Intro to Barnabas-Kidnapping Maggie-Intro to Julia" game board:

Re: Episode #0284

It would certainly be a hoot and a half if it was. 

I think that the main inspiration for this film was 1968.  If you really think about it, you'll see what I mean.

Honestly I don't. But I'd really love for you to explain further. 

[David]

I thought that "certain" scene was hilarious because we all know that's what Julia has wanted to do for nearly 50 years!

[David]

And the implications of that scene are a scream if one takes into consideration that Hoffman's the best man for the job!

[MagnusTrask]

(I promise everyone to use my great power unwisely...)

[Cousin_Barnabas]

It would certainly be a hoot and a half if it was. 

Honestly I don't. But I'd really love for you to explain further. 

Now, if it was, I might like it more.   

If you think of the progression of the film, it parallels the evolution of the storyline in 1968.  It begins in the 18th century and then fast-forwards to the modern day.  Once it gets to the present, it introduces us all to characters with whom we are familiar.  The plot begins soundly, seriously, much like the post-1795 proceedings.  Then, when day-walking Barnabas comes on the scene, it begins to get a little whacky, much as 1968 did with the introduction of our day-walking Barnabas.  Angelique is the next to arrive on the scene, as in 1968.  Her arrival increases the zaniness of the proceedings.  The family is eventually streamlined out of the script -- almost completely, with the exception of Liz who plays a more memorable role than the others, much like "I'm going to die" Liz in 1968.  Soon the story devolves into an epic battle between Angelique and Barnabas, much like the end of 1968 (except that was between Barnabas/Julia and Angelique/Blair), and every monster imaginable is introduced in the process.  It culminates with the introduction of a certain creature who also appears at the end of the 1968 madness.  All throughout, there is a certain heightened, almost surreal atmosphere, the same kind that pervaded the 1968 storylines. 

I have another theory about the Barnabas "smoke" scene, but I don't have time to expand on that one now.   

[MagnusTrask]

Good post, CB.

[Cousin_Barnabas]

Thank you, MagnusTrask! 

[Mysterious Benefactor]

That is quite the fascinating analysis, Cousin_Barnabas. And as I said earlier, none of that ever occurred to me. And what's interesting about it is that it means the film is even more of a tribute to the original show than most of us ever realized. 

When one thinks about it, though, perhaps it's not a surprise that TPTB might have actually taken some pages from the 1968 playbook because, well, it was the second highest rated and viewed period on DS, so despite the derision if often gets nowadays, apparently back in the day many in the original audience, perhaps including Depp and Burton, saw quite a bit in it to keep them interested and coming back. And I have to confess that I do indeed enjoy much of it myself. About the only thing I don't like is the entire period with Adam once he falls under Nicholas' influence. But thank heavens that coincides with the whole Vampelique story, which is one of my all-time favorite plots. Plus, I love Eve, her relationship with Nicholas, and her disdain for Adam, which definitely mirrored my own disdain for him (and perhaps the disdain of a lot of others in the audience by that point). And once Quentin's Ghost comes on the scene and we get the intro to the werewolf, well, we're getting into much of what many would consider DS at its best. But at least one thing is very different when it comes to the film and to the 1968 storyline itself - sadly 1968 has Jeff Clark.    And the fact that the film doesn't should be something to be eternally grateful for!! 

Given that the Watching Project is now beginning 1968, it could prove very interesting to pay close attention to see if there are any other things about it that correlate with the Depp/DS film...