just MY opinion...

[Patti Feinberg]

I've stated a few times before; I only saw the '90-'91 series between 3-4 eps, and I'm not even sure I watched the whole (was it 1/2 or whole hour?).

Every time I see one of the montages (as in this board) for that incarnation...I think, "Too harsh"...as in, no levity, no smiles....nada....

Anyone else feel this way? I'm trying to remember shows from this time period..."The Cosby Show" was just about finishing up...ER wouldn't be on for another 4 years....I don't *think* Cagney & Lacey were on. I believe most of the 'Nighttime Soaps' (ie Dallas, Dynasty, et al) were also about through....

Anyway, just my opinion. Would like some input....

Patti

[MagnusTrask]

I guess I agree.  I didn't stay with it long.  I haven't seen any of it since.

No humor, but that's not the important thing.   It didn't seem to have much of any kind of feeling-- humor, sadness, atmosphere, you aren't drawn to these people.   I think I remember a sort of toughness or stiffness that's popular in TV shows and substitutes for drama.    Barnabas was utterly uninteresting and impossible to give a damn about, I thought.   If Taeylor wanders back, maybe he can elaborate on how the '91 series drew him in as a fan, in the first place.   He loves it, and I hope my impressions turn out to have been wrong.  I'd like to think there's more good DS to see...

[Gerard]

They were a grumpy lot, weren't they?  But there were attempts at comedy, such as turning Willie into a doofus (which fell flat) and making Millicent a self-centered, whiny snot (which worked to a certain extent).

Gerard

[MagnusTrask]

I might've hung on with it, if I'd known time travel was coming soon.   I may just have seen the first episode, out of my connection to DS from childhood, but I wasn't really a DS fan then, partly because I was unaware of an available fandom to join, that might have resparked my interest.   It was only in 2002 when I strumbled across years of the original show cheaply on VHS that I reabsorbed myself in DS.

[DarkLady]

I watched all the episodes but haven't gone back to it since. It certainly was glum, wasn't it. I hated what they did with Willie but at least the Peter Bradford guy didn't resemble Roger Davis in the least. Barn really was a bit dull, plus what he and Vicki danced to was no minuet!

That being said, I did like Jean Simmons as Elizabeth and Joseph Gordon-Levitt as David. The most fun was provided by Roy Thinnes as a truly evil Trask. He was a hoot!

[Gothick]

The last time I checked all the episodes, or substantial numbers, were available for free viewing on hulu, Youtube, and possibly other outlets, and there's some channel that runs it a couple of times a year.

We've debated the series on several threads here in the past, but I guess you missed those discussions, Patti.

I think one thing that fans of this version like is the romanticism, particularly the fact that this time around, Vicki sincerely reciprocates Barnabas's attraction.  There are some Barnabas/Vicki scenes, really beautifully played by Ben Cross and Joanna Going (who IMO deserved to have more of a career) that have a very special quality if that's the kind of thing you wished you could have seen in the original.

I've already expounded several times about what I liked, and what I didn't like, and don't feel up to repeating it all now.

Holiday cheer, G.

[Patti Feinberg]

but at least the Peter Bradford guy didn't resemble Roger Davis in the least. Barn really was a bit dull, plus what he and Vicki danced to was no minuet!

 

cracking up!

Patti

[michael c]

my impression of the 91 series is that Dan Curtis saw it as his "big budget" opportunity to "fix" what he saw was "wrong"(ie. low production values)with the original series...


so it seemed to take itself deadly serious(despite a few lame stabs at "comic relief" via willie and millicent)and lacked the naïve and happenstantial charm of the original with all it's endearing clunkiness. it was also produced in the twilight of the big prime time soap era and has more than a touch of that feel but without the self-aware campiness of something like "dynasty". so the tone is somewhat florid and pretentious. Curtis tried to impose "grandeur" on his tale via corsetry and smoke machine.


unfortunately everything dates eventually and it was produced during a particularly unsightly period. such deadly seriousness awash in perms, mullets and acid washed jeans is hard to take seriously two decades later.

[Patti Feinberg]

my impression of the 91 series is that Dan Curtis saw it as his "big budget" opportunity to "fix" what he saw was "wrong"(ie. low production values)with the original series...

unfortunately everything dates eventually and it was produced during a particularly unsightly period. such deadly seriousness awash in perms, mullets and acid washed jeans is hard to take seriously two decades later.

cracking up again 

Patti

I never heard about DC wanting to 'fix'...

There were already a number of fan clubs, right? Perhaps he was trying to 'recapture' the fans with a new product (think mid-80s with Coke...New Coke...back to original Coke) (bunkers..bunkers).

[Gothick]

Curtis promoted the new series in several interviews in 1990 along the lines of "this time we've got money and we're going to do it right."

Some of us feel that the original series was as good as it was despite DC's input (which was often minimal-to-nonexistent).  I thought how the 1991 remake turned out demonstrated that pretty effectively--DC micromanaged every aspect, even tinkering with at least some of the scripts I believe.

In one of her recent video interviews, Barbara Steele complained that DS wasn't a happy memory for her because she clashed with DC over how the character of Julia should be played.  She wanted to make Julia more stylish and "eccentric" and DC insisted that every scene be played in deadly earnest.

Thankfully Steele was able to have a lot of fun with the character of Natalie--she dresses and speaks like the madam of a very high end French bordello.

Best, G.

[MagnusTrask]

my impression of the 91 series is that Dan Curtis saw it as his "big budget" opportunity to "fix" what he saw was "wrong"(ie. low production values)with the original series...


so it seemed to take itself deadly seriously...

My impressions too, exactly, and I think Curtis may have said this.   I'd never say that low production values were good in themselves, or endearing, but I would say that there was a life in the original DS thanks to the rush to get each episode out, that created a healthy sort of spontaneity, and therefore a sense of being there.   None of that excitement was in the '91 show.  It was weighed down by the perceived need to "do everything right this time", to avoid the blunders and frayed edges.

I'd guess it was ego on Curtis's part.   He probably wanted to be known for a respectable good-looking show, not ribbed for a blooperfest.   It's also possible, I suppose, that he felt guilty for rushing the original show so much that most mistakes were left in, and wanted to rectify things.

[Gerard]

Curtis had a golden opportunity and blew it.  He spent lots of money with a couple big-budget stars and a Lego model of Collinwood.  Everything was rushed and there was no subtlety.  It was a remake of HoDS that had elaborate sets rather than using actual buildings.  He cleaned up with War and Rememberance.  He should've known better after that.

Gerard

[michael c]

it doesn't come up too much at this board but elsewhere this revival has a rabid, almost fanatical fanbase.