Why Does The End of 1840 Make Me Feel That The Cast/Writers Stopped Caring??

The sloppiness of the writing at this point--Edith's death, Barnabas' sudden cure, Roxanne & Angeligue's 1840 demise, the note in Trask's skeleton--all inconsistencies that cannot be explained away by saying "we traveled thru time & changed things!" And until 1840, Sam & Gordon were very careful to respect events in the show's history as they affected different stories.

Bringing Stokes to 1840 to do--nothing.

[spoiler]The anti-climactic death of Gerard.[/spoiler]

 No attempt at explaining how the above mentioned inconsistencies affected 1897 or the modern dress stories. No attempt at wrapping up loose ends or even saying goodbye to beloved characters.

I understand that they all felt a need to move on by 1971. So end the story properly & move on.

But the show's last 3 months give me the sinking feeling that no one involved gave a shit anymore, and that neither Frid, Curtis, Sam or Gordon had enough respect for the audience to wrap things up before calling it quits.

Ending the show in 1841PT has got to be the most unsatisfying ending of a show in TV history.
And considering the magnificent brilliance of 1795 & 1897, this was
indeed a shame.

Am I being to harsh?

Any thoughts, anyone?

     

And until 1840, Sam & Gordon were very careful to respect events in the show's history as they affected different stories.

Uh, what show were you watching? 

I understand that your point is that 1840 seems to have thrown more established plot out the window than other storylines had and those changes affected several previous storylines in a big way. I honestly do get that.    But to say that the writers were very careful to respect events in the show's history isn't quite the case. And one of my favorite examples is how Jamison/Petofi and Aristede managed to find the Collins Family History book in 1897, despite the fact that Eve/Danielle Roget travelled back to 1796, brought it forward to 1968, and gave it to Vicki as a wedding gift. Not only did Eve/Danielle remove the book at a point in history prior to 1897 - but it had also been removed at a point in DS' own storyline timeline prior to the 1897 storyline taking place, so we can't even argue that Eve/Danielle may not have travelled back to 1796 prior to what we saw in 1897.

The writers managed to screw up all sorts of little things like that because they simply didn't remember what had come before. I marvel at the fact that the writers themselves have even admitted that sometimes they'd go to ask the kids outside the studio what had happened in a particular instance because they couldn't remember the events themselves! 

OK, good point.

But I also recall that when Barnabas came back from 1796 in 1968, he could not return until he was chained in his coffin as he had been originally. Little sub-plots like that always gave the stories a kind of credibility that was gone from 1840.

The writers ended 1795 & 1897 with no loose ends at all, but 1840 still feels like everyone stopped caring.

And Barnabas is soon to stairway his way back . .now, uh wait. .isn't his body already in 1971 . .how are 2 gonna be merged?  And if that body goes to 1971, how is Willie gonna find it in 1966?  Ohh the mind. . .they all knew they were soon to be outta there and we just going thru the motions. . . you are right that ending in 1841 was seriously WRONG. . they should've at least did a little detour back to 1971. .  .

Do we actually know that DC and Company had any input into when the show ended?  If the Network informed them that they were pulling the plug in a matter of weeks, there would hardly have been time to re-write what they had already taped, and then tape it again.  And given the fact that they were all loosing their jobs, who would have had the heart to do all that work, even if the time had been allowed?

Perhaps the DS Scholars among us can enlighten us as to the exact manner in which the plug was pulled?

No one knows why the plug was pulled so suddenly, but everyone agrees that there was something "mysterious" going on that we've never been told about.

There's just no reason why the show's last week could not have been used to tie up loose ends instead of listening to Bramwell/Catherine's/Morgan's boring, plotless, unrelated to the rest of the show crap about how tormented they were.

Barnabas/Quentin/Angelique/Victoria etc.
were all tormented too, but they had a history that made us care.

Did anyone seriously give a shit about Bramwell & Catherine, or were they more interested in getting answers to the questions raised by me & Julia99? 

There's just no reason why the show's last week could not have been used to tie up loose ends instead of listening to Bramwell/Catherine's/Morgan's boring, plotless, unrelated to the rest of the show crap about how tormented they were.

But that's exactly my point...if we don't know how much notice they were given, and how much time they had left before the last episode was shown, we don't KNOW that there was "no reason".  The "reason" could simply have been a lack of time and budget to re-write and re-shoot enough episodes to tie everything up the way we might have liked.

Terry Crawford told me at a fest in the 90s that the day she did her last show, in Jan '71, they already knew they were history, but she never got the details as to what caused the cancellation.

Three months was enough time, but they just didn't care.

Sad but true!

In spite of KLS' DS books and their cheerleading quality, the DS set was a difficult one to be on especially for production people.

I never thought it was a mystery as to why the show was cancelled even though the ratings were decent.  Michael Miozza made some points on previous DS boards that the blood and violence of HODS woke some parents (and maybe some advertisers up) to DS and the response was not a good one.  (Sorry if I misrepresented what I think I remember your saying, Michael).  Besides that, times were very different in 1970 and 1971 than they were in 1966-1967.  The network was changing its style of programming and fantasy like DS was not a part of that change.  You also had Dan Curtis who by many accounts was tired of doing DS and wanted to do other things.  Everything on the set was whipped into a frenzy and what had been sloppy before only became more so.  People such as Peter Miner and writer Ron Sproat have spoken before about the chaos that reigned on the set with everything having to be faster faster faster and more more more which was the way Curtis operated back then.  Mr. Miner said working on DS was pretty much a terrible experience except that the actors were usually very pleasant to deal with.  I don't know if what ultimately transpired with how the series ended had anything to do with cast and crew not caring as much as people being burned out.

Nancy

But that's exactly my point...if we don't know how much notice they were given, and how much time they had left before the last episode was shown, we don't KNOW that there was "no reason".  The "reason" could simply have been a lack of time and budget to re-write and re-shoot enough episodes to tie everything up the way we might have liked.

Three months was enough time, but they just didn't care.

Sad but true!

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say that. You have to remember that Jonathan Frid had walked off the set and renegotiated his contract to include a stipulation that he be given a character other than Barnabas to play. The whole 1841PT storyline came about as a way to fulfill that contractual obligation. They couldn't just up and drop everything that they had planned for 1841PT and suddenly come up with all new material. Not to mention that they may not have wanted to. Frid wanted a new character. Lara Parker wanted to play a weepy heroine. Both were getting what they wanted. And everyone associated with the show may have been quite content to see 1841PT play out as planned.

I disagree with pretty much everything that was said in the first post to this thread.  If I have time later, I'll try to detail my points, but I've basically made them all in the past on this forum or an earlier incarnation.  In my view, 1840 is a much more compact, well-plotted, and resolved storyline that 1897, second perhaps to 1795 in that respect.  Thematically the storyline comes full circle with Barnabas and Angelique ... and the 1841 storyline is an interesting coda (my own term for it) for the series.  It suggests new directions for the show, but also brings back some of the original themes, such as the orphan's search for her family, etc.  I actually found it quite a satisfying way to end the series, though obviously many things were left open, as they were with most of the individual storylines.

Ending the show in 1841PT has got to be the most unsatisfying ending of a show in TV history.

You know, I had stoped watching DS by the time 1841PT was in full swing. I had read in TV guide that the last episode would be airing and I made it a point to watch that last show. It was awful tuning in to bid the cast farewell and not having a clue as to whom anyone was or what the hell was going on. So for me, yes, I agree, it was thee most unsatisfying finale of a TV show in the history of television. And I felt the same way after watching the complete series on video in the 90s.

IIRC, there were a couple of unresolved storylines at the end of 1897. The ultimate fates of Magda, Count Petofi, Edward, and Charity were never resolved.  It may have been that there were thoughts about doing a follow-up story further down the road with some of these characters.

I remember a charming interview Grayson did late in 1970 in which she was talking about Magda, her favorite character, and said something along the lines of "I insisted my gypsy girl stay alive."  It was implied that she might be given the chance to play her again.  Barrett got to reprise the "Pansity" persona with Letitia, and I've often wondered whether Grayson might have played a Magda-type character in 1840 had Julia not become so popular at that point.

I find the pacing of the final weeks of the 1840 story to be very dodgy.  Both Barnabas and Julia are absent for some weeks running (I know in the case of Grayson she had an unexpected furlough when her father-in-law died).  The spellcasting sequences with Gerard and Daphne are vacuous and repetitive, and so is a lot of the material involving other characters who are around.

I think one of the biggest surprises is how a certain storyline involving Samantha plays out--despite a string of botched scenes leading up to it, the denouement is really quite satisfying.

G.

You know, I had stoped watching DS by the time 1841PT was in full swing.

****************************************

Umm - it seems as if the position of Global Moderator might be available soon. Would anyone care to apply?

Yes, we do require you to sign a contract in blood.    But there are great fringe benefits. ... Well, unless we discover that you've been keeping a huge secret - in which case your contract is immediately null and void and your body will probably never be discovered. (Oops, did I publicly type that last part? Please pretend you never saw it...  )