Thoughts on a new DS and the '91 series

Somewhere on here (probably a year and a half ago) there is a long thread in which many of us commented on what we thought a 'new' DS should look like.

The general consensus was that a re-make of the old was impossible, but a "next generation" was a good idea.  Frankly, I'll be surprised if the new one currently being created isn't a "next generation" concept.

there is a long thread in which many of us commented on what we thought a 'new' DS should look like.

The general consensus was that a re-make of the old was impossible, but a "next gemneration" was a good idea.

The discussion you're referring to can probably be found pretty easily by anyone who's willing to invest some time using the forum's search feature.    But there are actually numerous topics on the forum dealing with a new DS because it seems like we have the same discussion (Dark Shadows: The Next Generation - GOOD, Dark Shadows: The Retread - BAD) every time the possibility of a new DS project gets announced or even hinted. 

The first batch that I'm aware of: three threads dealing with a proposed new DS on FOX:
The first, "DVDs and a New DS," from back in January 2002, is the 6th topic down on page #18 of the board Current Talk I in the General Discussions Archive. A second, "Prediction re: New Series," is currently ("currently" because I haven't gotten around to changing over the posting dates in the database for this topic from the dates Midnite or I had transferred it to the YaBB SP version from the eboards4all version of the forum back before the SP version had officially opened) the 15th topic down on page #15 of Current Talk I. And a third, "NO NEW DS, MAYBE FOR THE BEST," is currently the 11th topic down on page #13 of Current Talk I.

Frankly, I'll be surprised if the new one currently being created isn't a "next generation" concept.

You know, who knows?  :-   The first announcements for this latest possibility all stated that Barnabas was to be a central character. Perhaps, if the series does actually pan out, we will get sort of a next generation concept, but apparently it wouldn't seem to be a sequel to the daytime series in, say, the same fashion that Star Trek: The Next Generation was a sequel to the '60s Star Trek on NBC. Well, unless ol' Barn time travels to the future or some such. Or better yet, somehow Barn got rechained in his coffin, gets released again, and events start all over again with a new generation of Collinses who know nothing about him. 

True, MB. They could go with the basic premise of Barnabas being released from his coffin. Eveything else could be different. Can you imagine Barn in the computer age? There would be a lot of room for humor. That could be a refreshing change. At least they could finally have a phone in the Old House...a cell phone! Hopefully Barn did well in his science and math studies. ()

Fans can say what they will about it, but I honestly think the '91 series did pretty well when it came to character development. Certainly they packed in about as much as the dizzying pacing of network nighttime TV seems to allow for these days...

You're quite right about this. One must consider the audience at the time, and the expectations of character. The 91 DS did pretty well with character development considering it was a one-hour weekly show. One of my problems with it, though, was what they did with some of the characters -- such as having Roger and Maggie (psychic, at that!) in the middle of an affair. Yeah, okay, right.

I think some fans of the original show tend to confuse character development with endless character reinforcement. The daily soap opera format was such that if you missed a few episodes here and there, you actually missed very little of what was happening, plot-wise and character-wise. That's no longer an option, and characters can be well-drawn in a one-hour weekly show. It's done all the time with decent television drama, i.e., Buffy, ER, Law & Order, CSI; the key is the job the writers and the actors do, not the allotted running time.

--Mark

One of my problems with it, though, was what they did with some of the characters -- such as having Roger and Maggie (psychic, at that!) in the middle of an affair. Yeah, okay, right.

I'm usually in the minority, but I actually liked what the '91 series did with Maggie and Roger. To this day I wonder if daytime David was an early experiment in artificial insemination because I have an amazingly hard time picturing daytime Roger being in love with anyone but himself.    But '91 series Roger was definitely sexual. And Ely Pouget's Maggie...well, let's just say I enjoyed her quite a bit. In fact, I still try to catch Pouget whenever I notice that she's guesting on a series (as she did on ER just a few weeks back - and which I videotaped).    (The tape is around here somewhere - perhaps I'll post a screen cap or two for any of her other fans to enjoy.  )

I'm usually in the minority, but I actually liked what the '91 series did with Maggie and Roger. To this day I wonder if daytime David was an early experiment in artificial insemination because I have an amazingly hard time picturing daytime Roger being in love with anyone but himself. But '91 series Roger was definitely sexual. And Ely Pouget's Maggie...well, let's just say I enjoyed her quite a bit. In fact, I still try to catch Pouget whenever I notice that she's guesting on a series (as she did on ER just a few weeks back - and which I videotaped). (The tape is around here somewhere - perhaps I'll post a screen cap or two for any of her other fans to enjoy.)

I'll be the first to plead guilty to having expectations based on preconceived notions when it came to Maggie in the '91 show. KLS spoiled me to the core, and I simply never accepted Ely Pouget as Maggie. I could handle Ben Cross as Barnabas, Jim Fyfe as Willie (after much initial difficulty), Jean Simmons as Elizabeth and BOY, I EVER-SO-SLIGHTLY TOOK TO JOANNA GOING AS VICTORIA! Ooops, sorry.   But never Pouget as Maggie, alas.

Roy Thinnes was excellent as Roger, by the way; and his Trask was first rate.

--Mark

BOY, I EVER-SO-SLIGHTLY TOOK TO JOANNA GOING AS VICTORIA! Ooops, sorry.

No need to apologize - I really liked Going too (another whose work I tape whenever I get the chance.  )

But never Pouget as Maggie, alas.

It could just be that I'm one of the rare DS fans who loved all the casting on the '91 series. Yes, even Lysette "'EAR me, Barnabas Collins!" Anthony (as our Gothick is fond of referring to her  ). But then, I was really open to the idea of a new take on the old storylines, and welcomed any and all changes with open arms. (I've even gone so far as to commit what some would considered heresy and say that in some ways the '91 series improved on the original.)

About the only thing I didn't particularly like was how the DC co-written and directed first hour of the second night of the mini-series (Episode #2 in the MPI tapes) was a complete rehashing of not only hoDS, but, uh, scenes and stagings "borrowed" from DC's version of Dracula with Jack Palance.  :-   (DC never spoke more accurate words than when he freely admitted to rarely ever having an original idea in his head when it came to DS!  )


(BTW, I've completely lost count already - just how many times has this thread veered completely away from its original FAVE Magazine subject? Perhaps someone should review all the posts and see if it's at all possible to split the different subjects into their own threads...)

  I have to add something on the subject of the casting of the 1991 series -- specifiaclly Ely Pouget as Maggie Evans.

  Pouget did play Maggie Evans.  She played the original concept of the character.  She played that part better than KLS, in my opinion.  But, wait, before you jump... KLS played this character only in the beginning.  This was the hash-slinging working girl, from the wrong side of the tracks.

  When Barnabas Collins arrived, he needed victim #1 -- now, they picked the semi-regular Maggie character.  This is really when KLS began to shine.  Later, Kathryn (as Maggie) took over the role of Victoria Winters.  This was the only thing to do, because replacing Alexandra Moltke's Vicki in name just wasn't possible... it wasn't working..

  So, the Maggie Evans character replaced Victoria Winters.  That worked.  That was the only thing you could do, until maybe Moltke returned.  The fan reaction to Vicki being replaced was pretty much the same reaction they had to seeing Maggie in the 1991 series -- she seemed totally out-of-character (but was not, really).

  When most fans tuned in to the nightime 1991 series, they expected Maggie to be the Maggie they remembered... the Maggie who was the gothic governess, not the working girl.

  There were three characterizations of Maggie: 1) the original concept 2) the victim/Josette and 3) the gothic governess.  Ely Pouget played characterization #1, as directed to.  Fans were not prepared, since most of them had not known Maggie as originally played.  Pouget did well, but wouldn't have been able to play Maggie as well as Kathryn later did... making her the memorable victim, then Vicki-type governess.

  By the way, I thought Going was fine as Vicki, too.  I agree, also with what was said about Roy Thinnes' work (though Jerry Lacy would have been a nice choice).  Not mentioned was Michael Weiss -- he was pertectly cast as fisherman Joe Haskell.  But, anyway, they played the parts as they were instructed... someimes it worked, but most of the time it didn't work... for various reasons.

  Really, Kathryn Leigh Scott and Ely Pouget played different characters.

Really, Kathryn Leigh Scott and Ely Pouget played different characters.

Wes -- You hit it on the head. To me, she failed as Maggie for this very reason. She wasn't Maggie Evans; I might disagree, too, that she played Maggie as she was first presented in the original show. Working class, somewhat hardboiled, but that's pretty much where the similarity ended. KLS's Maggie, in any phase, could never have been a convincing psychic or mistress for Roger. They could've named Ely Pouget's character Hazel Honeycutt or some such, and it might have been more palatable to those of us who anticipated a reasonable facsimile of the "real" Maggie.

Ely Pouget stands out to me because the other characters tended to have more in common with their original counterparts. They were often played differently, but their origins were at least comparable.

Still, in a new show, I'd much rather see next-generation characters than yet another re-interpretation of existing characters -- except for those that can make for some distinct continuity, such as Barnabas, Quentin, et. al. Time will tell.

--Mark

I'll chime in here. . I liked the '91 series too except for Ben Cross as Barnabas (and that's a mighty big exception/problem).  I thought he was stiff, unsympathetic and well, not all that attractive. . .

     I enjoyed the 91 series.  I was disappointed that it was not given a chance to find itself.  It was like an alternate reality.  I was surprised by the Ben Cross casting.  There has always been a debate as to how old Barnabas was supposed to be.  I know some believe he was in his twenties.  As portrayed by 40 plus Jonathan Frid, this seems unbelievable.  However,  Ben Cross was also obviously older than 20 something.  Do you think that DC will actually cast a 20 something actor in the role?  Of coarse,  everyone else will have to be younger, too.  Forget the Tony Petersen line about Barnabas being an old man.

PS.  I agree with MB perhaps we need a new thread about casting the new DS.

-- such as having Roger and Maggie (psychic, at that!) in the middle of an affair. Yeah, okay, right.

[size=8]EUHHH[/size]

euh, euh, EUUUUHHHHH

eeeuh,

Patti
ick
time to shower

Have you ever seen the '91 series, Patti?

  A new DS series, in order to be successful, will have to attract a LOT of new viewers. In order to do this , I think some review or summary or possibly flashbacks will need to tell the tale of the original Collins family----at least up to a point where new storylines could be introduced. In the original series, that (the introduction of a new storyline) might be the Leviathans. It will be interesting to see what DC has in mind for this new venture.
                                                            Misty

Have you ever seen the '91 series, Patti?

No, in one of these threads I stated I'd never seen it. I've only heard sort of bad stuff, but, this may've been before I've seen orig. DS a couple of times.

I think I'd be able to enjoy something else (but I don't think I could deal with Maggie & Roger!!)

PS...since my 'promo' price with digital cable is up, I called the  cable company today; I asked how much will it be, on the promo, $7.00/mo (just for one); it'll be $15.

I said have a cabledude come disconnect it. Oh, don't you like it? No, not $15 worth. (Honestly, except for SoapNet, I really haven't enjoyed it, PLUS the houligan 12 year old watching/listening to the Houligan music stations).

(psstt...don't tell the cable co., if DS comes on, I'll call them and get it back for a promo price!!)

Patti

pps...is it Hooligan or Houligan?