Boardindex Page Montage/aka 'Book 1'?

[Uncle Roger]

I haven't looked at my copies in years but I seem to remember a printing glitch in one of the issues. There were big white splotches on a couple of pages. I mentioned this to the owner of the comic book store who told me that I was welcome to exchange it for a clear copy. But all the ones in the store had the same problem and some were actually worse than mine. Did anyone else experience this? Maybe it was limited to newsstand copies.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

I have the same problem with mine on one of the pages. It isn't terrible, but it's certainly noticible.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Here's the sixth page:

(Click here for a 1328X1996 version)

It was a nice idea for them to include a map of the Collinwood estate. But among other things, they contradict themselves by dropping the wing of the Old House where they'd indicated Barnabas and Julia were talking on Page 17 of Book 1, Issue 1 - and much worse, they leave off the wing that the series added to Greystone to make Collinwood bigger. But then it would seem that nothing can ever be 100%. Though maybe it's because there were too many people involved in composing the map (we'll learn who they were as I post the info in SG #60).

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Here's the first part of the comics update in SG #60 from May 1992. Part of it references where we currently are in the slideshow and goes beyond to some things we haven't seen in the slideshow yet:

Given that a certain someone was involved in the creation of the map of the Collinswood estate, it should come as no surprise that there are a few things off in it because, well, just look how well that person co-edits the PomPress books...

And we know for a fact that Lysette Anthony would have played Laura. In fact, when her casting was first  announced in Soap Opera Digest, Laura was actually listed as one of her roles...

And David Campiti's explanation about the Barrettstown sign comes across as a bit disingenuous. But as anyone's who has read his explanations in the letters column probably grasped, that's pretty much par for the course...

[Uncle Roger]

If KLS is relying on you know who for DS expertise, that may explain a lot of the gaffes in the Pomegranate Press books.

[Gerard]

Joan Collins (how appropriate) would've made a great Laura Murdochstewbridgesteinhowser Collins.  Lysette Anthony was far too young looking to be David's mother. 

Gerard

[Mysterious Benefactor]

It was stretching things a bit if Laura was supposed to Lysette's own age because when she did the '91 DS she was 27. But she was technically old enough to have a 9-year-old. And, well, Roger's relationship with Maggie certainly showed he liked younger women. 

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Here's the seventh page:

(Click here for a 1328X1996 version)

And note that all but a few bits of dialogue were used for the slideshow. But then there's an awful lot of dialogue on this page. (Though, as we'll soon see, that won't be the case with the next two pages...)

[ADMIN EDIT: I didn't discover until 5/28 while doing research on another subject that SHADOWS IN THE '90s: The Dark Shadows Concordance 1991 features the following material from Book1, Issue2, so I'm adding it to this post -

(Click here for a 1450X1081 version)

- rather than make a new post for it in the topic where it will be quite a bit out of context.]

[Mysterious Benefactor]

A sketch for the eighth page:

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Normally I'd wait until the switch to Page 9 in the slideshow before I'd post Page 8, but considering that no quotes from Page 9 are featured in the slideshow (and when you see Page 9, you'll understand why) and we'll need to catch up before we begin quotes from Page 10 in tomorrow's slideshow, here's the eighth page a bit early:

(Click here for a 1328X1996 version)

And notice that even with only a small bit of dialogue on the page, some of it, as well as a whole panel were skipped in the slideshow.

And though one can't tell at this point, what Roger is doing in this page is actually setting up including a cut scene from the pilot in upcoming Book 1, Issue 3 (a scene that you have seen if you've watched the extended version of the pilot that MPI released). But more on that once it comes up...

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Here's the ninth page:

(Click here for a 1328X1996 version)

Apparently Roger really liked to paint Laura in provocative poses.    Imagine if one of those was displayed in the Drawing Room rather than Roger's take on a Suerat?!

[Mysterious Benefactor]

SG #60 shared the artwork for Page 9 without the dialogue (what little there is, that is):

[Gothick]

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't this supposed to be the 1980-whenever Laura suddenly being replaced by portraits of Angelique?

It seems from what you have written about the plans for the series arc that when "Laura" returned in season 2, she was really going to be Angelique (once the spirit of the latter was cast out from Julia, or was it Maggie--I can't recall).

G.

[Mysterious Benefactor]

We don't really know what the plan was so far as Angelique vs. Laura goes. In the SHADOWS IN THE '90s: The Dark Shadows Concordance 1991's section for Season Two it's stated that:

The writing staff was quite interested in developing Roger's character - the romance with Maggie and the mystery about his wife were elements they intended to explore further. Laura Collins would have been an integral part of the storyline. They discussed many different options. It was suggested that Laura would actually have been Angelique all along, but it is doubtful they would have followed that particular avenue. Laura would definitely be identified somehow with Angelique - and it was intended that Lysette Anthony play the role - without actually being Angelique. She could, perhaps, have been possessed by Angelique prior to her institutionalization. Or she could be a phoenix with supernatural powers of her own, as she was in the original series. The 'catfight' of all time was envisioned - a battle of the witches. There would also be a nod to the Gene Tierney movie "Laura".
They did intend to bring Angelique physically into the 20th century, to incarnate her somehow.

The sad thing is that Campiti & Co. had conferred with the writers to pin things down more concretely so, among other things, Innovation's Book 3 of the comics was supposed to flesh out more about Laura, but the company went under with only Issue 1 being released. I haven't read that particular issue in years, but as I recall they only got to touch on Laura very briefly in it...

[Mysterious Benefactor]

It's worth noting that as the show's scene of David leading Vicki to the studio and Roger angrily discovering them plays in the show and even in the script, there's mystery surrounding who the woman in the painting found in that sequence is:

Picking up with Scene 219 and through several more scenes until we reach today's quote:

Now she notices the draped easel by the window, she crosses to       it, lifts the covering to reveal 220   AN UNFINISHED PORTRAIT OF A WOMAN       A haunting beauty ... violet eyes, hair like spun gold, a face       that once seen, can never be forgotten 221   VICKI       Stunned by the painting's beauty, she leans in to examine the       artist's signature in the lower right hand corner. 222   INSERT - INITIALS AND DATE       They read:  “RC—1979.” 223   BACK TO SCENE       As she straightens up, studies the painting a beat longer,       fascinated.                                               (CONTINUED) 223   CONTINUED:       Now she glances at David, his eyes are brimming. She frowns.

And that's when today's quote -

Page 98/Scene 223 - Vicki: 'David...? Do you know who this is?'

- comes up.

And as for the dialogue, it's exactly the same as written.

But so far as the direction and descriptions go, several things are different. In Scene 220, the canvas isn't uncovered to reveal a woman's face but that of a nude woman -

- painted from behind as she sits in front of a windows holding a baby - and Scenes 221 and 222 don't appear to have been shot because, not only are they missing, but when Scene 223 comes up to show Vicki and David's reactions to the painting, Vicki does not straighten from having bent down to examine a signature because she standing exactly as she was when she uncovered the painting - and Vicki does not frown before she asks David if he knows who it is who is in the painting.

I suspect Scenes 221 and 222 may have been dropped because the signature is a big clue that Roger painted the painting - though anyone who has seen Scene 39 would have easily picked up that Roger was the person who painted the painting that Vicki admired in the drawing room, so chances are very good that the studio is Roger's and Roger painted the woman and baby - and it wouldn't be too much of a leap to presume the woman and baby are David and his mother - but as the scene plays in Ep #4, with the NBC version of the pilot not containing Scene 39, there is much more mystery to things up to this point...