The biggest problem with the storylines set in "the past," for this viewer, has always been the inability for the infamous Dan Curtis rule "only 7 actors per episode, MAX," to accommodate the realities of 18th and 19th century upper-class life.  I would think that the Old House would have had a regular staff of between ten and fifteen at a minimum.  I don't know how many the Jeffersons had at Monticello but that would be a good rule of thumb.  In 1897 with the much large household in the "New House" I would think there would have been twenty at least.  In 1897, [spoiler]when Judith coldly informs Beth that her services are no longer required, I'm always like, "Bitch, please... who else is going to fetch and carry for you around there?"[/spoiler]

Fortunately I mostly manage to "suspend disbelief" and "pretend" there are loads of servants around just out of camera range...

G.

It's really funny how on one of today's slideshows, Mrs. Jason Maguire/Johnson is welcoming Barnabas to the door of Collinwood, while in another, Jackie Earle Willie is welcoming Magtoria.

Great juxtaposition!  I love this stuff.

G.

That's really nice to hear that Marie is doing better.  Here's to her further healing!  She's such a sweetheart.

Best, G.

Well, I only saw the thing once, but I don't remember the sequence that these frames are from at all.  In fact, quite a number of the bits of dialogue and scenes from the pre-credits prologue, I don't recall.  But since I only saw it once and can't go back and check, I don't feel I have any right to comment.  Particularly given how low-grade my short term memory is these days.

G.

MB, did you ever read the supposedly spoiler-heavy script "outline" that was "leaked" and then became the object of a spoiler topic here on the boards in 2011?  To understate matters, the "outline" described a story that was very different from what was filmed.

I figured for some time that the "outline" was deliberate disinformation, but it occurs to me that it might have referred to an early draft of the screenplay before the Seth person was brought in to "lighten" things up more.

I hadn't even noticed the details you mentioned about the curse, the switching of dates, etc.  And that's really quite bizarre abou the IMDB page for the movie.

It would seem that the narrative of the movie's development, editing, promotion, distribution, etc. has quite a few more twists and turns than what actually happens in the story the movie tells!

G.

That's amazing, all the more so since the URL indicates the site is based in Canada--I've always read that DS never aired up North.

It's also amazing when you think of all the quality horror shows that WEREN'T included.  Ghostwatch wasn't a series, it was a one-off (and well worth tracking down--the real reason it was banned from rebroadcast back in the 1990s was because one viewer, who apparently was already emotionally unstable, killed himself after watching it).  The Munsters was comedy and Tales from the Crypt, while fun, never achieved real excellence from what I saw of it.  I would have argued for Forever Knight to be included.  There were others but that seemes like the most glaring omission--I'm sure we all have different views about this.

At least DS was included and in a respectable position!

G.

That's a pretty cool drawing by Burton.  The DVD I got from Netflix had NO extras on it apart from some trailers.  blech.

This is the site I mentioned in my earlier post, for those curious to see what was said:

http://www.vulture.com/2013/01/the-10-worst-movies-of-2012-critics-poll.html

Best, G.

I have a technical question about the pre-credits sequence for DS.  Was it filmed, or post-produced, using some special technique to make all of it, or at least certain scenes, look like an 18th century Gainsborough painting in motion?  I have only seen the complete film once and don't own it, so can't go back to re-watch.  I began to wonder this when the current run of captures began.  Particularly when Josette is on screen it looks more like an animated 1770s academy painting by Gainsborough or Joshua Reynolds than it does like film.  (I could be mistaken, but it seemed as if there were a couple of deleted scenes included in the mix of this series of captures--since I only sat through it the one time, though, I can't be sure about that.)

I'm quite intrigued by this process, whatever it is.  Makes me think back to a much more lo-fi tech (that at the time was quite extraordinary) where an animated version of the Dickens "Christmas Carol" was done based on the original Victorian steel engravings that were the illustrations.  It was an amazing bit of film although it only lasted, I think, about half an hour.  This would have been around 1973, I think.  There was talk of doing a Dorian Gray animation in the style of Aubrey Beardsley but it never happened.

It's surprising to me that Depp Shadows was not at least nominated for art direction, costumes, or other technical aspects.  The look of it was stunning, even when I disagreed with the choices that were made.

G.