8 hours ago, All My Shadows said:

It’s not the show Rich and Esther had in mind in the beginning (my mind will never not hear Esther’s passionate defense of their I, CLAUDius inspiration), but it wasn’t a failure.

True.  DYNASTY wasn't everyone's cup of tea - it certainly wasn't mine! - but even I would be hard-pressed to write the entire show off as a failure.  It's just my opinion that what it was in its' first season - and, to a lesser extent, what it was again at the end - could have been a successful show in its' own right, too.

You knew the show was toast when the 85-86 cliffhanger was so bad....

Claudia and her open window candles mess.

Blake strangling Alexis

And the worst.....Amanda and Sammy Jo physically fighting over the dull love boat guy.

15 hours ago, j swift said:

What teen cares that much if their parents got married because they were pregnant?  It always makes the soap kid seem dumb when they can't do the math about the timing of their conception and their parent's anniversary.

 

This teen did. It was a devastating revelation that resulted in a lot of torment and name-calling from my classmates. In 1981, having parents who had a, what was called "shot gun wedding," made one a pariah at school in middle-America. So that storyline was extremely timely and exactly how a teenager would react, again, at that time. (Still, I couldn't stand the character of Lindsay. But at least that storyline gave her something to actually cry about. LOL)

18 minutes ago, adrnyc said:

In 1981, having parents who had a, what was called "shot gun wedding," made one a pariah at school in middle-America. So that storyline was extremely timely and exactly how a teenager would react, again, at that time.

point taken, and lesson learned - sorry for your devastation

10 minutes ago, Soaplovers said:

Season 2 proved that the show could have focused on the rich and famous.. and still had strong characters/plots.

Claudia's emotional and mental decline that played out throughout season 2 was so well done.. and it climaxed at the start of season 3 as an effective red herring when Little Blake was kidnapped.

Krystal vs Alexis was very effective in season 2 with the two correctly sizing one another up and being more subtle in their battle.  Their catfight in season 2 was effective because there was motivation behind it (Alexis causing Krystal's miscarriage).

Sammy Jo was an effective Have not element... but I do agree that maybe Heather Locklear should have been a recast Lindsay... who would have gone after Steven romantically for revenge because she blamed him for breaking up her parents marriage.  And her schemes against Krystal in later seasons would have been effective had she been Lindsay.

I agree.

If Heather Locklear had played Lindsay instead of Sammy Jo, she would have had two reasons for seducing and then marrying Steven: to grab a piece of the Carrington fortune for herself; and to humiliate Claudia for humiliating Matthew when she admitted to the affair with Steven at Blake's trial: a revelation that led to the breakup of the Blaisdels' marriage, which, in turn, caused Matthew to flee with Lindsay to South America, where he ended up getting killed.  (If I had been in the Shapiros' or Pollocks' position, I might even have thrown in a twist: Blake, concerned that Steven's homosexuality will prove to be an embarrassment to the family and a detriment to Denver Carrington, offers Lindsay $1 million to seduce Steven into marriage, and another million if their union produces an heir).  To make matters worse, Lindsay pretends to bond with her new stepmother-in-law, Krystle, despite still being angry over Matthew and Krystle's affair, because she knows how much it would hurt Claudia to lose both her husband and her only child to the same woman.

31 minutes ago, Soaplovers said:

Kirby was sweet.. but lacked agency.

Kirby exemplified the Pollocks' tendency - both on DYNASTY and on THE DOCTORS - to make their "good" characters passive to the point of being frustrating.

I would have gone in a completely different direction with Adam.  For one thing, I would have introduced him as a priest, someone who wants even less to do with the Carrington empire than does Steven.  If nothing else, it would have provided actual conflict with Steven, as Adam struggles with reconciling the tenets of his faith with his long-lost sibling's homosexuality.  And you still could have the triangle with Kirby and Jeff, and even the baby, but you wouldn't have needed the rape, because Adam/Kirby clearly would be the couple to root for, with Kirby marrying Jeff and lying to Adam about the baby's paternity, because she doesn't want to cause Adam to leave the church.

But, when Kirby pulls the gun on Alexis, and Alexis hardly flinches, while Kirby is trembling like a mouse, that was a good scene.  It's got all the Dynasty characteristics. Kirby in a tiny hat with a veil.  Alexis being threatened, but knowing the stakes are low.  And, no follow-up discussion when it's over.

Totally inappropriate by today's standards, and apologies in advance to anyone who has pulled a gun on their mother-in-law, but, very entertaining within that context.

43 minutes ago, Soapsuds said:

You knew the show was toast when the 85-86 cliffhanger was so bad....

Claudia and her open window candles mess.

Blake strangling Alexis

And the worst.....Amanda and Sammy Jo physically fighting over the dull love boat guy.

"Who Shot Alexis?" would have been just the shot in the arm that DYNASTY needed at that point.  I mean, she finally - FINALLY! - got the revenge she had long sought against Blake.  What better time to have someone try and off the witch in her penthouse?  There were certainly plenty of suspects to go around, lol.

3 minutes ago, Khan said:

"Who Shot Alexis?" would have been just the shot in the arm that DYNASTY needed at that point.  I mean, she finally - FINALLY! - got the revenge she had long sought against Blake.  What better time to have someone try and off the witch in her penthouse?  There were certainly plenty of suspects to go around, lol.

Yup I thought the same. Instead Blake strangled her...so anticlimactic and an awful way to end the cliffhanger.

6 minutes ago, Khan said:

"Who Shot Alexis?" would have been just the shot in the arm that DYNASTY needed at that point.  I mean, she finally - FINALLY! - got the revenge she had long sought against Blake.  What better time to have someone try and off the witch in her penthouse?  There were certainly plenty of suspects to go around, lol.

Well, they kind of had their "who shot Alexis" in season 4, only changed the word "shot" to "framed". 

22 hours ago, te. said:

Well, they kind of had their "who shot Alexis" in season 4, only changed the word "shot" to "framed". 

Neal McVane was the George Santos of Denver, both congressmen who were bad at drag.

(thanks to youmiserablebitch blog for the photo)

Edited November 18, 20232 yr by j swift

It actually looks like they used the model that stood in for Alexis in the print ad. 

19 hours ago, te. said:

It actually looks like they used the model that stood in for Alexis in the print ad. 

Who looks like Hillary Clinton.

I am in the middle of season two when Dynasty is not quite *Dynasty* yet. It is nice to find myself watching in the moment with only minimal mental flashes to the show's future. I wonder how many first run viewers forgot about the utterly camp Alexis and Adriana the fortune teller scene with its major foreshadowing.

@Soapsuds Any time I see the print ad, I hear the thrilling voice of ABC reading it in my head.  Is this Ernie Anderson?

 

Edited November 20, 20232 yr by j swift

Nice to see PlutoTV has made it to Season 9 (“No Bones about it” is on right now) and Amazon Prime has it back on again. It’s been years since I did a full rewatch, and I mainly remember Seasons 1-4 and 9 the most.

Still to this day never understood why Fallon’s UFO story was carried onto the main show lol. There are still jokes about it in Season 9, yikes!