Jump to content

Knots Landing


Sedrick

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Dallas introduced some interesting female characters, but they never amounted to much. I thought Michelle was a good addition, but she was interacting with people who were too old for her so she felt out of place. I also thought they did a great job with re-introducing a stronger, more snarky Lucy, but she sat there for like three seasons with absolutely no story. The best of the bunch for me was Cally, JR's child bride. She had one of the worst introduction stories I've ever seen, but her relationship with JR was surprisingly very interesting and she was a great actress. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

One other factor to the writers burning through the Season 5 story bible early, was that the season was extended from 22 to 25 eps. (can't find the source now, but remember reading that) And then seasons 6-8 were all super-sized at 30 eps each.

= =

My impression is that Cathy Geary was more of a character created "on-the-fly", rather than planned with much foresight. After Ciji was killed off, Lisa Hartman signed a contract for a new ABC show "High Performance". Fortunately it tanked in the ratings and LH became available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I did finish Season 5! Very solid stuff. I think I may try to cover it and the opening eps of Season 6 in one go in a more abstracted overview, because I'm very busy right now. I did want to make a point of admiration re: the well-known climactic scene of the season with the cliffhanger at the hotel and Karen being shot in that blood-red dress by Twin Peaks' own Grace Zabriskie. I especially liked the great climactic moment where the whole eternal Val/Gary/Abby triangle is explicated onscreen with Gary literally torn between them physically in the parking lot. Man, if Mack's stunting here isn't grounds for divorce I don't know what is.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I love that interpretation, and it adds to the character’s backstory from before she arrived.  Abby has an entire past that was not as explored as it could have been.  I kind of wish we had gotten an origin season with implications for the present like we get with Mack/Anne.  We know she is frustrated because she has all this talent and intelligence and feels unfulfilled as time went on before she was with Gary.

Knots has the best set of characters by far during this period.  They cut the right people and invested in the best new characters, minus Richard, who I think could have still had a place on the show.  Although would Laura have been given the excellent development she received this season if Richard was still there?

Edited by titan1978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree that would've been very interesting. We saw very little of Jeff Cunningham but the man who turned up in Season 2, though he'd obviously gone to an extreme that was unlike who he might have been before, was no picnic. I seem to recall Abby mentioning her and Sid's father too, but I don't remember the details.

I previously had thought it wasn't totally necessary to cut Richard at the end of Season 4 given Pleshette's immense talent, but now I'm more inclined to agree with him that he would've had no solid place on the canvas. More importantly, as you say, I don't think Laura could've fully blossomed with him around. I do think they could've brought Richard back more often in a recurring role, but that's another pipe dream. And while Laura's role has already become somewhat transformed, her voice and attitude are so different that I think losing her down the road will be very tough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The only two natural places I could see Richard are as Abby’s scheming lawyer or someone working for Sumner.  And both placements kind of ice out Laura.  And of the two, I prefer Constance and Laura.  And I loved Abby’s rapport with her lawyer in season 5.  They both bring an element of sardonic wit to their portrayals.  And I really did miss Laura.  This might be blasphemy, but I could have taken more seasons of Laura instead of what we did get for Valene.

Its so funny to me that I also didn’t watch the show as it was airing back then.  I was watching the more hip programming on NBC (LA LAW, Hill Street Blues). I caught episodes airing I think on TBS one summer when I was not in classes, it was almost the end of the show and I got really hooked in by what turned out to be the last 8 or so episodes.  They even aired the special that happened just before the final episode.  I fell in love with Abby even then, only in a couple of episodes and the special.  Then it all started over again with season 1, and I got to see the classic storylines thanks to my VCR timer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It is surprising to me how quickly they seemed to ditch the Gary/Cathy affair - I'm talking about it now simply because one of Cathy's few scenes (possibly her only one) in the Season 5 finale is telling Laura she's leaving town because there's nothing for her here and it's obvious to her Gary is not over Val. This seems to come out of almost nowhere to me; Gary and Cathy discuss their past entanglements very openly and honestly once they become intimate, particularly once he's in isolation with her faking his death at the police station, and there doesn't seem to be any profound beat or confession that he can't get over either Val or Abby. Cathy seems very understanding of Gary's complicated feelings for the other two women, who they discuss, just as he is of hers for Ray (which is a great scene for her, mourning his death), and they still seem to be together. But you cut to an episode later and Cathy says she's leaving because Gary still has Val in his heart. What? I don't get it.

Obviously they were planning even then to begin to pivot away from the affair, but I think it's a little bit of a loss. Not that I think Gary and Cathy were a romance for the ages, but I personally liked their unpretentious, matter of fact chemistry and natural, athletic interplay a lot and I thought it was something very different from Mills and Van Ark. It could've driven story for a bit as his kicky midlife crisis and gone to some interesting places. But it also seems clear at the end of Season 5 (just as at the beginning of the season, when Abby had been all but positioned as the evil queen at the end of S4 before they reset) that they again decided 'hey, maybe we're not done with Gary and Abby after all,' there's still a lot of complicated love there, hence the emphasis on Abby's love and guilt over him in the final hours of the season, her willingness to risk her life for him, and Gary running after her in the car and leaving Val in the dust in the final moments of "Negotiations". Tommy Krasker again has an interesting take on the finale sequence; I don't agree with all of it but with a large portion of it, and it's beautiful analysis:

Richard returning as Greg Sumner's major domo in say, Season 6 or 7 - once he's firmly established with Laura - would've been very interesting, at least as a guest spot. Richard as a stand-in for Jim Westmont is interesting but I think would've just become an ancillary role. But yes, I agree I prefer McCashin hanging around.

Edited by Vee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I did not see Mack as celebrating a win - he's absolutely shattered and is trying to cling to any shreds of sanity as he cradles the wife he may have just killed. 

The Val/Gary/Abby moment is to me not about who Gary loves more - that choice would have been true if he'd had to choose directly between them in perilous moments. He'd already saved Val.  If he'd had to choose he likely would have chosen Val. The moment is to remind us that Val and Gary will never have a simple reunion. Abby is still there, and Gary still loves her. If I had to go further I'd say the moment is also exposing the core of both relationships - Val is subjected to trials outside of her control, trials mostly just brought on by the toxicity that comes naturally to the Ewing lifestyle, while Abby is trapped in a prison of her own making. Gary can never free Abby from that prison. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree, but I see it a little of both ways. Mack is completely off the spool in the last few episodes of the season with mania over Wolfbridge; anyone who tries to talk any sense into him, not just Karen but Greg, Gary, Detective Morrison, even Abby who all tell him to pull back, he can't do it. When Karen comes to him and tells him she's been contacted by St. Claire and that his life is on the line, his reaction is very literally 'that's good news! They're desperate!' She's terrified and he is elated. It's clear the writers are telling us Mack has gone way too far, and that's after he admittedly risked the lives of Val's unborn babies, something Ben rightly punches him out for when he figures out the truth, and which put all their families in a terrible state which is something Karen invokes re: the boys.

I don't think Mack is celebrating a win, but I do think he's clinging to whatever sense of rationale he has to keep himself sane, and that means going back to the central obsessive drive that got them all here: 'Getting' Wolfbridge. So it seems like he can't even mourn or regret in a functional or coherent way, he just keeps chanting his life's purpose to his wife's prone body.

I agree it's not about who he loves more, but I do think it's indicative that he cannot and will not let go of Abby no matter how much he loves Val. I do not agree with Krasker that Gary is the same man he was at the end of Season 3, but I do think Abby is a pull on him stronger than even Gary realized, which is why he abandons Val there without thought. The women have an equal place in his heart and mind at that moment IMO, which is something Gary had been denying to himself for the stretch of the final eps until that instant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

They did a fantastic job with Gary/Val/Ben/Abby.  I genuinely wanted Gary and Abby to stay together and Val and Ben.  I prefer them in those pairings, even if I also am a fan of the longing and history of Gary/Val.

It does suck that Cathy and Gary no longer share much after this storyline.  He would have been a natural source of antagonism and jealousy for Joshua had their friendship at least continued on more prominently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
    •   Thanks for sharing these. I wonder if Charles might have been in the running for Adam. I know Preacher was a bit of a bad boy at times on EON, but Neal seemed to be a step down, and Robert Lupone had played a similar part on AMC. Given the huge cast turnover at this point I wonder who thought they had been there long enough to go.  Laura Malone/Chris Rich would get a remote within the next year. 
    • Interesting.  It seems to allude to that statement that Warren Burton made around that time about some AW actors getting special treatment.  I wonder who was resentful about not getting to go. 
    • Good morning, boys!  I figured that it was time that our Gio was introduced into the hotness thread

      Please register in order to view this content

      @ranger1rg I even included a close up of his face for ya!
    • Under all of Madonna's social media today there is this wave of negative, toxic, absurd comments by Lady Gaga fans telling her how Gaga surpassed her in concert in Copacabana. I mean... Who the hell cares? Why are these fan communities so freaking toxic??? I'm sure Madonna doesn't care... But still. Have some respect for M. Leave her social media alone. Go cheer Gaga and be happy. Why come and spew hate on M??? Crazy world.
    • FYI, again, Ruth/Letitia is not in either of these 2 episodes. So that concludes the 4 episodes I had from Nov. 1983. I don't have the October episodes.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy