Jump to content

Dallas 2.0: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I think it'll hit me he's gone as the season progresses. I like Bobby as the sole patriarch fighting outsiders, it works for me. The show has good moments and I am sometimes surprised by it, but in a lot of ways, it's lacking.

Oh, anyone wanna see Jesse Metcalfe's new mansion? Ugh.

http://www.celebuzz.com/2013-03-18/from-dallas-to-los-angeles/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Gary and Val were original Dallas characters, regardless of Knots Landing. The first full season of Dallas began by telling their story first. They are very important to the fabric of the show, especially when you consider Lucy was a main character for many years. Their return doesn't need a lot of backstory, that's just an excuse for bad writing. It's simple: Gary is JR and Bobby's brother, Valene is Gary's wife and Lucy is their child. The writers haven't done anything to develop Lucy and this was the perfect opportunity. Basically, this amounted to nothing. At least for Gary and Val, they at least set things up well, but there was no follow through. Their first scene should've been followed with the offscreen Gary/Val reunion and the Sue Ellen/Valene scene suggested an actual story. If they knew this was the only episode they were using Joan for, they should've used that time to put her in a scene with Lucy and/or Gary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I KNOW the backstory, that Lucy lived at Southfork as a teenager, etc., etc. But frankly, I don't care about watching Gary, Val and Lucy because 1. Joan Van Ark looks like a walking corpse and is painful to watch, and 2. She's had so damn much plastic surgery that it's not believable to anyone watching that Lucy is supposed to be her child. Charlene Tilton has aged like a normal woman, and seeing her next to JVA is ridiculous. Lucy's parents look more like her siblings.

I felt like more could have been done with Gary regarding the mineral rights, and maybe that will happen at some point. Lucy has been on before, and they haven't bothered to give her a storyline, so I'm not sure why her parents (who look more like her siblings) showing up would somehow translate to a storyline now. Honestly, Lucy is the only one I wouldn't mind seeing more of going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Like a lot of young parents, the age difference between them and their children seems less and less as they all age, but accepting Val's appearance without factoring in cosmetic surgery is a leap.

I really do enjoy the show but it sometimes feels like the hour isn't quite enough, especially when you toss in a Gary/Val/Lucy when so much else is going on, or they want to devote such large chunks of story to Ann/Emma/Harris/Judith. They occupy any space the original series stars who are reduced to cameos might get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You can tell Charlene is pissed, but doesn't want to be too obvious because she wants to be invited back. However, if you're going to bring anybody back it needs to serve a purpose. Especially for people who have never seen the original. WIthin the context of this show you have no idea who Ray or Lucy are. You think Mandy and Cally were both former wives of JR and you have no idea they really existed on the original, etc. It's just bad writing to bring on characters in such a plot driven fashion and do nothing with them. Even the new characters Cidre creates are poorly developed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I agree. How would new viewers even care about who those people are? I'm not saying I want everyone back leading storylines but the cameos and throwaway lines are more insulting than anything. It was why I thought they could have done much better with JR's farewell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Now they are writing Afton as a troublemaker??...oye.....and when did Sue Ellen start hating Afton again...she treated Mandy better than Afton although we didnt get a scene...these writers suck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

ellabelle, I am glad someone here has some sense!!

I think they need to give the show 20-25 episodes per season. The old series got away with the character driven stuff because they had more episodes and I think they had more programming time for each episode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Dear Cynthia Cidre,

If you are reading this thread please know that you are doing a great job and most of these people have no idea what "contemporary" means if they fell over a 1000 page dictionary with "Contemporary" printed 40 times on each page along with the definition. If I were you I would ask TNT if you can have 20-25 episodes per season so we can have more of your great story and vision. If not, that is fine! I am enjoying Dallas 2.0 more than any TV series right now.

Sincerely,

Allmc2008

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Definition of contemporary
adjective
  • 1living or occurring at the same time:the event was recorded by a contemporary historian
  • dating from the same time:this series of paintings is contemporary with other works in an early style
  • 2belonging to or occurring in the present:the tension and complexities of our contemporary society
  • following modern ideas in style or design:contemporary ceramics by leading potters
noun (plural contemporaries)
  • a person or thing living or existing at the same time as another:he was a contemporary of Darwin
  • a person of roughly the same age as another:my contemporaries at school
Clearly, you haven't watched British television. They "get away with" character driven storyline in series that have 6-10 episodes a year so that excuse is ridiculous.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

ummmn...I'm not sure what the definition of "contemporary" has to do with the criticisms of Dallas. It's not an acting showcase by any means. But honestly, neither was the original. And I don't think it's too much to expect that if they bring back familiar characters, that they're written with consideration to their previous "life" or at least given more than a dayplayer's line or two in an episode.

If there's one piece of advice to be given, it's not to waste the goodwill Dallas has. I mean, just hearing the opening chords of the theme song puts a smile on my face. You can't buy that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Please register in order to view this content

         
    • @TaoboiI ran into Dani’s favorite party planner again tonight

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I think they’re desperately trying to cover his awful tattoos. But anyway them being unable to style short kings properly has been a major pet peeve of mine for a while now.  I honestly don’t understand what some people expect from actors to even begin considering them for recognition. Let’s be real—awards mostly mean that an actor is respected by their peers and has some level of cultural relevance. Actual judgment on the acting itself? That’s often secondary—highly subjective and shaped by the times. I completely agree on both points. If you’re an actor or a dancer you shouldn’t get any tattoos (sorry not sorry). Tomas’ tattoos are ugly too. And regarding the couples- you’re completely right. These writers are unable to write romance.   Further comments: - Kat cannot be this dumb to keep tampering with evidence over and over again. And I’m officially not a fan of the actress—every time she’s in a scene with Leslie, she doesn’t seem intimidated at all. She plays it like comic relief, which is just too much, especially when paired with Leslie’s histrionics and over-the-top antics. Leslie is older, dangerous, and has literally been portrayed as homicidal—Kat should be at least a little scared. • I also didn’t like Kat playing damsel in distress with the hotel manager. It gave off the same weird energy as Dani with the cop. I would’ve much preferred the version Paul Raven suggested, with her sneaking in through housekeeping. • And yes, Dani again accused Hayley of faking the pregnancy—this time even specifying she might be using a pillow under her shirt. (No fake miscarriage being mentioned) I stand by my take: this is ridiculous writing. No one in the real world—except us, the chronically online soap watchers—would even think of such a conspiracy theory. Haley is no Beyoncé. • What in the world was Chelsea wearing in her hair the other day? And this whole thing with Madison is beyond cringe. Chelsea’s coming off as needy and toxic—basically like every other Dupree. • I’m glad the casino storyline is moving forward, but it’s still boring as hell. Honestly, I’d be so here for a plot twist where Vanessa and Doug take Joey out. • The direction and editing lately have been rough. Abrupt cuts, weird pacing… something just feels off overall. There’s a strange uneasiness to how it’s all coming together. • And finally: Tomas is too much of a saint. Where are the messy sluts when you need them? (Vanessa doesn’t count.)
    • I was watching some August 1987 episodes and they brought back so many memories. I had some thoughts: Lisa and Jamie were so dull. Lisa was such a nothing character. It boggles my mind that so much story was centered around her in such a short amount of time. Joanna Going is a talented actress, but the material was just not there.  It was so good to see Wallingford and Mitch again. I know there was talk about Felicia a while back, but these episodes reminded me how integral Felicia was for the show.  Sally Spencer was done so dirty. She is turning in superb performances in an icky storyline. I wish she had stuck around longer. She has chemistry with everyone. The McKinnons should have lasted longer. Spencer had some strong stuff with Stephen Schnetzer and Mary Alexander. AW waster such a talented actress by getting rid of her. Justice for Cheryl too. I also missed Ed Fry when he left. Sandra Ferguson was a star from the moment she came on. She was charismatic and just popped. She had immediate chemistry with RKK and blended in well with Wyndham and Watson. I'd forgotten about the teenage Matthew.  I have no memory of Peggy Lazarus. She must not have lasted long. Was the original plan for John that he was going to turn out to be the twins' real father?      
    • If the new and improved copies that @rsclassicfanforever has uploaded can be manually moved into the "by month, by year" folders, that would be awesome. I personally don't think it's necessary to keep the older versions (which either have Dutch subtitles hard coded on them, or are lesser in picture quality). That's a lot of valuable drive space that could be cleared. Just my view but can appreciate others may feel differently. The structure had been by month by year previously, so I think it would be easier to conform to that, where so much prior work to get it to that format has already been done. Hopefully you can "drag and drop" so the new copies are in the right month/year? Re Clips, I never look at them now we pretty much have the episodes in full. Appreciate others may use, however. Thanks for all your hard work here @BoldRestless!
    • Oh yes defintely, Josh Griffith repeats and repeats the same storylines.
    • Isnt’t this storyline similar to the Cameron Kirsten situation though? Sharon thought she killed him. He ended up being alive and Sharon was being tormented with thinking she was seeing his face everywhere and that’s how we got that iconic scene with her and Nikki in the sewers.   I understand in Mariah’s case this is different circumstances but it does seem like a play on that whole thing. Maybe I’m wrong. I just wish if they were going to make any character follow in Sharon’s foot steps it would be Faith. Mariah wasn’t even raised by her, and her personality is different. I would expect her to take a different path. I understand I could be completely jumping ahead because the storyline hasn’t even played out yet but we’ll see. 
    • Thanks again @Paul Raven Monica was completely without redeeming qualities at this point. I always found the whole Monica = Carly narrative regressive, as I don't think shows comparing characters so heavily is ever a great idea, but she's actually worse than Carly was. Was it the Pollocks who had Leslie have a miscarriage?  Giving her a child, especially by rape, was not a good idea, but a part of me wishes they'd committed to it just to see what story it might have had in later years.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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