Jump to content

Dallas 2.0: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

DYNASTY declined, because the constant push to best DALLAS and top their own "Moldavian Massacre" had resulted in a show that had become more OTT and ridiculous than the laws of human decency should have allowed. (DYNASTY always had been campy. After Moldavia, though, it just became downright bizarre.) And FALCON CREST declined, IMO, because the constant back-and-forth between Angela, Richard, and others over who controlled what was just too confusing. Conversely, although KNOTS wasn't exactly like it had been in seasons past, there still was enough about it that had remained recognizable and comfortable to viewers. IOW, KNOTS didn't really lose ground at that point, because they had remained somewhat consistent.

Same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Dynasty just lost any sense of believability or humanity in the characters. I read somewhere that the producers asked the actors to move as little as possible in scenes, to just be wooden, to put focus on the story only, not the performances. If that's true then it really did wreak some havoc, as the early seasons worked thanks to lively characters like Fallon. Just compare that to the loser Emma Samms played for most of her run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Although I don't necessarily want a reboot, I think Knots would be a lot easier to reboot than Dallas, even if it was filled with entirely new characters and the "younger" generation. I think what helped that show was that it was more about community and more of an ensemble than its sister show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Callie was just awful but luckly Sue Ellen was there to make fun of the whole marriage. Thats the only thing that kept me watching....The JR plots became insane and him being out smarted by Callie and James was just plain stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Frankly, I don't think so. Look, DALLAS is a soap, but it isn't a daytime soap. You couldn't bring Bobby back from the dead, or say Patrick Duffy is coming back as Bobby's long-lost twin brother, without it coming across as the most absurd plot twist ever (and contrary to what others might think, if they had tried either of those scenarios, DALLAS itself would have been gone in a year, tops). Nor could you pull a Ken Corday and just have him come on as a new, unrelated character, because viewers will want to know why these people are acting as if he doesn't resemble Bobby Ewing. I'm sorry that Duffy had to learn the hard way how much he needed DALLAS to keep working as an actor. Dwindling ratings or not, though, the show should have turned down Hagman's and others' suggestion to bring him back. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's because Hagman and Katzman refused to see the writing on the wall, so to speak, and give DALLAS a proper send-off. Did they know the ratings were in the toilet? Yes. However, even now, I recall reading SOD and Katzman referring to it as a season, rather than a series, finale.

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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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