Dallas 2.0: Discussion Thread

Hell Falcon Crest had a better series finale than Dallas or Dynasty.

You know you've stayed a few years too late at the party when fuckin' Falcon Crest bests you at anything...

Oh with Angela looking out at Falcon Crest and taking about all the visitors and family members that had passed through FC. Yes, that was a nice ending with not much ratings success either unfortunately...

Dynasty...lol.....Alexis and Dex falling off a balcony....lol...looked so fake...and Blake being shot. Even Dynasty which ended 2 years before Dallas couldnt muster ratings success one more time on its last show.

Edited July 4, 201213 yr by Soapsuds

Dallas was great up until Jock died, and remained very good right up until Bobby died.

I have to really disagree. During the Jock years, the show "only" had one brilliant season (season 3 DVD, which ended with J.R.'s shooting). Jock's death prompted DALLAS' next two brilliant seasons, Seasons 6 and 7. Seven especially was as KNOTSian as DALLAS ever got. Yes, the dynamic Jock brought to the show was missed but I find it very unfair to say that Jock's death caused the show to be any less good. Instead, it brought us what would probably be the show's best business storyline.

Just finished watching the Wedding Masacar on Dynasty....LOL....how anyone survived that is beyond me.....lol...now on to Season 6 DVD I got in the mail .....and then the Dallas Marathon is going on right now..what to do....lol

That's the general complaint David Paulsen had about DYNASTY, too. As he explained in an interview (for knotslanding.net?), DYNASTY would have these tremendous cliffhangers; unlike DALLAS, though, DYNASTY's writers never paid them off. I mean, the insurgents storm into the chapel, shoot everyone there, but only two minor characters ended up dead while everyone else escaped with flesh wounds? Say what?

I have to really disagree. During the Jock years, the show "only" had one brilliant season (season 3 DVD, which ended with J.R.'s shooting). Jock's death prompted DALLAS' next two brilliant seasons, Seasons 6 and 7. Seven especially was as KNOTSian as DALLAS ever got. Yes, the dynamic Jock brought to the show was missed but I find it very unfair to say that Jock's death caused the show to be any less good. Instead, it brought us what would probably be the show's best business storyline.

I agree....Jock was just an afterthought for me....I think the show got better without Jock with Miss Ellie as head of the house. The last good season of Dallas was 87.

That's the general complaint David Paulsen had about DYNASTY, too. As he explained in an interview (for knotslanding.net?), DYNASTY would have these tremendous cliffhangers; unlike DALLAS, though, DYNASTY's writers never paid them off. I mean, the insurgents storm into the chapel, shoot everyone there, but only two minor characters ended up dead while everyone else escaped with flesh wounds? Say what?

The funny thing is, Jacobs and Fillerman hated what Paulsen did on Knots Landing during season 7. They thought he had made the show too OTT and overtly masculine (according to Fillerman, they tried hard to make Knots equal in terms of gender dominance).

I was looking/analyzing the ratings for the Knots and the other soaps last night. I noticed that Knots wasn't a huge hit as I once thought. I believe it only cracked the top 10 once in its run. And the rest of the time was in the 20's and 30's in the ratings for the various years. Even their last show only mustered 19 million in viewers while Dallas last show had 33 million viewers. Dallas numbers were bigger than any of the other soaps. Even Knots had horrible last couple of years...and yes if it wasnt for money the show would have lasted longer but really it was painful to watch the last few years. The Latham and Lechowick years were hated by most of the cast especially Mills and Van Ark. Only Michele Lee love Latham and Lechowick's material. Mills and Van Ark prefered Peter Dunne's writing during their time at Knots. Say what you may of Dallas but people still returned at the end.......

You know what all that says to me? Even though I have zero faith in TNT's abilities to mount a successful KNOTS continuation/reboot, the fact that KNOTS always maintained a stable and loyal, if not overwhelmingly large, audience proves KNOTS 2.0 could work now in cable, where the expectations are lower. I mean, for God's sake, they're calling DALLAS 2.0 a "victory" with 6 million people, which has to be a fraction of what the audience was even at the start of the original series.

Edited July 4, 201213 yr by Khan

That's the general complaint David Paulsen had about DYNASTY, too. As he explained in an interview (for knotslanding.net?), DYNASTY would have these tremendous cliffhangers; unlike DALLAS, though, DYNASTY's writers never paid them off. I mean, the insurgents storm into the chapel, shoot everyone there, but only two minor characters ended up dead while everyone else escaped with flesh wounds? Say what?

LOL...and Lady Ashley was one of them and only because she was taking pictures during the whole thing...lol...I still laugh at that to this day....the other one who died was Luke Fuller..figured it would be him.....after that what could Dynasty do to top themselves?? Nothing...the cliffhanger with Blake strangling Alexis was just absurd. The La Mirage fire was tame compared to the massacre

You know what all that says to me? Even though I have zero faith in TNT's abilities to mount a successful KNOTS continuation/reboot, the fact that KNOTS always maintained a stable and loyal, if not overwhelmingly large, audience proves KNOTS 2.0 could work now in cable, where the expectations are lower. I mean, for God's sake, they're calling DALLAS 2.0 a "victory" with 6 million people, which has to be a fraction of what the audience was even at the start of the original series.

This is 2012...not the 80s...no show would get those kind of numbers now....lol

The funny thing is, Jacobs and Fillerman hated what Paulsen did on Knots Landing during season 7. They thought he had made the show too OTT and overtly masculine (according to Fillerman, they tried hard to make Knots equal in terms of gender dominance).

What was season 7 all about?? See i dont even recall but Dallas I do...lol..and I am too lazy to look it up...lol..damn Warner for not releasing these Knots DVDs yet....lol

Oh and again what dvds have been released?? Dallas the whole series and Dynasty almost all of it?? Where is Knots and FC?? Still stuck on season 2....lol

I'm currently re-watching Knots and season 7 was MUCH better than given credit for and better than season 6 IMO. Yes it was more masculine, but the female characters were great. It was a very well plotted season. It's when Val got her babies back, Jill Bennett and Peter Hollister arrived and you had Gary blowing up Empire Valley. You also had the courtship of Laura and Greg, which was the best it was written in terms of Laura's perspective.

Fillerman's interview with KnotsLanding.net a few years back:

http://www.knotsland...elfilerman.html

Jason: That's great. Now, Season 7. We're very curious about Season 7

because that's the year that David Paulsen came over from DALLAS, I believe.

Michael: Uh huh.

Jason: It's a very interesting season. David Paulsen's quoted as saying he

wanted to masculinise KNOTS LANDING. Are you a fan of that season? Do you

remember it? Do you have any thoughts?

Michael: What did we do?

James: That's when Alec went off the building, and it's the year Gary blew

up Empire Valley, and he and Abby split up.

Jason: Yes, it's the whole Empire Valley saga.

James: And you've got Ben married to Val as well, with the twins.

Michael: Well, I thought it was a, you know, I thought it was a serviceable

season. I never agreed with David Paulsen. I mean, he wanted to make it

DALLAS and it's not DALLAS. And I resented that, to be very honest with you.

Michael: Because DALLAS was a male oriented show. The women were all weak

and the men were strong. (Mimicking Sue Ellen again) "Oh no, JR! Oh yes,

JR!" They kept driving into telephone poles.

Michael: Well, I don't think they really knew how to do it, to be honest

with you. I don't think they're the story tellers that David Jacobs is. And

again they had always - there was not one strong woman on the show. Maybe

Miss Ellie, but she wasn't a central character. She was a side character,

you know. And KNOTS LANDING had strong women and strong men and weak women

and weak men. I don't think David Paulsen was the - had the facility to

write complicated characters like that.

Edited July 4, 201213 yr by Y&RWorldTurner

You know you've stayed a few years too late at the party when fuckin' Falcon Crest bests you at anything...

Far be it from me to poo-pooh anyone's love for all things FALCON CREST, but I always felt as if that series suffered a serious case of schizophrenia. It never could decide whether to be another DALLAS or another DYNASTY -- and because most of the writers had come from Earl Hamner's previous series, "The Waltons," my theory is that they never were comfortable going in either direction. The only time FC appeared to know what it was doing was when Jeff Freilich ran the show; even then, though, his "vision" for FC (as a campy precursor to high-concept mystery-driven shows such as "Twin Peaks") had about as little to do with the show's original concept (namely, two factions within the same family fighting for dominance in California's wine country) as humanly possible.

But yeah, it's a miracle how FALCON CREST's series finale turned out as decent as it did, given the show's utterly tasteless final season.

The funny thing is, Jacobs and Fillerman hated what Paulsen did on Knots Landing during season 7. They thought he had made the show too OTT and overtly masculine (according to Fillerman, they tried hard to make Knots equal in terms of gender dominance).

Which is the strangest comment to me since I actually cannot tell the difference between that season and everything before or after it. I just appreciate the fact that KNOTS' characters always had one, clear through-line and never changed just for the sake of story.

Oh with Angela looking out at Falcon Crest and taking about all the visitors and family members that had passed through FC. Yes, that was a nice ending with not much ratings success either unfortunately.

I blame that on the almost concerted effort that successive writing and production teams made in pissing away FC's capital and general goodwill with its audience. It's one thing when DALLAS' mistakes in its later seasons cause viewers to turn away; as the ratings for their finale proved, DALLAS' fans never stopped loving DALLAS just because they couldn't watch it anymore. Conversely, FC fans appear to have felt cheated and robbed by their show in ways that were both immeasurable and deep.

In a way, it's like when a daytime soap goes off the air for good. Some fans return because they know it's "the end," and they need the sense of closure. Most, though, have this attitude of, "Screw 'em, after what those bastards did to me? They can have their big finish without me!".

Edited July 4, 201213 yr by Khan

Since I mentioned it earlier, here's the interview Jacobs gave KnotsLandingonline in 2006 for those who've never read it:

http://www.knotslanding.net/interviews/davidjacobs.htm

Even Dynasty which ended 2 years before Dallas couldnt muster ratings success one more time on its last show.

It didn't help matters, though, that the Roger Grimes mystery was both obvious and dull, and probably the last nail in that show's coffin. Frankly, David Paulsen never should taken on the gig. He just should have waited until Katzman was ready to promote him to Supervising Producer, which I am certain would have happened after Calvin Clements Jr. had left the show.