Dallas: Discussion Thread

[Khan]

I think the 2012 series was a good idea, but I agree with David Jacobs that they relied too much on the original cast members, who should have made limited or recurring appearances, and that the younger generation should have taken over more.  I think the fact that they didn't was a sign that TPTB weren't too sure about the younger generation carrying the show on their own.

I also agree with DJ that John Ross should have been more like Bobby and Christopher should have been more like J.R.  If nothing else, "flipping the script" like that would've given Patrick Duffy and Larry Hagman more challenging stuff to play with, rather than a retread of familiar dynamics.

Edited May 22, 2023 by Khan

[AmandainNC28655]

I have always said that the TNT 2012 series should have focused more on the younger generation. We didn't need Judith Light's character or if they were going to introduce her have her be the widow of Jeremy Wendell.  

I always thought that they're could've been more elements added had they focused on Bobby and Jenna's son Lucas coming to town finding out he was really Bobby's son and not Ray's. Just think of the angst and storyline that might have opened up for Christopher and played on his insecurities. 

I also thought it would have been a great time to bring Victoria Principal back as Pam and either given Bobby and Pam there happily ever after or both of them move on.  So much potential could've been done.  I 

 

[Broderick]

Which is kind of the opposite of what Dallas was intended to be.  For the 1978 version, TPTB outfitted themselves pretty well with veteran actors for the tentpole characters -- Barbara Bel Geddes, Jim Davis, & David Wayne -- but they let the younger actors carry the majority of the storylines.  Producers don't have that confidence anymore.  

[DRW50]

I don't think it helped that their younger cast sucked. 

[Khan]

I agree.

I knew the revival series was in trouble when Gary and Val returned.  The original series never really needed them.

[Vee]

I'm just amused Jacobs vetoed them using Abby. He was right to do it.

[Khan]

I agree here, too.

I was always confused as to whom the 2012 series was really for.  Was it purely for those who had watched the original series?  Or was the revival series aiming for a new and maybe younger audience, who might have a passing remembrance of it?

Plus, it seemed like the revival series was trying to be a combination of the original series' first couple of seasons, when the stories were smaller and less soapy; and the original DALLAS' later seasons, when it was an all-out soap opera.  Maybe it's because people's regard for soaps have fallen even lower than before, but it was like Cynthia Cidre was afraid to let the revival series become a full-fledged soap.

I agree, lol!  You could argue that J.R.'s visits to Knots Landing were interesting, if only because Larry Hagman and Donna Mills had chemistry.  But Abby in ANY version of DALLAS would have been a mistake.

Edited May 22, 2023 by Khan

[Vee]

I'll admit to not having watched it, but I still can't imagine how a new show could've so bungled a setup involving Judith Light, Mitch Pileggi and Carlos Bernard all in the same series as heavies. That is a murderer's row. I guess it comes down to the plotting and the young leads being miscast (though I've always liked Jordana Brewster).

[Khan]

The revival series really needed a Peter Dunne.

[Soaplovers]

Cynthia Cidre admitted never seeing the original..and that each writer would view sections of the original show...so that could explain why the show seemed so disjointed with the self contained/soap structure.

I would have maybe did the more self contained format in the 1st season back...at least till we knew all the younger characters in adult form...while having Bobby/Sue Ellen/Jr crew keep the soapy aspect going since we all knew them.

[Khan]

I didn't know that, @Soaplovers, but I'm not surprised.  I don't believe Cidre held any real affinity for the original series, its' characters or its' storylines.

[DRW50]

Back when the show started I remember some here, like @Chris B, talking about her, and among other things people mentioned how bad her previous shows had been and that she clearly had no idea how to produce a soap. It was a failure from the start, due to a) a lack of care and b) yet another example of industry people who are ashamed of soaps and do whatever they can to not incorporate the soap genre even if it means the most generic oatmeal possible.

[Khan]

I agree.  Given her track record, I wonder why WB/TNT thought she'd be a good showrunner for this project.  Maybe it was just to fulfill some contractual obligation, lol.

[Soaplovers]

Speaking of Cynthia Cidre... her response in 2012 about her favorite show probably explains why she seems to have trouble with running shows:

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/dallas-cynthia-cidre-376016/#!

[Khan]

LOL!

Well, look, you can't judge* a writer by their favorite TV shows, movies, books, etc.  Looking closely at her resume, however, I can see why WB and TNT hired her to run the revival series.  "In Country" and "A Killing in a Small Town" were good movies that featured the kind of characters you might have found on a series like DALLAS.  I only wish she had brought some of THAT to the revival series.

 

(*No pun intended, lol.)

Edited May 23, 2023 by Khan