Discussion in 'Dynasty 2017 on The CW' started by tommie, Aug 7, 2017.
Was there any new material in it? Can't tell...
Please loose that horrible rocky music. NOW.
Sure was. There was an extra bit of Steven alone with Cristal, explaining what Fallon's deal is ("She was expecting a promotion, not a stepmother"), which does further my hope that they'll still have Steven and Cristal form a bond (perhaps one that'll force Steven to make some tough decisions as the women he's closest to start a war with each other); and there's another part where Blake tells Fallon she's not driving away "this one" aka Cristal, hinting that Fallon has chased away all of Daddy's girlfriends before, a detail I find rather delicious, in that it shows Fallon is still a possessive Daddy's Girl (that was one of my favorite features about her in the original). X)
@Ked has an avatar!!!
That's what I liked as well with original Dynasty. I didn't see Fallon as being possessive rather protecting her father because for many years it was just the three of them...until Krystal arrives.
Yes. The lovely @Ome surprised me with this very lovely avatar... which makes me think about how unimaginative my penname is, , but hey, its too late to change it now: I've gotten too used to it, and I'm sure everybody on here has too. And besides, it fits perfectly into the avatar, so, meh. It works out.
I suppose so... although in season 1, Steven did have a moment with Krystle where he told her that Fallon didn't want to share Blake with anyone (whether that included is debatable).
I am not sure about liking the new Dynasty based on the previews. I am going to give it the fate as the TNT Dallas.
Hate the house. Hate the hard music. Hate the tacky quaility. Didn't feel like Dynasty at all to me. As other have said here about salacious moments the writers can do but are unable to weave it all together, I'd say that's what this looked liked. I was expecting more Empire infused Dynasty. What I saw was more Kardashian infused Rosanne. What ever it was, it certainly wasn't Dynasty.
Can I ask, does anyone know why they are redoing Dynasty? Why didn't they just put new names on these people and do their own thing? It's not like Empire and it's three sons didn't look an aweful Dallas like in the set up. I can't figure out the purpose if they're really. Keep keeping anything but the family structure.
Cuz they can? Meh? Who can say?
With TNT Dallas I sought ways of watching episodes as they were released as I wasn't sure at the time if any Australian commercial network would pick it up. I won't be looking for Dynasty 2.0 the same way. If a network here in Oz decides to screen it I'll give it a look. In the meantime I cannot wait to read the comments on soapchat as Dynasty 2.0 episodes are viewed. The issue of course will arise comparing it to the original which will be difficult for those that watched ABC Dynasty.
Because it has a recognizable brand name. And some executive may have heard of the show and decided to do it (don't buy into the Shapiros' claims that they're all that closely involved in the production -- Esther is about to turn 90; they're just enhancing a financial legacy for their children by leasing the title and basic concept. And Goddess bless 'em).
I mean, what was a 2017 DYNASTY going to look and feel like, anyway?? Exactly this.
Now, it may not suck compared to other stuff on the air today. It may even be more competent (and probably will) then much of the original series. But what I see in the trailers is what we knew to expect: a lot of swaggering women, people tossing out wall-to-wall 'I-know-more-about-the-world-than-you-do-and-I'm-gonna-kick-your-ass!' slams, with those sauntering women taking time out of their hostility to be kissed by affluent men.
Sure, the oldDYNASTY did all those things, too. But that was more about efforts at high-class repartee (admittedly, not always well) while this seems to be the contemporary 'we-all-just-escaped-from-a-brothel-and-now-we-got-us-a-Bentley-beeeyatccchhhhhh!' digs between sex and slugfest.
But let's face it: has anybody watched the Miss America Pageant, or any other pageant, in recent years? The swimsuit competition, when there is one and there usually is, has the girls strutting like literal prostitutes across the stage, the slattern swag a shocking departure from the old "we're pretending to be ladies" approach from days of yore.
I'm not saying that's bad. Even the oldDYNASTY played a role in vulgarizing the culture. But once the series ended, that vulgarization kept going.
And so this is what they've got to give us today.
The visuals will be better (not only due to budget issues and digital technology, but creative people who know how to do montages in a way the Pollocks rarely thought of except when Alexis went to find Ben in Australia and we saw some stock footage of a koala climbing up a bamboo tree because those Pollocks didn't want to get fired that week) and plotting will probably be better, too. That won't be difficult achieve.
But the casting will not be the same nor have the same appeal. Yes, most actors affect a convincing attitude today far more effortlessly than they once did, so none of the cast is likely to stink.
Yet the original's seeming goal of creating a prime time Camelot (which the '80s show mostly failed at doing) certainly can't happen with the all-too-slick but soulless performers usually on display in the present.
I'll watch the pilot out of lurid curiosity, but is there even a sliver of a possibility I could be wrong? One can't see how.
Maybe it'll be okay. But it can't be very special, can it?
Excellent post. Well let's hope it's special. Even though I didn't really watch the original, it certainly sounds like it was thought provoking for the time. Let's hope there's at least a touch of class somewhere in this version and all the vulgarity is tampered a bit. But honestly the trailer didn't get me to want to watch. In fact I felt like I walked into a Rolls Royce dealership where they showed me a customized, all blinged out in diamonds and platinum, supper stretched "car." They then preceded to tell me buying it would show I'd arrived and how much I'd impress everyone. I walked out being very unimpressed. So if they're not going to sell me a Rolls Royce / Dynasty, why bother putting the label on it? I'll only end up that much more disappointed when looking at what doesn't live up to my expectations.
But that's the fun part. Not about which one is better, but to see what has stayed the same and what has changed.
It's just a great opportunity to watch the dynasty saga again, in an updated version.
If we can all agree that original Dynasty is better (even if it isn't), then at least we don't have to worry about that aspect anymore.
Wouldn't it be more fun to focus on what it has to offer, rather than all the things it's not going to be?
I, for one, am not concerned with which one is "better" because, as I said, both versions will likely have done something "better" than the other.
By the way you inspired me to a darker fan fiction, you know rape, murder, killing unborn babies. These people were vicious. Anyway I used Margret Krebs (tought about Lucas Krebs) from Dallas, Betsy Ewing from Knots Landing (thought about Meg McKenzie) and Kevin Channing from Falcon Crest.
Separate names with a comma.