Maybe they lived in the attic.

 

It was occupied.

 

There were several missed opportunities where they could have tapped into the history of the original series. One of the most obvious examples would have been finding out Ann Ewing had previously had a one night stand with Cliff. It would have been a nice homage since Brenda Strong played both characters. Mama Ryland basically said Ann was a whore in her younger days who ran around on Harris with different men, so it wouldn't have been far fetched. Another angle involving the Rylands would be finding out that Harris had been driving the tanker that Pam crashed into. I believe Snarky suggested the idea years ago. The storyline was practically built into the show with Harris owning his own fleet of tankers and all.

I find it interesting that the new show's biggest fans tend to scoff at such suggestions. It was sold as a continuation of Dallas, yet they seem to think it was more appropriate to take the show in crazy directions that had nothing to do with the original. There's something subversive about them in that they love everything about the new show that the rest of us despise.

 

I was under the impression that Cidre didn't ask for the job, and was offered it by Warner Horizon. Hence her half-assed measure of watching a handful of original episodes. In fact, I think I read that she too was surprised they offered it to her. Why they randomly picked her to helm a continuation without knowing what she planned on doing with it is beyond me.

 

Somehow I must have missed that, was it in the original (pre-crash) TNT Dallas discussion?
I like the way it was, but that doesn't mean that I would have disliked it if things had been done differently.
But it's difficult to comment on things that didn't happen since there's no proof that it would have been better (or worse).

The Ryland/Pam's crash connection is a cool detail, although I'm not sure if they could have hated Harris more.
The thing with significant details is that the viewer expects a result coming from those details.
Personally I find it a bit surreal when they're telling a detailed story without showing it (unless those details are used to explain something, but there's a difference between adding info and creating info just for the heck of it).

 

Oh, yes. Prior to the crash, there were posts praising the continuity mistakes, claims that some people cared too much about minutia, references to under-developed storylines as ambiguous, etc. Obviously, enjoyment of a tv show is subjective, and I don't begrudge those who enjoyed it as it was. It just never quite hit the mark as a proper continuation for me.

I don't know, I like when writers find a way to expand on a storyline from the past. Sort of like what Dynasty did with Roger Grimes in their final season.

 

That only tells me that both sides cared about the details (mistakes or not) and that they accused eachother of doing the same thing.
I don't know, I hardly participated in those discussions because I wasn't watching it back then, but every now and then I glanced over the threads and overall I found the tone rather aggressive.
There were quite a few trollos and trollinas (no longer here, obviously) so I guess that didn't help matters much.

But that story actually played out on screen, and it unravelled little by little.
That's not the same as flooding the audience with information that may or may not be relevant.

 

Really? I did? I recall saying that the tanker should have been owned by JR doing illegal business in the badlands just after the feds slapped down Ewing Oil.

But did I attach that to the Rylands later? Interesting idea either way.

 

Maybe I'm mistaken. I remember you saying they should have had JR doing illegal business in the badlands after Ewing Oil was shut down. However, I thought it was also your idea to have the tanker belong to Ryland Transport, thus making JR and Harris business partners. It's possible somebody else suggested that and elaborated on your initial idea.

 

It did get a bit aggressive at times. People had vastly different expectations for the show and what it should be, and they often clashed with each other.

I was never someone who hated the new Dallas completely. There were things I praised about it, but the overall product fell flat by my standards.

You previously said that it's surreal when a show presents a detailed story without showing it, but doesn't that describe the Ramos revenge plot? It was based on JR screwing Elena's dad out of some oil rich land, which we never saw play out on screen. The Ramos family made their debut on TNT's Dallas, yet their were details about Elena knowing Pam and such.

 

It doesn't take much to pull a snippet of information from Lorimar Dallas and roll with it. In this case both characters played by Mitch Pileggi and Brenda Strong could easily have been welded into TNT Dallas. Mitch played a one off scene when Jenna (Priscilla Presley) was working at the Bar and Bobby was sniffing around. I don't recall Mitch being called by name so he could easily have been Harris Ryland for all we know. Was a name revealed when Brenda played opposite Cliff in Lorimar Dallas? She may have given a first name but did she reveal a surname?

I like your idea and Brenda herself said to Cynthia she once played a very small part in Lorimar Dallas. But instead of running with the idea that the Ryland family had a past connection with the Ewing family, Cynthia went in the opposite direction.

 

I actually said somewhat of the same thing - why reference something if it's not important, especially in a continuation?

Imagine if people kept referring to Kristin yet nothing came out of it? Of course, you can always argue that Sue Ellen should've had a subtle and close relationship to Christopher, but that wasn't even there during the original show, was it? Getting the Oil Baron's Ball right would've been nice though - and just watching the original show would've been even nicer.

 

Some would argue my tone could come across as aggressive when denouncing TNT Dallas. The unfortunate thing about sites like Soapchat is we're all guilty of reading someone thoughts in a different tone then what the creator intended. Thankfully we have "smilies".

 

I don't think nods to the past are a bad thing as long as they're not in your face and make a point. Like the cut scene where Sue Ellen warns Emma about tramps not lasting long at Southfork, and citing Kristin's death in the pool as an example. Details and references not relevant to the main plot are part of what make a show character driven vs. plot driven.

Yes, Brenda actually wanted Ann to be the same character as Cliff's one night stand, which I thought was cool. She wasn't referred to by name on the original, so it could have worked.

 

I don't think anyone disagrees (it's one of the best cut scenes), but on the other hand the issue with any serial drama is that you won't catch up new viewers. So referencing past storylines is tricky at best, especially if they don't amount to anything.

 

It's not the same because Cliff's revelation was on-topic and had major consequences. Also, that background story was rather to the point, without adding unnecessary details.

But when people expect Lucy or Ray to describe their life story post-O.Dallas, and they're not going to do anything with it, then it's pointless and creates false expectations.
Same goes for Mandy and Cally, they could describe everything that happened in those missing years, but what good would it do?
"My first husband died, my second husband left me for his secretary, my son got involved with a dangerous cartel who planned to take over the word, and I was raped three times and I also had an abortion".
That would be perfectly acceptable if it happened in the episodes, but to tell that kind of story would be downright laughable.

 

Poor, poor Mandy...Or is Cally the one you are referring to, Willie? (If so, you are terrible!!)

 

We seem to be on different wavelengths now. I thought we were still talking in terms of Bobby finding out JR and Harris were involved in Pam's tanker accident.

If you're talking in terms of characters catching up on their lives over the years, I agree a whole lot of exposition isn't needed. However, I don't see anything wrong with the cliff notes from characters such as Lucy and Ray since they are family. If every piece of dialogue only serves the purpose of furthering the plot, it takes away from character driven scenes. The original series was more character driven in that regard, while the new series was more plot driven. Where people land on the issue obviously has to do with which format they prefer.

Then again, perhaps those character conversations are more laughable than John Ross blackmailing a guy in a dog suit or JR using a video of pet tricks to hack Bobby's computer.

 

I think a continuation has actually a lower bar to pass than a reboot. Even if you captivate a fraction of the huge old audience, you get decent ratings. The first few episodes of TNT Dallas showed there was an appetite. At the same time, of course you can't expect that there are no new viewers (also because advertisers don't care for people over a certain age so not ALL old viewers count) so you have to give history and updates in small doses. TNT Dallas was especially tone deaf, even when it could satisfy fans: remember the famous clip shown in the trailer of Sue Ellen warning Emma by the pool that tramps don't do well in Southfork, and telling her about Kristin? And then they went ahead and deleted it from the actual episode. The Dynasty reboot lives and breathes references to the classic show. The Dallas continuation was trying hard to hide its lineage.

 

Well I guess it's difficult to put in nice words how much you loathe it - and it's not that I don't understand why the fans were disappointed.
It's all fine with me as long as we're not being aggressive towards each other.

But I don't understand why some posters like to revel in their hatred and negativity. It's always about "what went wrong with this, what went wrong with that".
When did we stop talking about the things we like?

I like both.
But O.Dallas had 25-30 eps per season, and NuDallas only 15, so I guess they had to cut to the chase.