Dallas Character Which "new" character was the most well-written?

[Sarah]

I found John Ross to be too evil. That wasn't the little boy I remembered. He didn't seem to have any redeeming qualities at all and in some ways was worse than JR (not that he was that's just how it seemed through the writing).

All in all I am grateful to Cynthia Cidre for trying. I do feel a lot of the criticism of her is unfair.

 

[stevew]

To be fair, I don't think Bobby understood in what a bad shape Sue Ellen actually was. The Ewing men were always a bit tonedeaf when it came to the feelings of the women in their lives and I think it might've also been the mentality that Sue Ellen is safer at Southfork than in some god-forsaken facility. You could see Miss Ellie reasoning the same way if she had been there.

But as you said, John Ross should've reacted way stronger when it almost killed Sue Ellen and he should've definitively tried to block Bobby by legal means from getting close to Swellin'.

To be fair it was none of his business to get involved with family and Sue Ellen was not his family any more and certainly even as a sister-in-law his role certainly did not trump her only child. And to be fair we don’t know the place was god-forshaken. I would think her foundation worked with plenty of fine places helping addicts and the money was certainly there. And in Bobby’s world of dealing with things he should have kicked the shit out of his uncle. That missing piece, response, is why I struggle to even name John Ross as “well-written” because they set him up well and then with all failed, giving up character to get to the story they wanted to tell.

 

[Sarah]

You can still be family even if not technically or on paper. They were always going to think of one another as family.

 

[stevew]

I found John Ross to be too evil. That wasn't the little boy I remembered. He didn't seem to have any redeeming qualities at all and in some ways was worse than JR (not that he was that's just how it seemed through the writing).

All in all I am grateful to Cynthia Cidre for trying. I do feel a lot of the criticism of her is unfair.

I agree with much of this. It seemed to me in the writing she disliked the little boy. Maybe someone like him broke her heart, IDK. But she was determined to make him evil, a looser, hurt over and over again, a loner with no friends or those who were like Drew died off quick without a tear from him.

At the same time she wrote a Chris as the kid who never losses, gets all the girls, as the eco-warrior (though I’m not sure gas is really the eco-friendly replacement to oil we’re looking for), close to his dad, and inheriting all things Ewing. He never did a bad thing in his life, the poor victim of others, his evil cousin, his selfish mom, his manipulative wife. Even his girlfriend was a victim, Sue Ellen wouldn’t just forgive the loan so she owned a piece of the company, JR stole from her dad so she was poor.

The black and white nature of the story where events felt forced to enforce this picture instead of the natural flow of things was awful, in my opinion. I do feel the criticism of CC is harsh and if it’s driven from executive demands, then I agree unfair. But if it was her intention to wipe out the two movies and tell a story where the Ewing’s are just the world’s worst people and their victims are going to win, then I feel the criticism is justified. Starting off with her highbrow criticisms of the original doesn’t help her case.

 

[stevew]

You can still be family even if not technically or on paper. They were always going to think of one another as family.

True I get that but to intervene only paper matters - the legal ties, not feelings.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I thought it was settled that it's Swellin'.

I don't know, that might make it sound like she's gaining weight.

I found John Ross to be too evil. That wasn't the little boy I remembered. He didn't seem to have any redeeming qualities at all and in some ways was worse than JR (not that he was that's just how it seemed through the writing).

All in all I am grateful to Cynthia Cidre for trying. I do feel a lot of the criticism of her is unfair.

Yes, I found John Ross too evil too! I also found him cowardly and ungrateful. Nobody likes a en evil, cowardly, ungrateful child. To do that to one of the two Ewing sons in their show was a terrible mistake. Didn't he insult Miss Ellie in the first night of the new show? JR worked so well because he had enough of the right good qualities that the fans could like him. He was evil to a degree but not nearly to the degree that John Ross was. JR would never have threatened his father, for example. JR was so old by then too, and had been in a nursing home so he was much more vulnerable than Jock ever was. So threatening him made John Ross cowardly as well. Everyone hates a coward! What a stupid thing for Cidre to have done with John Ross.

I saw no evidence that she tried. She didn't even bother to watch the episodes to learn the story. That was her job to know the story. She got basic elements of the show like The Oil Barons'Ball wrong. She didn't even know the name of their maid and that she did not have a daughter. She didn't know or understand why it was so important that the story be about the Ewings.

She used the name Dallas to get massive amounts of exposure to a project she created. That ensured her that a millions more people would tune in to see the debut of her project. When they found out they'd been lied to, the audience in the second week dropped to half of what it was in the first week.

Cynthia Cidre actually had the audacity to make fun of original Dallas when talking to an audience. She was so convinced that if she just kept ramming Elena down the throats of the audience, they'd grow to love her.

To be fair it was none of his business to get involved with family and Sue Ellen was not his family any more

Right, he and Sue Ellen were not family anymore and any bit of friendship Bobby might have felt for that woman would have ended as soon as she shot his brother three times. She tried to murder a son, a brother, a father...all because her gigolo was dead. That showed she didn't give a damn about her son.

 

[Sarah]

Can I ask what it is you have against Sue Ellen @Kenny Coyote ? Some of her actions were totally justifiable given how JR treated her but you seem to have a moral compass where she is concerned - but rarely mention the horrendous acts that JR participated in? You also condone his adultery.

Is it because he’s a man that you feel he should be treated with higher regard? He cheated on her, was implicated in her sister’s murder, used their son as a weapon, hid the boy from her, sent Pam on wild goose chases, mortgaged his family home and was responsible for a suicide as well as Sue Ellen’s near death when Driscoll rammed his car... are all these things ok but shooting him isn’t?

With all due respect saying ‘because her gigolo is dead’ is quite sexist and a weak argument. Do you see Julie Grey as a gigolo too? She fell off a high rise as well didn’t she? What if Jock or JR hasn’t shot her? Would that be ok?

JR deserved to be shot - as the Chicago song says, ‘He had it comin’.

I really don’t understand the defence you have of these males who carry out acts like this.

Genuinely perplexed. I don’t mean to be rude but you do seem to have a total misunderstanding of her character and be a bit of a ‘mans man’.

Regardless, Sue Ellen loved JR, alcoholism is a disease which should not be criticised and it was him who started the ball rolling with the affairs.

But I have never once seen you criticise him - you wanted him to leave her to ‘get on with his life’ (emphasis on HIS, blows my mind), with one of his tramps. Maybe it’s because the tramp in question was a vacant airhead who would do what she was told...? Whereas Sue Ellen has a brain and personality?

I mean no disrespect but I’m genuinely interested as to why it always seems to be Sue Ellen’s fault, given the awful deeds JR committed.

Don’t get me wrong they remain my favourite couple and I have studied them for decades - which is why I don’t understand why you can tell seem to see past the surface of Sue Ellen or why you hold her accountable for all of the things that JR instigated.

Thanks...

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Can I ask what it is you have against Sue Ellen @Kenny Coyote ? Some of her actions were totally justifiable given how JR treated her but you seem to have a moral compass where she is concerned - but rarely mention the horrendous acts that JR participated in? You also condone his adultery.

If you think I don't mention the negative aspects of JR's behavior, you simply haven't read the posts where I've done that. I don't make an effort to spend most of my posts on negativity though because I love Dallas. it's my favorite show. If watching Dallas filled me with negativity I think I would have stopped watching it before I watched all 14 seasons. I certainly wouldn't have watched it a second time. I'm a very positive minded person so I don't like to dwell on negativity, but if you want to see something I wrote that shows JR in a negative light, I don't have to go back too far because I wrote this just yesterday http://www.soapchat.net/threads/familiarity-breeds-contempt.8977/

I don't condone his adultery. It's the worst thing he did on any regular basis and I've made that very clear. I don't why you feel the need to lie about this. If you were to at least include a post where you mistakenly thought I condoned his adultery, I would be glad to explain it to you, but I see that you have included no evidence of me condoning his adultery. I wonder why that is.

With all due respect saying ‘because her gigolo is dead’ is quite sexist and a weak argument.

Sue Ellen shot JR because her goon, who broke and entered into a home, threatened the resident, refused to leave when asked, and then physically assaulted the resident ended up dead. You do understand those are felonies, don't you?

"Goon" doesn't have any sexual overtones, to it, so if you prefer that word to describe Nick, then fine. Do you think "goon"is too harsh a word to describe Nick? I think it describes Nicholas Pearce perfectly. Why? Nick abandoned reason, he abandoned his intellect and behaved like a savage. His were not the actions of a civilized, rational, logical man. When men abandon reason, physical force becomes their only means of dealing with one another and of settling disagreements.

Nick wasn't operating based on reason, he continually used physical force that night to break in, to trespass into another man's home, and then to physically assault him, falling to his death as a result.

Sue Ellen was his accomplice in those felonies. She deserved to go to prison for those things alone, even if she had not shot JR. That she'd be willing to not only commit murder, but to murder her son's father shows what an awful woman Sue Ellen was.

Do you realize what it would do to a child to find out his mother murdered his father? That you would want a scenario that would permanently take a little boy's father away from him, especially when the father and son had as close a relationship as they did, tells me that your philosophy and my philosophy are nowhere near alike.

JR deserved to be shot

Again, you and I have very different philosophies. Unfortunately for you, but fortunately for me, the civilization in which we live does not allow someone to shoot someone else just because the person with the gun thinks the other person deserves to die.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Do you see Julie Grey as a gigolo too? She fell off a high rise as well didn’t she? What if Jock or JR hasn’t shot her? Would that be ok?

I can't call Julie Grey a gigolo because a gigolo, by definition is male. Julie Grey was a traitorous, loose woman of ill-repute. Julie Grey would be a horrible choice for a young woman to have for a role model. If Julie had any good qualities, I don't remember them at the moment. The worst woman of all on Dallas of course was Rebecca Barnes, a woman who committed acts so evil as to be almost unspeakable. Pam sealed her fate when she chose to go looking for Rebecca because she ended up unleashing the malevolent forces of Rebecca and Katherine on herself as well as other innocents. By the time Rebecca's demon spawn, Katherine was dead, she had not only written a letter contributing to Pam and Bobby divorcing, but had gone on to murder the only man Pam ever truly loved and the father of their son Christopher.

It wouldn't be OK if anyone shot Julie Grey. It's my philosophical belief that human life is sacred. Shooting is only justifiable in self-defense situations where death or serious bodily harm is imminent.

Genuinely perplexed. I don’t mean to be rude but you do seem to have a total misunderstanding of her character and be a bit of a ‘mans man’.

Regardless, Sue Ellen loved JR, alcoholism is a disease which should not be criticised and it was him who started the ball rolling with the affairs.

If you are perplexed over this it's because you have missed huge portions of what I've written and have come to the erroneous conclusion that I see JR as having no flaws or defects of character. It's unfortunate that you missed or misunderstood what I wrote about JR because I have a phenomenally good understanding of his character. If you're truly interested, I will look for some posts I've written which make that self-evident. Please understand that may take several days as I've got a lot on my plate right now.

As for alcoholism being a disease: Cancer is a disease. Being a drunk, or if you prefer, a lush, is a behavior. One of my wife's best friends died 7 years ago because of cancer. It wasn't because she engaged in a behavior that was bad for her and it wasn't because she refused to get treatment. Our friend would have given anything to hear from the doctor: "You will live if you just stop engaging in self-destructive behavior"! Had she merely been a lush, she could have gone to a treatment center for alcoholics and after 30 or 90 days there, could have returned home in far better health. With cancer, no such option exists. You don't get to "make your disease go away" just by stopping doing something. It's hardly fair to use the word "disease" for such distinctly different things as cancer and drinking too much. Terminal cancer patients would literally give anything to be in Sue Ellen's situation instead of having terminal cancer.

But I have never once seen you criticise him - you wanted him to leave her to ‘get on with his life’ (emphasis on HIS, blows my mind), with one of his tramps. Maybe it’s because the tramp in question was a vacant airhead who would do what she was told...? Whereas Sue Ellen has a brain and personality?

I mean no disrespect but I’m genuinely interested as to why it always seems to be Sue Ellen’s fault, given the awful deeds JR committed.

Don’t get me wrong they remain my favourite couple and I have studied them for decades - which is why I don’t understand why you can tell seem to see past the surface of Sue Ellen or why you hold her accountable for all of the things that JR instigated.

Thanks...

They're your favorite couple but you think one deserved to be murdered by the other? If I had a favorite couple, I can assure you I would not wish for one of them to do any harm at all to the other. You and I have very different ways of thinking.

 

[pete lashmar]

As a life long Dallas fan anyone that suggests CC did a good or reasonable job on TNT Dallas stuns me.

Everything about the show and the returning characters changed beyond recognition. Southfork looked dreadful, John Ross was a bad boy caricature, Bobby was a completely different person, Christopher was a bland wet flannel with no personality whatsoever. Anne was just dull and when she did show a bit of grit she lost it just as quickly. Emma was a completely unlikable character in the same vein as Michelle Stevens, the Romas family were just uninteresting and in order for them to be in the show, the whole history of the show had to be re-written.

Sue Ellen was virtually invisible in season 1, J.R was still sly and was the nearest to his original character out of everyone.

But I did love the Rylands - totally OTT characters that you really had no idea what they'd do or say next - they for me were the only redeeming characters.

What CC did to the show was unforgivable - and let's not even start on Cliff Barnes and Pamala...terrible terrible conception and writing.

If you're going to reboot a classic show, using classic characters then at least know their pasts, their histories and why audiences loved/hated them, then maybe, just maybe you stand a chance.

I've never rewatched any of the TNT series, it just got worse and worse as it went on - CC didn't even have any idea about the title sequence for season 1!

 

[stevew]

As a life long Dallas fan anyone that suggests CC did a good or reasonable job on TNT Dallas stuns me.

Everything about the show and the returning characters changed beyond recognition. Southfork looked dreadful, John Ross was a bad boy caricature, Bobby was a completely different person, Christopher was a bland wet flannel with no personality whatsoever. Anne was just dull and when she did show a bit of grit she lost it just as quickly. Emma was a completely unlikable character in the same vein as Michelle Stevens, the Romas family were just uninteresting and in order for them to be in the show, the whole history of the show had to be re-written.

Sue Ellen was virtually invisible in season 1, J.R was still sly and was the nearest to his original character out of everyone.

But I did love the Rylands - totally OTT characters that you really had no idea what they'd do or say next - they for me were the only redeeming characters.

What CC did to the show was unforgivable - and let's not even start on Cliff Barnes and Pamala...terrible terrible conception and writing.

If you're going to reboot a classic show, using classic characters then at least know their pasts, their histories and why audiences loved/hated them, then maybe, just maybe you stand a chance.

I've never rewatched any of the TNT series, it just got worse and worse as it went on - CC didn't even have any idea about the title sequence for season 1!

I agree the Rylands were the most interesting (though I didn’t like the “momma likes” statement as it seemed so OTT as to be cartoonish). Judith’s character really could have developed. I could see her ending up a U.S. Senator, watching her granddaughter win Olympic gold and marrying into an old Texas family, while she makes Harris scrub the office floors with a tooth brush.

I liked Harris too, even though I didn’t buy the good guy working with the CIA because he wanted to. I took it more as he was a CIA asset than agent, especially as it took John Ross to get the CIA to reuse Emma. Harris probably got busted drug trafficking and this was the deal. I like that when punched by Bobby he took it up with the police - about time someone checked his temper. I even liked his desperation to lock his momma away. I didn’t like him getting out of jail so easily, but I’m bias toward JR.

I even liked Emma. I’d have liked to have seen more about Olympic competition with her. She could have really grown too, fighting with Pamela, claiming Pamela’s relationship with John Ross was a business deal while she and John Ross were friends (note not romantic). I could also see a reveal of an MBA and like her grandmother a behind the scenes ability to handle the board room (kind of a Texas version of Angela and Lance).

 

[Sarah]

Hang on @pete lashmar - I am a lifelong fan too. If you cut me open I’d bleed Dallas, so that hurts.

I should have clarified - I was grateful she brought Sue Ellen and JR to a point where they had identified how much they loved each other, and that the letter was written when he died. They to me are the most important couple on the show, I adore them and always have.

I do identify the holes in TNT, but at least allow me to appreciate that JR and Sue Ellen had least a half decent ending as a couple before Larry passed.

I met and talked with Cynthia Cidre at the launch in London and she did have the best of intentions.

 

[Ome]

As a life long Dallas fan anyone that suggests CC did a good or reasonable job on TNT Dallas stuns me.

I don't know what classifies a 'lifelong fan' or whether I fall into that category because I've been a fan of the show since it aired when I was a young child. But I do know that I thought Cidre did a reasonably good job on TNT Dallas. Of course, she got things wrong, but she got things right too.

Does that mean I have lost my 'lifelong fan' status? Or do you mean this?

"If anyone disagrees with me, I am stunned."

 

[Kenny Coyote]

As a life long Dallas fan anyone that suggests CC did a good or reasonable job on TNT Dallas stuns me.

Everything about the show and the returning characters changed beyond recognition. Southfork looked dreadful, John Ross was a bad boy caricature, Bobby was a completely different person, Christopher was a bland wet flannel with no personality whatsoever. Anne was just dull and when she did show a bit of grit she lost it just as quickly. Emma was a completely unlikable character in the same vein as Michelle Stevens, the Romas family were just uninteresting and in order for them to be in the show, the whole history of the show had to be re-written.

Sue Ellen was virtually invisible in season 1, J.R was still sly and was the nearest to his original character out of everyone.

But I did love the Rylands - totally OTT characters that you really had no idea what they'd do or say next - they for me were the only redeeming characters.

What CC did to the show was unforgivable - and let's not even start on Cliff Barnes and Pamala...terrible terrible conception and writing.

If you're going to reboot a classic show, using classic characters then at least know their pasts, their histories and why audiences loved/hated them, then maybe, just maybe you stand a chance.

I've never rewatched any of the TNT series, it just got worse and worse as it went on - CC didn't even have any idea about the title sequence for season 1!

I like your description of John Ross" "a bad boy caricature." He was a man who acted like a boy who thought he was a badass, but wasn't. He wasn't a tough guy guy and he wasn't a good businessman either. He was a boy in a man's business, who thought he was something because of who his father was but he wasn't. He wasn't even "JR Lite."

It's typical of what Cynthia Cidre would do with Ewing characters though. Devalue them, make them inept and push the characters she created to the forefront. Nobody tuned into to Dallas to see the story of the daughter of the Ewing's maid!

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Does that mean I have lost my 'lifelong fan' status? Or do you mean this?

"If anyone disagrees with me, I am stunned."

Ha ha! No, I don't think it was meant to imply you lost any type of status. Just from the perspective of someone else reading it, I took it to mean that the writer of the post would be stunned if anyone who is also a lifelong fan of Dallas was content with a show that used the Dallas name but fell so far short of deserving that name.

 

[pete lashmar]

Yes @Ome, as @Kenny Coyote says, I just cannot understand how anyone who loved and followed the original series (whether on first airing or later), could relate TNT's series to the original.

But it was a generalization, and of course, we all have our own views and opinions.

Can I ask though @Ome, did the TNT series not grate on you that it changed the show's timeline, history and characters?

 

[pete lashmar]

Hang on @pete lashmar - I am a lifelong fan too. If you cut me open I’d bleed Dallas, so that hurts.

I should have clarified - I was grateful she brought Sue Ellen and JR to a point where they had identified how much they loved each other, and that the letter was written when he died. They to me are the most important couple on the show, I adore them and always have.

I do identify the holes in TNT, but at least allow me to appreciate that JR and Sue Ellen had least a half decent ending as a couple before Larry passed.

I met and talked with Cynthia Cidre at the launch in London and she did have the best of intentions.

I appreciate that @Sarah but did you not think that Sue Ellen was completely underused in season one? I agree that we had closure on their relationship and it was interesting to see their dynamic at an older age, but overall, when you look at TNT Dallas as a whole, did we need it, or would a webisode have been able to show their relationship at an older age in a 10 minute feature without trampling on the show's history and timelines?

 

[Ome]

Can I ask though @Ome, did the TNT series not grate on you that it changed the show's timeline, history and characters?

Yes, it did.

There were times when I would shout at the TV because the continuity was totally wrong and there were times I would roll my eyes at the poor acting, or the re-writing of some history. There were a couple of weeks where I didn't watch it because I wasn't impressed with something, though when I did the catch up in the back to back binging, I would start to love it again.



But overall, I loved the whole thing. Despite its faults, I was so happy to see it back and with so many of the original actors and characters. I thought the way they wrote Cliff was closer to my kind of satisfaction in how he morphed into the character he became. I loved the SE/JR scenes as well as the SE/John Ross scenes. New characters like Emma, Judith, Harris and DRew as well as the brilliant Pamela Rebecca. We didn't get enough Ray, Lucy, Gary and Val stuff but I was grateful for what we got and I accepted that this was around 20 years later so not everyone would still be on the scene.

But it was a generalization, and of course, we all have our own views and opinions.

Absolutely and no one person's opinion is more superior to another person's opinion.


I just get somewhat confused when words like 'lifelong fan' get thrown into the mix, I mean, what does that actually stand for? Someone who has the most posts on a Dallas forum? Or someone who loves the show no matter what crap it might throw out. I'm sure there are a few more examples I could mention.



Then there are comments like what you mentioned here

As a life long Dallas fan anyone that suggests CC did a good or reasonable job on TNT Dallas stuns me.

I can't work out if you are implying that you have the best opinion. Why would someone who has a different opinion to you, stun you?

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Why would someone who has a different opinion to you, stun you?

It would stun me because of my certainty that it did not live up to the standard already set for Dallas. While there is a lot of subjective opinion when it coms to art, there are still certain objective standards as well. If there weren't then why would you find everyone here saying that the first 7 seasons of Dallas were better than the last seven? Why wouldn't you find some people saying that the last seven seasons of original Dallas were the best? If it were nothing more than a matter of the subjective, you would never find such overwhelming agreement that the first seven seasons were better than the last seven because, after all, everyone has different tastes.

 

[Ome]

It would stun me because of my certainty that it did not live up to the standard already set for Dallas. While there is a lot of subjective opinion when it coms to art, there are still certain objective standards as well. If there weren't then why would you find everyone here saying that the first 7 seasons of Dallas were better than the last seven? Why wouldn't you find some people saying that the last seven seasons of original Dallas were the best? If it were nothing more than a matter of the subjective, you would never find such overwhelming agreement that the first seven seasons were better than the last seven because, after all, everyone has different tastes.

That's all very nice, but what you're saying is, my opinion doesn't count because it simply stuns you that I have a different opinion to you. Maybe it's just me, but when someone states that my opinion stuns them, it makes me feel I'm best not joining in, otherwise what else would they say about me and my opinions?





To use your words here

why would you find everyone here saying that the first 7 seasons of Dallas were better than the last seven?

The majority (notice I don't say everyone) has the same opinion and if someone differs from that, they will be belittled and the term 'stun' will be used to illustrate how weak or meaningless their opinion is.

At least, I think that's what you're implying.