Was Dallas The First Drama To Have All It's Main Characters Be Bad?

[Kenny Coyote]

or to put it another way, was it the first drama to not have a heroic lead character? I think Jock and Ellie were basically good but the rest of the main cast including the real lead characters (JR, Bobby, Sue Ellen, Pam, Cliff) had some serious flaws; before Dallas, dramas usually had at least one heroic main character didn't they? JR was a villain and didn't pretend to be anything else. Bobby pretended to be good but he did a lot of nasty and downright illegal things. In some ways that's even worse. The thing that really did it was when he tried to steal JR's baby from him (when he thought Christopher was his brother's son). Bobby went to Sue Ellen and coerced her to lie on an affidavit and was ready to perjure himself in court if asked if he knew anything about who the father of this supposed "orphan" was. To be willing to commit perjury in court to steal your own brother's baby is about as low as a man can get. It's indefensible. I think things would have gotten a lot more interesting had Christopher's father been proven to be JR.

Was it Jim Davis who when given the script to audition for Dallas said after reading it: "Everyone in this show is rotten?" I don't know if someone here knows the exact quote.

 

[Karin]

I think it was Larry or Maj who said the "There's not one nice character in it" quote.

Honestly I do think Bobby and especially Pam were supposed to be the nice characters in the mini-series.

Besides I don't think the characters were necessarily evil or bad. They were like you pointed out flawed which made them interesting.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I think it was Larry or Maj who said the "There's not one nice character in it" quote.

Honestly I do think Bobby and especially Pam were supposed to be the nice characters in the mini-series.

Besides I don't think the characters were necessarily evil or bad. They were like you pointed out flawed which made them interesting.

Oh, it was definitely interesting; it's my favorite show of all time. I think it's interesting that it may have been the first TV drama to not have a heroic main character.

As another example of Bobby's morals, remember when JR got shot and he said he would fill in for JR at Ewing Oil until JR recovered? But when JR recovered, Bobby reneged on his promise. He used JR being shot to take control of Ewing OIl. Compare that to JR in very similar circumstances. Bobby had been shot and was blind. John Ross asked JR why he didn't just take control of Ewing Oil since "Bobby can't see." JR replied, that wouldn't be fair and he wouldn't be able to live with himself. "But when Bobby recovers then I'll fight him for control of Ewing Oil and of course I'll win."

 

[Rove]

Like a book we all interpret characters differently. But you are correct upon viewing Lorimar Dallas. I've recently began watching the series from the beginning. Of course JR is the stand out for being dark yet Sue Ellen has an acid tongue when Jock and Miss Ellie are not around. Her treatment of Pam is appalling but Pam wises up to her real quick. "What were you doing up there on the stairs, checking for termites?"

You could say not one character had a redeeming quality about themselves but hell, we all fell in love with them anyway.

 

[Presea]

Oh, it was definitely interesting; it's my favorite show of all time. I think it's interesting that it may have been the first TV drama to not have a heroic main character.

As another example of Bobby's morals, remember when JR got shot and he said he would fill in for JR at Ewing Oil until JR recovered? But when JR recovered, Bobby reneged on his promise. He used JR being shot to take control of Ewing OIl. Compare that to JR in very similar circumstances. Bobby had been shot and was blind. John Ross asked JR why he didn't just take control of Ewing Oil since "Bobby can't see." JR replied, that wouldn't be fair and he wouldn't be able to live with himself. "But when Bobby recovers then I'll fight him for control of Ewing Oil and of course I'll win."

I remember that all too well. Bobby was a real jerk thinking that he should get to keep Ewing Oil! And then he whined about how it was too hard to run things and gave up. It was the same thing with the whole Senator Bobby thing. They might as well have said this after he won the election: Bobby: I'll make you proud Pam. Pam: Don't worry about that, Bobby. I know that this is really just a plot device.

 

[Presea]

Like a book we all interpret characters differently. But you are correct upon viewing Lorimar Dallas. I've recently began watching the series from the beginning. Of course JR is the stand out for being dark yet Sue Ellen has an acid tongue when Jock and Miss Ellie are not around. Her treatment of Pam is appalling but Pam wises up to her real quick. "What were you doing up there on the stairs, checking for termites?"

You could say not one character had a redeeming quality about themselves but hell, we all fell in love with them anyway.

I always thought it was strange how they made Sue Ellen's character in season 5 (dvd) do a total one-eighty away from the "lady of the manor" who delighted in putting down Pam. All of a sudden, she is a great pal to Pam and is terrified of living alone. The old Sue Ellen would've relished having that beautiful condo!

 

[Presea]

I think it was Larry or Maj who said the "There's not one nice character in it" quote.

Honestly I do think Bobby and especially Pam were supposed to be the nice characters in the mini-series.

Besides I don't think the characters were necessarily evil or bad. They were like you pointed out flawed which made them interesting.

Bobby did some bad things and was a hypocrite at times, but I think the real reason why I hated it so much was because the other characters over glorified his goodness. Especially the women. They acted like it wasn't possible for any other guy in the whole city to be decent, or something. It was unrealistic. It also seemed to me that the writers had made a firm decision that Pam was allowed to do no wrong and usually excelled at everything, somehow. But at least she wasn't annoying like Bobby.

 

[Presea]

or to put it another way, was it the first drama to not have a heroic lead character? I think Jock and Ellie were basically good but the rest of the main cast including the real lead characters (JR, Bobby, Sue Ellen, Pam, Cliff) had some serious flaws; before Dallas, dramas usually had at least one heroic main character didn't they? JR was a villain and didn't pretend to be anything else. Bobby pretended to be good but he did a lot of nasty and downright illegal things. In some ways that's even worse. The thing that really did it was when he tried to steal JR's baby from him (when he thought Christopher was his brother's son). Bobby went to Sue Ellen and coerced her to lie on an affidavit and was ready to perjure himself in court if asked if he knew anything about who the father of this supposed "orphan" was. To be willing to commit perjury in court to steal your own brother's baby is about as low as a man can get. It's indefensible. I think things would have gotten a lot more interesting had Christopher's father been proven to be JR.

Was it Jim Davis who when given the script to audition for Dallas said after reading it: "Everyone in this show is rotten?" I don't know if someone here knows the exact quote.

It did seem like a lot of the characters were either flawed or had an evil side to them. But one thing that I did notice was that some of the female characters who would've been considered as "bad" got a complete makeover towards the other end of the spectrum by the writers.

 

[Rove]

All of a sudden, she is a great pal to Pam

I always considered Sue Ellen's relationship with Pam thawed over John Ross.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Bobby did some bad things and was a hypocrite at times, but I think the real reason why I hated it so much was because the other characters over glorified his goodness. Especially the women. They acted like it wasn't possible for any other guy in the whole city to be decent, or something. It was unrealistic. It also seemed to me that the writers had made a firm decision that Pam was allowed to do no wrong and usually excelled at everything, somehow. But at least she wasn't annoying like Bobby.

I think it was Bobby's hypocrisy that got to me because he talked as if JR was everything he didn't like - lies and secrecy. But it was somehow alright for Bobby to lie and have his secrets like going to court to adopt who he thought was his brother's son and must have perjured himself when they asked him if he had any knowledge of where the father might be or who the father might be. He tried to do what amounted to trying to steal his brother's son (everyone thought Christopher was JR's son at that time).

You expect JR to be evil at times and to lie but he admits that's who he is. He even said about Casey Denault - "That boy is about the best liar I've ever seen with the exception of myself." But Bobby pretends like he's above all that and so good and he isn't. And like you said, almost all the other characters act as if Bobby is just incapable of lying, stealing, etc. but he wasn't.

One thing you can say about JR is he wasn't a quitter. Bobby quit Ewing Oil and then he quit his construction business. Cliff tried to put Jock in prison for alleged murder of Hutch McKinney and at the end of it Bobby vows to "run Cliff out of Texas" and of course Bobby completely fell short of keeping his word there - he didn't even try to but just a couple episodes later he quits living at Southfork and runs away because he just can't stand that JR refused to be partners in an oil field with Cliff! Jock said he would have done the same thing as JR. So much for gaining revenge for what Cliff tried to do to Jock. Yet no matter how much evil stuff Cliff does, Bobby doesn't have the guts to do anything about it. Bobby bullies and criticizes JR at every opportunity yet treats Cliff with an endless amount of forgiveness. It's disgusting how good he is to the man who tried to put his father in prison for a murder he didn't commit and the rest of the time Cliff spends his life trying to ruin Jock's company. Bobby won't even lay a hand on Cliff though. Bobby comes back to Southfork and tries to steal JR's job while JR is recovering from being shot. Then he quit being a Senator, went back to Ewing Oil, quit it again, said it was so important to him because his father founded the company but yet he sells Ewing Oil. He's almost as gutless as Gary!

 

[KayLloyd]

or to put it another way, was it the first drama to not have a heroic lead character? I think Jock and Ellie were basically good but the rest of the main cast including the real lead characters (JR, Bobby, Sue Ellen, Pam, Cliff) had some serious flaws; before Dallas, dramas usually had at least one heroic main character didn't they? JR was a villain and didn't pretend to be anything else. Bobby pretended to be good but he did a lot of nasty and downright illegal things. In some ways that's even worse. The thing that really did it was when he tried to steal JR's baby from him (when he thought Christopher was his brother's son). Bobby went to Sue Ellen and coerced her to lie on an affidavit and was ready to perjure himself in court if asked if he knew anything about who the father of this supposed "orphan" was. To be willing to commit perjury in court to steal your own brother's baby is about as low as a man can get. It's indefensible. I think things would have gotten a lot more interesting had Christopher's father been proven to be JR.

Was it Jim Davis who when given the script to audition for Dallas said after reading it: "Everyone in this show is rotten?" I don't know if someone here knows the exact quote.

I have to respectfully disagree Kenny. Bobby wasn't trying to "steal" Christopher from J.R. at all. He brought him to Southfork to force J.R. to take responsibility for him, but he hadn't expected Pam to be there when he arrived home. He was expecting the privacy that he needed to confront J.R. with Christopher. She assumed that Bobby had brought the baby home to her and Bobby didn't have the heart to risk her mental health with the truth. Did he buy Christopher illegally, forge a new birth certificate to adopt him, and ask SE to help with her affidavit? Sure, but he did it for Pam's sake, not to "steal" him from J.R. And so did SE. Not to mention that they saved Christopher from being raised by a drug addict who was willing to sell him to the highest bidder. As for the quote that you're thinking of, I believe it was Maj Hagman who whooped and called out to tell Larry that he should do the show because wasn't a redeeming character in the bunch when she read the pilot script.

 

[Rove]

everyone thought Christopher was JR's son at that time

In the previous Soapchat Universe I suggested this would have made a great back story for TNT Dallas. It was David Jacobs that suggested the writers should have John Ross as the good guy and Christopher the bad seed. When we last leave Christopher it was 1998, technically he would have been 17 years of age - an age where most young men can find themselves in trouble.

When we leave Dallas in 1998 Christopher could have fled to California after years of taunts from JR and John Ross about not being a blood Ewing. He may have went there to seek his own fortune or to learn more of his mother Kristin and his father Jeff Farraday. Christopher though learns a shocking secret from an old acquaintance of Kristin's.

This acquaintance tells Christopher that Kristin was pregnant when she returned to California but that she delivered that baby full term. Fast forward to Dallas TNT and we have Christopher return to the family and only he knows the truth.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I have to respectfully disagree Kenny. Bobby wasn't trying to "steal" Christopher from J.R. at all. He brought him to Southfork to force J.R. to take responsibility for him, but he hadn't expected Pam to be there when he arrived home. He was expecting the privacy that he needed to confront J.R. with Christopher. She assumed that Bobby had brought the baby home to her and Bobby didn't have the heart to risk her mental health with the truth. Did he buy Christopher illegally, forge a new birth certificate to adopt him, and ask SE to help with her affidavit? Sure, but he did it for Pam's sake, not to "steal" him from J.R. And so did SE. Not to mention that they saved Christopher from being raised by a drug addict who was willing to sell him to the highest bidder. As for the quote that you're thinking of, I believe it was Maj Hagman who whooped and called out to tell Larry that he should do the show because wasn't a redeeming character in the bunch when she read the pilot script.

Yes, he was stealing who he thought was JR's son. That Pam would like to have a child doesn't justify lying on an affidavit, perjuring oneself in court saying he has no knowledge of who the father was to steal his own brother's son That's just sick.. When Pam saw him she asked Bobby if that was their baby. A simple "No, he's JR's" would have done nicely. It was a gutless move to say nothing. Had Christopher truly been JR's son, JR would have ended up with him and that would have done Pam far more damage in the long run than being honest from the beginning. You know how Bobby's two most hated things were "lies and secrecy", right? He's such a hypocrite!

 

[Piggyrella Sanderson]

I agree with Karin about that quote. I seem to remember that it was Larry Hagman who explained it and mentioned Maj was reading the "Dallas" script fascinated by it at the next room. And she called him and said that he had to take that role.

Anyway, I think that the magic of "Dallas" was based on that: one could have different opinions about the characters as they developed and the series progressed. I always envisioned Bobby and Pam as the heroes, no matter what flaws they had, because they managed to keep their love story going for 9 long years.

J.R. and Sue Ellen were sort of the anti-heroes, the most dysfunctional couple, though Sue Ellen used to be a chameleon that changed to the writers´ convenience. She actually didn´t keep up a stable personality or mood for more than one season. That also was part of her appeal, and even part of what kept J.R. interested in her.

The steadiest characters were Ray and Donna, because they were just supporting characters and they were needed for the audience to root for. No matter what big soap drama the others were living, Ray and Donna always were true to themselves and people could relate to. Of course, all this changed when Bobby "resurrected" and they turned them into two zombies: Donna obsessed with politics and Ray, with those skanky mother and daughter. Then Donna became expendable and was let go. Even so, she always was into politics so I think she was faithful to herself (and Ray!) to the very end.

After the "Who Shot JR?" phenomenon, the network and producers began to realize what they had in their hands, so they obviously started to add nuances to every major character. J.R. had his love for John Ross, Sue Ellen her (temporary) strength to leave Southfork and J.R., Miss Ellie being able to replace Jock as the head of the family and resume her life with Clayton, and so on. As seen above, some of these changes were permanent and logical, and others were rather far-fetched and lame (Sue Ellen remarrying J.R. after a few months as a divorcée, Lucy giving up on her own marriage for dumb reasons, Pam becoming unstable enough to attempt suicide...).

But at the end of the day, yes, all of them had a bit of blackness in their hearts, even Pam (who used to slap some people´s faces once in awhile...) or Miss Ellie, who told off Clayton because of his walks with a certain wooden Brit...

 

[Rove]

Upon reflection Dallas should not have been the success it became. I can understand its popularity in America but really, this show should not have spiraled into the mega hit around the world. Why would the working class care for an American wealthy family and their issues? On paper it should not have worked.

Others have suggested Dallas aired at the right time as America clawed its way out of a recession into the Ronald Reagan led era of growth and wealth. This still doesn't explain its popularity around the globe. Maybe we were over the niceness of "The Waltons", another Lorimar Production mega-hit. Or that other huge hit, "Little House on the Prairie."

It's a weird concept that as we walked into the 80's with its wealth and opulence, bright colours, big hair, shoulders pads that any player in the NFL would die for, a woman prancing around Venice singing "Like a Virgin" to the horror of the Vatican and parents around the world we all sat down and watched this show that had us enthralled with characters we really should not have cared about, since they were so removed from our ordinary lives.

Dallas arrived at the cusp of change. Finally moving on from the decade that fashion forgot it was like the world had woken up from its 70's induced coma with its dreary brown shades. We had colour!

I'm so thankful that I grew up in the 80's. It was my era. As if Michael Jackson's "Thriller" wasn't enough to wet the appetite another young brash pop star was about to unleash herself onto the world - Madonna.

Indeed the planets had aligned. Everything was good in the world. Great TV viewing (in general), bloody good music (vinyl baby), fashion and amazing friends (which I still have today). Who knew that in 2016 I'd still be sharing my life with those mates now with dad bods and kids who think we know nothing of the world.

More importantly a site like this exists which allows us to reminisce and debate about one of the best shows ever to appear on the small screen.

Amen.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

Why would the working class care for an American wealthy family and their issues? On paper it should not have worked

I think people always had a taste for outrageous stories and scandalous and dastardly behaviour. Maybe it's even more interesting when it happens to the upper class.
In those days (60s/70s/80s) the Royal families were very popular in the media, America had the Kennedys, and "Dallas" was the tv version of that.

 

[Ome]

Why would the working class care for an American wealthy family and their issues? On paper it should not have worked.

Isn't that itself an interesting concept to explore?

I think there's an element of the old saying "see how the other half live" I remember been completely taken by living in a big house that had servants to deal with all the boring chores. The thought of someone waiting on you is like living on a very long vacation.

 

[Richard Channing]

Isn't that itself an interesting concept to explore?

I think there's an element of the old saying "see how the other half live" I remember been completely taken by living in a big house that had servants to deal with all the boring chores. The thought of someone waiting on you is like living on a very long vacation.

It's also interesting that all the UK soaps are all centered around working class people, whereas the US soaps have always been centered around the rich. Something to do with the 'American Dream' I guess.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

Something to do with the 'American Dream' I guess

Yes, and perhaps the American (self-made) millionaires were more prominent than the rich folks in Europe.
Well like I said there were the Royal families but the chance to become one of them was very slim. Many super rich Americans have that rags-to-riches background that people love to read about and before DALLAS there had been quite a few mini-series based on that theme.

Just think about the Vanderbilts, it all started with a woody goody two shoes farmer from Holland.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Upon reflection Dallas should not have been the success it became. I can understand its popularity in America but really, this show should not have spiraled into the mega hit around the world. Why would the working class care for an American wealthy family and their issues? On paper it should not have worked.

Others have suggested Dallas aired at the right time as America clawed its way out of a recession into the Ronald Reagan led era of growth and wealth. This still doesn't explain its popularity around the globe. Maybe we were over the niceness of "The Waltons", another Lorimar Production mega-hit. Or that other huge hit, "Little House on the Prairie."

It's a weird concept that as we walked into the 80's with its wealth and opulence, bright colours, big hair, shoulders pads that any player in the NFL would die for, a woman prancing around Venice singing "Like a Virgin" to the horror of the Vatican and parents around the world we all sat down and watched this show that had us enthralled with characters we really should not have cared about, since they were so removed from our ordinary lives.

Dallas arrived at the cusp of change. Finally moving on from the decade that fashion forgot it was like the world had woken up from its 70's induced coma with its dreary brown shades. We had colour!

I'm so thankful that I grew up in the 80's. It was my era. As if Michael Jackson's "Thriller" wasn't enough to wet the appetite another young brash pop star was about to unleash herself onto the world - Madonna.

Indeed the planets had aligned. Everything was good in the world. Great TV viewing (in general), bloody good music (vinyl baby), fashion and amazing friends (which I still have today). Who knew that in 2016 I'd still be sharing my life with those mates now with dad bods and kids who think we know nothing of the world.

More importantly a site like this exists which allows us to reminisce and debate about one of the best shows ever to appear on the small screen.

Amen.

Great post, Rove!!! I think the success of Dallas around the world had to do with a number of things, including the sheer quality of the acting and the stories. Also a prime time soap was something so new for that time, and the western feel of it brought back some off the nostalgia for the western movies which were so incredibly popular during John Wayne's prime. Above all, I think that the appeal was escapism. It was fun to imagine what it would be like to be so rich and live on a huge ranch with all that land and money. The idea of living together with such a big family was intriguing, if nt necessarily appealing for most people. But it created so many exciting scenarios and possibilities for conflict as well as good times like the nice dinners they had and the nice tradition of the whole family getting together in the family room for a drink before dinner.

It provided a definite sense of escapism because their way of life was so different from the majority of us both financially and in the way they all lived in the same house. Also by TV standards for the time, it was quite risque and sexy and it had some very good looking actors and actresses in it. Finally I think that people naturally tend to be interested in fights and feuds. The Barnes - Ewing feud was so bitter (from the Barnes side usually) and was full of exciting plot twists. That along with the Romeo and Juliet theme of Bobby marrying the daughter of his father's main enemy gave it a timeless theme that has always proven to be interesting to audiences, just like the J.R. and Bobby relationship was a competitiveness between two brothers that almost rivaled Cain and Abel from the Bible! So with stories that had concepts that had their roots in Shakespeare and The Bible, and such capable actors playing the roles, I'm not surprised it was the massive hit it became.

Edit: I thought I was done but one other thing comes to mind and that is Dallas gave people the fairly revolutionary (by TV standards at the time) idea of a leading character that you "love to hate." Traditionally there is a leading character that you simply love or admire for being good or even heroic. But for the most iconic character of the entire show to be someone the audience loves to hate was what I would call a brilliant idea, except I don't believe it was planned that way from the beginning. The way it started, the two leading characters were going to be much more typical ones - the good, cute couple of Pam and Bobby trying to make it against all odds. Eventually the people in charge of the show realized they had a phenomenon on their hands in the character of J.R. Ewing. It was as if they had captured lightning in a bottle!