Changes in Original Cast

[stevew]

just a discussion to pull together many other discussions.

1) JR was mean to John Ross in a way he’d never have been in the original. He was NOT Jock. He was Miss Ellie and his favorite was John Ross (no I don’t know what that whole Beaumont thing was about). He would have hid from Chris his inheritance from his mother, not help him get it. Even old age doesn’t explain giving Bobby back Southfork - maybe the ranch but not the house.

2) Bobby was an entirely different person. He’d have kicked Chris’s ass for getting back with Elena after she was engaged to John Ross. He would never have followed through on blackmailing JR (and JR would know that). He would been smarter than Miss Ellie and after age was gone agreed to drill on Southfork even if he gave away all her money. He’d have thought of slant drilling from the start.

3) Sue Ellen would have blackmailed the right people to protect John Ross but wouldn’t have been so sloppy about it. She would have demanded payment on her loans and taken Elena’s shares the second she could. She let JR walk on her, that was about it. And when her son needed her support he’d have gotten it. She’d have told Bobby “I’m sorry but John Ross comes first. If you ask me to choose, I will and I’ll fight you. But I’m not JR, you bring my brother isn’t my weakness.”

4) Cliff - wtf was that? He had to have some kind of mental illness. It’s the only explanation.

Others?

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

Isn't it more fun to watch a soap not knowing what they're going to do, or how lucky/unlucky/happy/unhappy they're going to be?

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Isn't it more fun to watch a soap not knowing what they're going to do, or how lucky/unlucky/happy/unhappy they're going to be?

Yes, it's more fun not knowing those things (what they're going to do, or how lucky/unlucky/happy/unhappy they're going to be) but I do need to qualify that: Unless the reason you don't know or can't even make an educated guess about those things is because they're acting so against their character and/or against their own interests, because in that case it becomes absurd.

I think the ideal situation is one in which you can make an educated guess as to what their goals will be (in most situations anyway, because you know what those characters value)) but even if they end up going after that goal, they still surprise you by going about achieving that goal with a strategy you wouldn't have guessed. Would you agree?

 

[stevew]

Isn't it more fun to watch a soap not knowing what they're going to do, or how lucky/unlucky/happy/unhappy they're going to be?

Not exactly. Unpredictable events yes. Unpredictable characters no. The first builds the drama (even with minor excursions from reality - too big a jump from reality and plausibility issues become annoying to me).

The second rips apart the drama, if not handled correctly. When I feel like I “get” (not agree or disagree or even like or dislike) a character, I feel drawn into the drama. Sure something might happen that’s unexpected, I don’t know the person through and through. Sure people change, and that’s the best in drama, but we see why. But when you feel you “get” a character and then the writing leads you to question what the hell just happened, then doesn’t even bother to explain it, that’s not fun, it’s annoying, to me anyway.

So maybe for viewers of TNT who didn’t watched Dallas, all was good as to them the characters were developing from scratch. They weren’t for me. Cliff wasn’t just insane to me, he was a lot more so what the hell happened? More annoying then still talking about drilling on Southfork as if some environmental crisis loomed. For the later I can suspend reality, I guess. For the first I need development, other wise I stop caring about the characters. Then I stop caring about the show.

 

[stevew]

Not exactly. Unpredictable events yes. Unpredictable characters no. The first builds the drama (even with minor excisions from reality - to big a jump and plausibility issues become annoying). The second rips apart the drama, if not handled correctly. When I feel like I “get” (not agree or disagree or even like or dislike) a character, I feel drawn into the drama. Sure something might happen that’s unexpected, I don’t know the person through and through. Sure people change, and that’s the best in drama, but we see why. But when you feel you “get” a character and then the writing leads you question what the hell just happened, then doesn’t even bother to explain it, that’s not fun, it’s annoying, to me anyway. So maybe for viewers of TNT who didn’t watched Dallas, all was good as to them the characters were developing from scratch. They weren’t for me. Cliff wasn’t just insane to me, he was a lot more so what the hell happened? More annoying then still talking about drilling on Southfork as if some environmental crisis loomed. For the later I can suspend reality I guess. For the first I need development other wise I stop carting about the people. Then I stop carting about the show.

To be fair I’ll also add I do like drama written in the 1st person because it can really mess with this. Character writes about two guys that love her. She explains all they do, at least as she knows it, but she doesn’t know all. So then one of the two guys writes his version and you find out he didn’t love her. He was using her. Yeah everything you read gets turned upside down. That’s why first person to me is fun - I question the perspective. But as TNT was a “continuation” of the original that kinda of idea didn’t work.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Hey SteveW, your OP is amazing! One of the most fun ideas I've seen in a long time.

1) JR was mean to John Ross in a way he’d never have been in the original. He was NOT Jock. He was Miss Ellie and his favorite was John Ross (no I don’t know what that whole Beaumont thing was about). He would have hid from Chris his inheritance from his mother, not help him get it. Even old age doesn’t explain giving Bobby back Southfork - maybe the ranch but not the house.

True, he was far from Jock.. However, I don't think he was like Miss Ellie either, although JR was even further from being Jock. No, he wouldn;t have hidden Christopher's inheritance though - remember the reason he did that.. He helped with that so with Christopher's inheritance, the Ewings would have enough combined shares in Barnes Global to take it away from Cliff.

As for giving all of Southfork to Bobby - inexplicable is the best way I can describe that.

2) Bobby was an entirely different person. He’d have kicked Chris’s ass for getting back with Elena after she was engaged to John Ross. He would never have followed through on blackmailing JR (and JR would know that). He would been smarter than Miss Ellie and after age was gone agreed to drill on Southfork even if he gave away all her money. He’d have thought of slant drilling from the start.

Yes, Bobby is very different. Once in a while he acted like the old Bobby but for the most part, no. Would he have kicked Christopher's ass for getting back with Eleena after she was engaged to John Ross - I don't know but I would hope so!

Bobby blackmailing JR with the threat of prison was unconscionable. Incidentally I chose that particularly terrible action by Bobby in my open letter to Cidre to illustrate just how badly she distorted the original characters. It's something the real Bobby would never have done. Had the original JR ever been in a situation where he could have dome the same to Bobby, again, he never would have done that either. That's something you just don't do to your brother or any family member. Sickening.

3) Sue Ellen would have blackmailed the right people to protect John Ross but wouldn’t have been so sloppy about it. She would have demanded payment on her loans and taken Elena’s shares the second she could. She let JR walk on her, that was about it. And when her son needed her support he’d have gotten it. She’d have told Bobby “I’m sorry but John Ross comes first. If you ask me to choose, I will and I’ll fight you. But I’m not JR, you bring my brother isn’t my weakness.”

I'd like to think Sue Ellen would never have needed to blackmail people to John Ross because as JR's son who was taught well by JR (JR was a great father despite him denying it in TNT Dallas), John Ross would have been far too competent to need his mother to do that for him. When did Jock or Miss Ellie blackmail anyone to help JR? Never, and that illustrates my point.

Would Sue Ellen have taken Elena's shares the second she could? Honestly, I don't know that Sue Ellen was ever that smart. Intelligence was never one of Sue Ellen's strengths. Hopefully she would taken Elena's shares as soon as she could.

Would Sue Ellen have given her support to John Ross in general? Yes, she would have. She loved her son and would never have deliberately hurt him.

4) Cliff - wtf was that? He had to have some kind of mental illness. It’s the only explanation.

Bassically, yes. Cliff either had to have been mentally ill or have had a traumatic experience which gave him an emotional disorder.

Others?

You bet! There plenty of others - too many for me to name off the top of my head. A few that immediately come to mind:

JR would never have told John Ross he was a bad father to him and then apologized for the type of father he was. JR was an excellent father and as such it was the absolute last thing he ever would have had or felt any need to apologize for.

Bobby would not, would not have caved in to Elena's blackmail. That was sad to watch him cave in a way that was so far beneath him. In Bobby's defense he did say when Elena confronted him about framing Cliff, and this is crucial to the plot, that he went to Cliff and offered to get the charges for shooting JR dropped, just as long as Cliff would confess to blowing up the rig - something he actually did. Cliff said no. Think about how important that is. It's huge. But inexplicably (par for Cidre), then that crucial element just got forgotten. Bobby said it, and then the whole confrontation and eventual extortion by Elena (yes, it's extortion and not "justice") continued as if Bobby had never offered to Cliff, face to face, to get the charges for what Cliff didn't do to be dropped. You can't ignore that. It makes a farce out of the whole story if you do.

I don't know what TNT Dallas wanted from the audience. Where we supposed to think, "Oh come on Bobby, it's not fair to, in return for getting the charges for shooting JR dropped, to ask the man to own up to what he did do." Really? It's not? That's funny, I think it perfectly illustrates what "fair" means. So, Cliff didn't have nuts enough to own up to what he did? Then Bobby should leave Cliff in prison. It's the only fair reaction Bobby could have in that situation.

By the way, Elena's extortion was only made possible because John Ross didn't keep his letter from his father in a safe. So Elena was able to easily steal it. Why, in the hell, would John Ross have not kept a letter which could implicate them all in conspiring to commit a felony in a safe??? It was ludicrous how cavalier he was in the way he kept that letter in his wallet.

JR would have reacted quite differently when he found out John Ross was trying to betray him by getting all of Southfork for himself and planning to cut his father out of it entirely. JR excused what John Ross did and he wouldn't have. John Ross was raised far better than to do that to his own father, whom he loved by the way Can you imagine JR trying to screw Jock over by doing something similar? If they had done that, they'd have lost a lot of their audience. You can't do that. What's next? Simulated bestiality? TNT Dallas did that! Good call CC. Shows your level.

Regarding the above incredibly distasteful plot twist of John Ross betraying his father, Cidre would probably explain that bizarre twist in the plot by saying, and this is a quote from her - "There is no story in happiness." I've got news for her: Yes there is! Maybe she's never been happy and/or seen anyone be happy in a way that makes a great story, but I certainly have! I may not have been happy all the time in any one of those stories from personal life. I was probably happy at times and unhappy at other times, but for the most part I was happy and they're great stories in which I ended up happy or at least reasonably happy. I don't know anyone who is 100% happy. Life isn't like that. Being happy isn't a permanent condition. We need some dynamics in our lives, some mix of happiness and sadness, some mix of pain and pleasure so that we truly appreciate the happiness and the pleasurable experiences we have in life.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

More annoying then still talking about drilling on Southfork as if some environmental crisis loomed. For the later I can suspend reality, I guess. For the first I need development, other wise I stop caring about the characters. Then I stop caring about the show.

I was watching and thinking that Bobby really had a neurotic fear of drilling for oil on Southfork in TNT Dallas. What else are we supposed to think? Drilling some wells on a 100,000 acre ranch will permanently destroy the whole thing? That's irrational.

Bobby's reason (it's what Miss Ellie wanted) doesn't justify it because she could not have possibly predicted every possible circumstance which could have arisen in the future. Suppose something like The Great Depression or even worse arises during her grandchildren's lifetimes. Didn't she basically marry Jock to save Southfork? So, what wouldn't she have done to save it? There is nothing, including drilling, that Ellie wouldn't have done to save it. What if the banks foreclose? They wouldn't keep the land pristine would they? They would drill as soon as they could. So how does it make any sense?

 

[stevew]

Hey SteveW, your OP is amazing! One of the most fun ideas I've seen in a long time.



True, he was far from Jock.. However, I don't think he was like Miss Ellie either, although JR was even further from being Jock. No, he wouldn;t have hidden Christopher's inheritance though - remember the reason he did that.. He helped with that so with Christopher's inheritance, the Ewings would have enough combined shares in Barnes Global to take it away from Cliff.

As for giving all of Southfork to Bobby - inexplicable is the best way I can describe that.



Yes, Bobby is very different. Once in a while he acted like the old Bobby but for the most part, no. Would he have kicked Christopher's ass for getting back with Eleena after she was engaged to John Ross - I don't know but I would hope so!

Bobby blackmailing JR with the threat of prison was unconscionable. Incidentally I chose that particularly terrible action by Bobby in my open letter to Cidre to illustrate just how badly she distorted the original characters. It's something the real Bobby would never have done. Had the original JR ever been in a situation where he could have dome the same to Bobby, again, he never would have done that either. That's something you just don't do to your brother or any family member. Sickening.



I'd like to think Sue Ellen would never have needed to blackmail people to John Ross because as JR's son who was taught well by JR (JR was a great father despite him denying it in TNT Dallas), John Ross would have been far too competent to need his mother to do that for him. When did Jock or Miss Ellie blackmail anyone to help JR? Never, and that illustrates my point.

Would Sue Ellen have taken Elena's shares the second she could? Honestly, I don't know that Sue Ellen was ever that smart. Intelligence was never one of Sue Ellen's strengths. Hopefully she would taken Elena's shares as soon as she could.

Would Sue Ellen have given her support to John Ross in general? Yes, she would have. She loved her son and would never have deliberately hurt him.



Bassically, yes. Cliff either had to have been mentally ill or have had a traumatic experience which gave him an emotional disorder.



You bet! There plenty of others - too many for me to name off the top of my head. A few that immediately come to mind:

JR would never have told John Ross he was a bad father to him and then apologized for the type of father he was. JR was an excellent father and as such it was the absolute last thing he ever would have had or felt any need to apologize for.

Bobby would not, would not have caved in to Elena's blackmail. That was sad to watch him cave in a way that was so far beneath him. In Bobby's defense he did say when Elena confronted him about framing Cliff, and this is crucial to the plot, that he went to Cliff and offered to get the charges for shooting JR dropped, just as long as Cliff would confess to blowing up the rig - something he actually did. Cliff said no. Think about how important that is. It's huge. But inexplicably (par for Cidre), then that crucial element just got forgotten. Bobby said it, and then the whole confrontation and eventual extortion by Elena (yes, it's extortion and not "justice") continued as if Bobby had never offered to Cliff, face to face, to get the charges for what Cliff didn't do to be dropped. You can't ignore that. It makes a farce out of the whole story if you do.

I don't know what TNT Dallas wanted from the audience. Where we supposed to think, "Oh come on Bobby, it's not fair to, in return for getting the charges for shooting JR dropped, to ask the man to own up to what he did do." Really? It's not? That's funny, I think it perfectly illustrates what "fair" means. So, Cliff didn't have nuts enough to own up to what he did? Then Bobby should leave Cliff in prison. It's the only fair reaction Bobby could have in that situation.

By the way, Elena's extortion was only made possible because John Ross didn't keep his letter from his father in a safe. So Elena was able to easily steal it. Why, in the hell, would John Ross have not kept a letter which could implicate them all in conspiring to commit a felony in a safe??? It was ludicrous how cavalier he was in the way he kept that letter in his wallet.

JR would have reacted quite differently when he found out John Ross was trying to betray him by getting all of Southfork for himself and planning to cut his father out of it entirely. JR excused what John Ross did and he wouldn't have. John Ross was raised far better than to do that to his own father, whom he loved by the way Can you imagine JR trying to screw Jock over by doing something similar? If they had done that, they'd have lost a lot of their audience. You can't do that. What's next? Simulated bestiality? TNT Dallas did that! Good call CC. Shows your level.

Regarding the above incredibly distasteful plot twist of John Ross betraying his father, Cidre would probably explain that bizarre twist in the plot by saying, and this is a quote from her - "There is no story in happiness." I've got news for her: Yes there is! Maybe she's never been happy and/or seen anyone be happy in a way that makes a great story, but I certainly have! I may not have been happy all the time in any one of those stories from personal life. I was probably happy at times and unhappy at other times, but for the most part I was happy and they're great stories in which I ended up happy or at least reasonably happy. I don't know anyone who is 100% happy. Life isn't like that. Being happy isn't a permanent condition. We need some dynamics in our lives, some mix of happiness and sadness, some mix of pain and pleasure so that we truly appreciate the happiness and the pleasurable experiences we have in life.

Thanks for the discussion.

I do disagree - JR didn’t help with Chris getting his mother’s shares to take over Barnes Global - for that to be true he’d have had to agree to John Ross marrying Pamela and knowing Cliff would give her Katherine’s shares. That’s a stretch for me. No JR as I knew him would have found a way to strip Cliff of those shares he had no legal right to - no way either sister left anything to Cliff in any shape or form. Again it’s all out of character.

Maybe kicked his ass is a bit strong - though if it had been a non family member most certainly. He certainly would not have stopped from putting both Chris and Elena in their place and when Sue Ellen took Elena’s share he would have never blamed Sue Ellen.

Even if Bobby said it JR would have laughed knowing he wouldn’t do it and visa-versa. Never, ever would one of them send the other to prison, right or wrong.

Wasn’t it a farce that Chris got back with Elena after she black mailed his father and took money over something JR did and to do it she helped the man who KILLED his children. Now Chris was young. His character could have all kinds of issues we don’t know but my god what kind of man would do that? I know of not one, other then to get her across the boarder and kill her and Cliff in one bloody revenge plot.

I agree. What made Dallas great is there were good times in the mix. It even mixed in a lot of comedy with JR and his colorful sayings.