Dallas 2020

[stevew]

No more remakes, please. Be thankful we have DVDs etc to continually remind us of the brilliance of the original show and its cast.

Swami

I’m not sure what you mean by remake. I think of Dallas TNT as a continuation not a remake. I think of NuDynasty as a remake, in which case I’m fine with it - do those things all day everyday as they don’t impact the original product, imo.

 

[Swami]

I’m not sure what you mean by remake. I think of Dallas TNT as a continuation not a remake. I think of NuDynasty as a remake, in which case I’m fine with it - do those things all day everyday as they don’t impact the original product, imo.

Well, remakes or reboots in any shape of form. Avoid tarnishing the show's legacy by producing something that simply isn't up to scratch.

Swami

 

[Seaviewer]

I struggled between choosing continuing from TNT with or without changes. The changes really wouldn't have to be all that major. Just ignore certain parts without directly contradicting them.

Continuation from the original, movies included and TNT, under the supervision of real experts who can correct mistakes and explain all inconsistencies. I would see Josh Henderson as the undisputed protagonist and new characters, closely linked to the epic original story. I would also like to know why Cliff Barnes had become so crazy in recent years.

This would be the gold standard but I fear it's a tall order.

 

[tommie]

If there had to be one, I'd say continue a few years after the TNT years. They can still pick up threads from that show that they want to explore and completely ignore others.

With that said, I'm ready for Dallas to be completely buried once and for all. No need to be greedy as nothing will ever satisfy everyone.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I agree ideally but I’m not one for erasing what we see - I’d still like to write back in the Dream season somehow. I’d even leave in TNT’s if I did a continuation. That’s might just be me.

It's because I saw TNT's show that I know I wouldn't want it included as part of the story. That's also why I'd go back to before Bobby sold Ewing Oil. I don't consider the quality of the story in those last couple seasons to be up to par with what was created before that and I know most people here on this forum don't consider it up to their standards for Dallas. It's incredibly hard to create a high quality story if you're going to feel compelled to deliberately include elements that you know were received poorly.

That's why it would be necessary to disregard the TNT show. The percentage of original Dallas fans who watched the entire TNT series is tiny. Most who started watching dropped out after a few episodes. That tells me that they along with myself don't consider the material TNT created to be up to par with the quality they'd expect of any show they'd enjoy watching. As a general principle I'm not in favor of erasing what people already saw, but here it's justified.

Is there anyone here who has decided what they'd call their series? Would you just use the name Dallas, use a name that a variation of that, or use an entirely original name?

 

[pete lashmar]

It's because I saw TNT's show that I know I wouldn't want it included as part of the story. That's also why I'd go back to before Bobby sold Ewing Oil. I don't consider the quality of the story in those last couple seasons to be up to par with what was created before that and I know most people here on this forum don't consider it up to their standards for Dallas. It's incredibly hard to create a high quality story if you're going to feel compelled to deliberately include elements that you know were received poorly.

That's why it would be necessary to disregard the TNT show. The percentage of original Dallas fans who watched the entire TNT series is tiny. Most who started watching dropped out after a few episodes. That tells me that they along with myself don't consider the material TNT created to be up to par with the quality they'd expect of any show they'd enjoy watching. As a general principle I'm not in favor of erasing what people already saw, but here it's justified.

Is there anyone here who has decided what they'd call their series? Would you just use the name Dallas, use a name that a variation of that, or use an entirely original name?

In principle this sounds about right, but unfortunately you'd still be missing major cast members/characters (J.R, Ellie, Clayton, Cliff, Pam) who combined really were a massive part of the show, so you'd still be left with just Bobby, Sue Ellen, Ray, Lucy and possibly Donna, so would people be interested?

That's why I'd reboot the show, with a new cast of good character actors, and start again from Bobby & Pam returning to Southfork after they got married - we have the original so it can't be sullied (well...until season 10 (11 DVD) (and the dream scenario). And who knows, a new re-imagining may bring people to look at the original.

As for the title, personally Dallas is Dallas so I'd just keep it the same. I'm not a fan of titles such as "Next Generation" or "New Adventures of", but I suppose of it was a complete reboot then neither of these would apply anyway.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

In principle this sounds about right, but unfortunately you'd still be missing major cast members/characters (J.R, Ellie, Clayton, Cliff, Pam) who combined really were a massive part of the show, so you'd still be left with just Bobby, Sue Ellen, Ray, Lucy and possibly Donna, so would people be interested?

There would have to be new actors. There is no other way to continue the story at that point in time (mid to late 1980s). Broadway does it all the time and they get by. They're not going to stop telling a good story just because the first actors to ever play the leads in it aren't alive anymore.

 

[pete lashmar]

There would have to be new actors. There is no other way to continue the story at that point in time (mid to late 1980s). Broadway does it all the time and they get by. They're not going to stop telling a good story just because the first actors to ever play the leads in it aren't alive anymore.

Point taken, but look what happened the first time Ellie's face changed....it was the beginning of the end.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

Point taken, but look what happened the first time Ellie's face changed....it was the beginning of the end.

Everything about her changed! The way she dressed, the way she spoke, and that has a jarring effect on the viewers. I think once you begin a series that has a beginning and an end you have to stick with the same actors. They could have continued without her by that time; the show was so successful, and they would have gotten less criticism. At the time it didn't bother me a lot because I'd heard they had to replace her temporarily because she was having heart surgery (whether that was correct or incorrect) so I accepted as something they thought they just had to have until the original could return, but just waiting for her to return without recasting would have been better.

Now if you're doing a continuation 50 years after the original and most of the original actors are dead or dying, you either have to have new actors or not continue with those characters' stories. I'd have to base this series on the premise that people understand that. I think the casting would have to be based on the approach that our priority is not to find people who look or act like copies of the original actors,; we're going to find the most talented and capable people we can get and if they don't resemble the original actors, are capable of bringing something interesting enough of their own to those roles that the audience will like it. I'd rather the casting focus on finding actors with the ability to capture the interest of the audience while they're adding, to some degree, their own personalities to the role than find people who may look and sound a lot like the originals but lack the acting ability and the charisma of the actors they physically resemble.

 

[pete lashmar]

Everything about her changed! The way she dressed, the way she spoke, and that has a jarring effect on the viewers. I think once you begin a series that has a beginning and an end you have to stick with the same actors. They could have continued without her by that time; the show was so successful, and they would have gotten less criticism. At the time it didn't bother me a lot because I'd heard they had to replace her temporarily because she was having heart surgery (whether that was correct or incorrect) so I accepted as something they thought they just had to have until the original could return, but just waiting for her to return without recasting would have been better.

Now if you're doing a continuation 50 years after the original and most of the original actors are dead or dying, you either have to have new actors or not continue with those characters' stories. I'd have to base this series on the premise that people understand that. I think the casting would have to be based on the approach that our priority is not to find people who look or act like copies of the original actors,; we're going to find the most talented and capable people we can get and if they don't resemble the original actors, are capable of bringing something interesting enough of their own to those roles that the audience will like it. I'd rather the casting focus on finding actors with the ability to capture the interest of the audience while they're adding, to some degree, their own personalities to the role than find people who may look and sound a lot like the originals but lack the acting ability and the charisma of the actors they physically resemble.

Oh I absolutely agree, whether it's a continuation or a reboot you want actors that can deliver a punch, not impersonate what went before, thereby creating a like for like comparison.

I also think that's why Dallas died so slowly and fatally back in the 80's when they employed actors incapable of giving good performances once they originals began to go, their lack of substance was overwhelming.

 

[stevew]

Thank you everyone. I appreciate all the feedback. One thing is for sure - there’s no consensus on Dallas going forward and a fair number that just want to stop where it is.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

The only way for Dallas to return now is with a re-boot but it would need to be produced properly & concentrate on the Ewings. However in saying that I voted for a continuation from the TNT series with major changes. Dallas does have the potential to continue, the premise of the show is still a powerful one. I don't think we've seen the last of Dallas. It will probably take a while but I believe the show will return.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

It's because I saw TNT's show that I know I wouldn't want it included as part of the story. That's also why I'd go back to before Bobby sold Ewing Oil. I don't consider the quality of the story in those last couple seasons to be up to par with what was created before that and I know most people here on this forum don't consider it up to their standards for Dallas. It's incredibly hard to create a high quality story if you're going to feel compelled to deliberately include elements that you know were received poorly.

That's why it would be necessary to disregard the TNT show. The percentage of original Dallas fans who watched the entire TNT series is tiny. Most who started watching dropped out after a few episodes. That tells me that they along with myself don't consider the material TNT created to be up to par with the quality they'd expect of any show they'd enjoy watching. As a general principle I'm not in favor of erasing what people already saw, but here it's justified.

Is there anyone here who has decided what they'd call their series? Would you just use the name Dallas, use a name that a variation of that, or use an entirely original name?

 

[stevew]

The only way for Dallas to return now is with a re-boot but it would need to be produced properly & concentrate on the Ewings. However in saying that I voted for a continuation from the TNT series with major changes. Dallas does have the potential to continue, the premise of the show is still a powerful one. I don't think we've seen the last of Dallas. It will probably take a while but I believe the show will return.

Agreed.

I thought with the reboot there might be interest in such. I’m not opposed just as long as they’re loyal to the original. I liked the idea of the reboot of Dynasty - different city and a few changes, more racial diversity and Sammy Joe bring a guy. The other issues with Dallas that Dynasty didn’t have was it didn’t start off as a serial and the whole who shot JR was really way too big, and already revealed, to have any impact worth repeating. Still, I thought of something similar with Dallas:

http://www.soapchat.net/threads/reboot.7257/

 

[stevew]

As of right now:

12 want to see it continued in some form

8 want to see it left alone

I did not vote but I would vote for it continued if some in some form (of course with respect and honor to the original). My preference would be a continuation of the TNT version with some significant change in direction and execution. While I have major issues with it, I don’t believe in ignoring anything people have watched (including the dream season). For me the best would be an entire 80’s soap continuation bringing the big four (Dallas, Dynasty, Knots Landing and Falcon Crest) into one universe (at least the Lorimar three). But without that I’d like to see a Dallas reboot (or as was suggested a spin off ok Jack’s family similar to a reboot).

 

[Rove]

I voted for "Continuation from TNT with major changes." I'd have no interest in watching a reboot with different actors portraying those famous roles. Would I watch the first episode out of curiosity? Absolutely. But I think that's where the interest would stop.

Dallas has such a rich history it wouldn't be too difficult to create a continuation. So many untold stories. While the Ewing/Barnes feud (I believe) would be finished with the death of Cliff (Ken) and Pam finally given some closure there are multiple characters out there where JR's ruthless tactics has peeved them off enough to come back and seek justice against the Ewing family. There could be the Wendell family. How about Alan Beam and his family returning? Or how about the untold story of Lucas Ewing returning to Dallas - friend or foe? What about Cally's child? What about Margaret Krebbs?

To keep the story seamless I would keep some aspects of TNT Dallas. Christopher remains dead. Nicholas is either serving life imprisonment in Texas or has fled the State for a potential return. Pamela is no longer around and has returned to her mother. The big one of course is JR's long lost daughter. I'd keep her.

I'm curious to know if people voted for "Prefer to leave Dallas alone and not come back in any shape or form" is because of the bitter taste we're all still feeling from the disastrous TNT Dallas. Feelings which are understandable.

 

[ChrisSumner]

Especially with Warner Brothers having it's own streaming service and doing lots of reboots of well known properties, I think they'd be crazy not to revisit Dallas. Plus with Dallas already being on IMDB and the DVD re-release, clearly there is still demand for the series. I'd continue from TNT Dallas, but with a new tone and a mostly new cast. Christopher is dead so I'd leave him that way. I'd also write off Elena and the Ryland's. Bobby, Sue Ellen, John Ross and Pamela would be the only characters to stay. Ann can make guest appearances to tie up her relationship with Bobby, but that's it. The first thing I'd do is boost the Ewing family which IMO had a poor showing in the TNT version. Bring back Donna and Ray in the Jock/Miss Ellie role and make Margaret and Lucas main characters. Lucas could fill the Ray role as someone who loves the land and feels like an outsider considering Bobby basically abandoned him. I'd also consider some sort of return for Jenna considering she's his mother. Perhaps she could be Bobby's new wife.

In addition to that, I'd consider giving Lucy a child and allowing them to have a presence. When she appeared she had no character development so we don't know that she isn't a mother. Alternatively you could also bring back Gary and Val (and maybe the twins) and do a triangle with Sue Ellen. I felt Gary fit in so well he could've easily been a regular after JR died. Then as for the second family for the Ewing's to feud with, I'd develop a new family. I don't think the Barnes has enough of an established next generation to really focus on. Plus with Pam and Cliff gone it wouldn't be the same.

Another thing, with the elder characters I'd only have Sue Ellen and Bobby on contract. Gary, Val, Ray, Lucy, Donna and Jenna could all have a story (but consistent) recurring presence. The main focus would be building a new Ewing family and what surrounds them like we had on the original. You have the Ewing's, the Barnes, the cartel, etc. They need a sense of community. A sense of power. The Mexican mafia stuff would definitely have to go. Let it be soapy and Texan and have a writer who respects that it's a soap.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I'd love to see a series exploring really any of the years leading up to the pilot. Maybe not the wildcatting days, since 'The Early Years' did that, but the 50s and 60s and earlier 70s - the years when Jock was running things and JR was on his way up, Bobby as the football star, skinny young Ray Krebbs showing up on the ranch with a note from his mother, the whole Gary fallout. With the right cast and production and writing it would be amazing. (What are the chances that would happen, though?)

The more I think about it, the more I would want to go with the concept of @Taylor Bennett Jr. to create a series exploring the 1950s - early 1970s which Taylor describes as "the years when Jock was running things and JR was on his way up, Bobby as the football star, skinny young Ray Krebbs showing up on the ranch with a note from his mother, the whole Gary fallout. With the right cast and production and writing it would be amazing."

This idea of setting a modern day drama in the past was done by Mad Men with great success, as it set its show in the 1960s. So there's a precedent for that working with a 21st century audience. If that might necessitate making this Dallas more serious drama than soap opera, fine. I have no problem with that. Actually, the more serious drama style seems better accepted today than soap opera anyway. I just want it to tell great stories which would be fascinating to watch for people of all generations.

Another reason I like this is because the story of the years of building a company which becomes the largest independent oil company in the state of Texas would a compelling one. Dallas is already thought of as "an old show" done in old style, maybe a "dinosaur", so here they'd be acknowledging "Yes this is a show about events taking place a long time ago - we're embracing the idea of telling a story set in that time and turning what some would consider a possible weakness into a strength."

By doing that you also make it clear that the only way to do it would be with a new cast playing the same characters. It's not a stylistic choice to not use the still living actors of Dallas because it would be impossible for them to portray those characters as young people. I think it would help the audience accept new actors playing this characters because it would be so apparent to them that this story could not be told any other way.

It would be a great opportunity to look into things such as "what made JR become the man he became - what molded his character." Through flashbacks we could even look into how JRs childhood shaped him. We could see how Pam and Cliff's upbringing shaped their characters. I'd find getting the opportunity to watch all these personalities being shaped and to find out how different factors shaped them to be fascinating!

Seeing Jock Ewing working as a much younger man building his own company from the ground up and allowing us to finally see the way Jock Ewing did "bidness" when he was still in his prime years in a weekly series could be very compelling TV.

From a practical standpoint, a financial one, I think this is still the best way to do it. By making Dallas look like a 21st century show, conceding that an 80s soap is outdated, we'd be embracing the fact that yes, this is an old story, these events did take place a long time ago, but they make a compelling story to watch when told in a modern style!

 

[Pamela_E]

I voted for Reboot with significant changes in location, characters and script, reason being I don't think any form of continuation could work now because so many characters/actors from the original have gone.

Tastes and attitudes have also changed radically now, especially for women, they're far more empowered now than they were back in the late 70's/80's.

As much as I adore and love re-watching Dallas I would love to see a genuine reboot with great character actors and powerful men and women scheming and plotting.

I wouldn't change the location - Southfork IS Southfork but I would maybe change the ages of the characters, maybe go back 10 years earlier so they're a little bit younger, but still start at the same point - Bobby returning to Southfork with his new wife Pam.

Plot wise though I would be more than happy for them to create brand new timelines/plots etc - We will always have the original to treasure, but these characters are wonderful and I'd love to see what new writers can come up with to surprise us.

But Dallas MUST be about the Ewings Vs the Barnes and Ewing Oil/Energies - no other characters should be more than associates because that's not how the series worked IMO.

If it happens, this is the likely scenario. There has been some thoughts about this thrown around but nothing concrete.

When done well it works, Prisoner CBH is a great example. It had wonderful touch stones with the original but it's confident in being a great drama.

I think it's fab and interesting to see how they reimagine it.

The new prisoner has not taken anything away from the original.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

I voted for Reboot with significant changes in location, characters and script, reason being I don't think any form of continuation could work now because so many characters/actors from the original have gone.

Tastes and attitudes have also changed radically now, especially for women, they're far more empowered now than they were back in the late 70's/80's.

Empower: to give official authority or legal power to

*In my best Jock Ewing voice* What the hell!?!? Empower? Listen up, there just ain't no damn such thing as "empower." If women have been empowered, then they've got nothin'! Nobody gives you power. Real power is something you take!