How do you think the show would have gone had Pam stayed?

[Jock's Ghost]

NO! It's always better to lose the actor than the character. Morons thought only Connery could play James Bond.
Margret Michaels as Pam number 2. After the car crash and the bandages removed, she is a different character in essence. Think of her with a body image and tons of self-doubt for Bobby to reassure her for the next few seasons. This would have kept the loser April away and the rest of Bobby's boring babes.

I’m generally against recasts after an actor has been playing a role for a long time. But in this case, I would make an exception because Pam was such a crucial character. The show’s central conflict (Bobby’s wife is a member of the rival family) went away without her.

I would have been less enthusiastic about a quasi-lookalike. I don’t think Margaret Michaels would have worked because she and Patrick Duffy didn’t have much chemistry. I think they should have gone for someone who had great chemistry with Duffy (and Ken Kercheval). They already had the plastic surgery excuse of why Pam looked different.

That said, even if Pam had been successfully recast, the show would have still gone downhill, albeit more slowly. The creative team they had in place for those last years wasn’t very good.

And Michaels was a great sound and look alike. I think she did just fine, remember, she would have been a different character after this ordeal... and the show might not have suffered such an ass kicking... gradually die off instead of lingering and choking to death

 

[Spooky Owl!]

NO! It's always better to lose the actor than the character

That works on shoddy daytime soaps -- it's much, much harder to pull off for nighttime shows, and some folks just don't seem to get that.

Morons thought only Connery could play James Bond.

But they didn't recast 007 with Roger Moore in the middle of DR. NO.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

NO! It's always better to lose the actor than the character. Morons thought only Connery could play James Bond.
Margret Michaels as Pam number 2. After the car crash and the bandages removed, she is a different character in essence. Think of her with a body image and tons of self-doubt for Bobby to reassure her for the next few seasons. This would have kept the loser April away and the rest of Bobby's boring babes.


And Michaels was a great sound and look alike. I think she did just fine, remember, she would have been a different character after this ordeal... and the show might not have suffered such an ass kicking... gradually die off instead of lingering and choking to death

Are you suggesting a recast?
Oh No!
We can't have that.
According to this forum, only one person on the planet can play a fictional character.

That is news to fans of Doctor Who, James Bond, Batman, Superman, etc

 

[DallasFanForever]

That works on shoddy daytime soaps -- it's much, much harder to pull off for nighttime shows,

Yes, I’ve always said that on daytime it’s much easier to pull off. There may be pushback at first but with about 250 plus shows a year to watch fans get conditioned to the recast faster. I can think of some that were probably never totally accepted but overall seeing the same character five times a week compared to having way fewer episodes in prime time does help.

 

[Spooky Owl!]

Yes, I’ve always said that on daytime it’s much easier to pull off. There may be pushback at first but with about 250 plus shows a year to watch fans get conditioned to the recast faster. I can think of some that were probably never totally accepted but overall seeing the same character five times a week compared to having way fewer episodes in prime time does help.

And, frankly, there was always a disposability issue with daytime soaps -- during the twentieth century, there was no way to watch them again. And little market for it.

Nighttime shows, in all their 35mm glory, felt more permanent.

Daytime shows were as ephemeral as the stage.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

Pam or VP?
only asking because recasting seems to be such a no-no on this site

 

[Spooky Owl!]

Pam or VP?
only asking because recasting seems to be such a no-no on this site

Only the principal cast.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

Only the principal cast.

I thought Pam was part of the main cast, and yet there was a recast and a sort of follow-up

 

[Spooky Owl!]

I thought Pam was part of the main cast, and yet there was a recast and a sort of follow-up

I've convinced myself that Pam's one-scene cameo where she tells Cliff she's married her doctor is actually Jeanne O'Brien trying to lure in Bobby.

Please play along.

 

[CryptCreeper72]

Are you suggesting a recast?
Oh No!
We can't have that.
According to this forum, only one person on the planet can play a fictional character.

That is news to fans of Doctor Who, James Bond, Batman, Superman, etc

Dr. Who isn't comparable. The very premise of that character is CHANGE (regeneration).

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

Dr. Who isn't comparable. The very premise of that character is CHANGE (regeneration).

True.
Just for fun, -1966
What I have read is that the showrunner, Innes Lloyd, who along with then script editor Gerry Davis( who is the originator of the Cybermen),
thought 'what if the Doctor's people were so advanced, that they could could make time run backward in their bodies when they were
no longer able to function?'
There was no Gallifrey, no Time Lords at that point.
I don't know if the process was called regeneration at that time.
Not only that, but the decision to cast Patrick Troughton, and create
a entirely new approach to the series, with an entirely new
concept of the character, was groundbreaking.
I don't know if any other popular series has a comparable history.

Innes Lloyd and Gerry Davis may indeed be responsible for Doctor Who's longevity, and they
seldom receive enough appreciation IMHO

 

[Soaplover]

I think had Patrick Duffy not come back making season 9 a dream season that VP might have stayed beyond 1987 because there might have been more money in the budget for her raise.. and she would have continued to be challenged with new story avenues.

But since Patrick Duffy did come back in 1986... I don't know if there was anything more to do with the Pam character had VP stayed.

 

[Jock's Ghost]

That works on shoddy daytime soaps -- it's much, much harder to pull off for nighttime shows, and some folks just don't seem to get that.



But they didn't recast 007 with Roger Moore in the middle of DR. NO.

Dr No is the first film, why would they cast Moore then?

 

[Jock's Ghost]

Pam or VP?
only asking because recasting seems to be such a no-no on this site

It's lame too. Gary was recast. Kristin was recast. I am probably in the minority and didn't mind Donna Reed, at least we didn't lose the character. Pricilla as Jenna was mostly a bust recast... but they had a great one for Pam! And with the car crash storyline, she would have emerged slightly changed... cool!

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

That works on shoddy daytime soaps -- it's much, much harder to pull off for nighttime shows, and some folks just don't seem to get that.



But they didn't recast 007 with Roger Moore in the middle of DR. NO.

Not a good comparison.
Dr No is a feature film, the first of the James Bond.
Far different situation than a TV series

 

[Spooky Owl!]

Dr No is the first film, why would they cast Moore then?

Not a good comparison.
Dr No is a feature film, the first of the James Bond.
Far different situation than a TV series

It's recasting midway through. Like a Broadway play starring BBG as Maggie the Cat, when, all of a sudden, Donna Reed shows up in Act 3 with no explanation.

I mean, it's a problem!

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

It's recasting midway through. Like a Broadway play starring BBG as Maggie the Cat, when, all of a sudden, Donna Reed shows up in Act 3 with no explanation.

I mean, it's a problem!

I am not going to revisit this.
You made the point about a feature film, I didn't
It is not a valid comparison
Film, theatre and tv are all different mediums.
The situations require different strategies.
If have to have the last word, go for it,
Dazzle us with your observations.
It is sad that you have to resort to this, because I thought
you were better than that.
You speak of intolerance with disagreements
Read your own posts

 

[Spooky Owl!]

I am not going to revisit this.

But you just did! I was discussing the example of recasting midway through a film or a play!

It is sad that you have to resort to this, because I thought
you were better than that.

Really? You thought that?

You speak of intolerance with disagreements
Read your own posts

You've already started fighting (and playing the victim) yet again -- can't we just discuss what qualifies as a "good" or "bad" example of re-casting, and whether it works in a film, a series or a play (and how it differs) when it happens midway through?

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

But you just did! I was discussing the example of recasting midway through a film or a play!



Really? You thought that?



You've already started fighting (and playing the victim) yet again -- can't we just discuss what qualifies as a "good" or "bad" example of re-casting, and whether it works in a film, a series or a play (and how it differs) when it happens midway through?

I am not"playing victim" or arguing. projecting much?
You are harassing me and responding to me in a mocking tone, which is something you are not doing to others.
BTW theatre - heard of understudies?They have been known to replace actors during the live show
I AM discussing the merits and differences. You just happen to disagree to the point where
you don't even consider another perspective.

Your main objection seems to be that I do not hero worship BBG
If you and others do, fine,
You do realize that Digger was portrayed by two different actors who were very different in their approach
David Wayne was more bitter, more volatile, more impulsive.
Keenan Wynn was more thoughtful, less concerned with David Wayne's version of events,
more concerned with having his rightful (in his view) share
And the two of them didn't look anything alike
I don't see Keenan Wynn being vilified, thankfully
Both were great actors, I have great respect for both.

Go ahead, continue to misstate and misrepresent what I say
That is not victimhood, that is simply what you are doing

 

[Spooky Owl!]

I am not"playing victim" or arguing. projecting much?
You are harassing me and responding to me in a mocking tone, which is something you are not doing to others.
BTW theatre - heard of understudies?They have been known to replace actors during the live show
I AM discussing the merits and differences. You just happen to disagree to the point where
you don't even consider another perspective.

Your main objection seems to be that I do not hero worship BBG
If you and others do, fine,
You do realize that Digger was portrayed by two different actors who were very different in their approach
David Wayne was more bitter, more volatile, more impulsive.
Keenan Wynn was more thoughtful, less concerned with David Wayne's version of events,
more concerned with having his rightful (in his view) share
And the two of them didn't look anything alike
I don't see Keenan Wynn being vilified, thankfully
Both were great actors, I have great respect for both.

Go ahead, continue to misstate and misrepresent what I say
That is not victimhood, that is simply what you are doing

Please stop talking about me. The subject matter is much more interesting.

And, yes, recasting guest roles tends to work better.