Goodbye Pam´s Nightmare

[Billy Nolan]

I've just finished the legendary dream season and am at the beginning of season 10. I quite liked season 9 with Marinos, etc., as well as some of the storylines.

What particularly moved/delighted me was the storyline about the deaf Tony. For a primetime soap opera from the '80s, I thought that was really good.

So I'm very disappointed that this storyline isn't being continued.

I also write for film and TV magazines, and I'll be mentioning Dallas and Tony's story in one of my next articles about "Representation of Inclusion in Hollywood´s Movies and TV-Series over the Decades." It's a shame that it wasn't continued, especially since some producers said they were glad to be able to drop some storylines after the dream season ended. Was that perhaps also referring to Tony's storyline ?I will do some more research on that.

Furthermore, I have to admit that I'm currently losing interest in the show, as I feel like the development has stalled and everything is being rehashed from the beginning. Like the conflict between Ray and Donna; Jenna's grief at not being able to have Bobby, etc.

I hope the show will grab me again.

...oh yeah: and it's a shame that Mark Graison apparently isn't coming back after all. His humor and cynicism were refreshing. And I would have liked to learn more about his time in the macho fraternity as a student.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

So I'm very disappointed that this storyline isn't being continued.

Or at least wrapped up more validly and quickly.

I don't know how much of this you may know, but when Patrick Duffy left in 1985, so did writer/producers Leonard Katzman, Art Lewis, and David Paulsen... Replacing them for the season (that was turned into a dream retroactively) was Peter Dunne and his team who'd previously guided DALLAS' spin-off, KNOTS LANDING, for several seasons.

Dunne's work on KNOTS had been quite good, but DALLAS was a different show with a different sensibility, and Dunne came in with the mindset that DALLAS needed to be 'reformed' in some way -- despite being TV's number one show for years (i.e., we must make the women 'stronger' even though our patronizing efforts will ultimately make her look dumber).

Also, unlike KNOTS' looser and more-experimental narrative, DALLAS had a certain Paulsenian sense of structure that was tighter and more plot-focused (in keeping with the needs of the parent series). So once Dunne took over DALLAS, DALLAS immediately began to do some artful things that were -- initially -- kind of interesting... The problem began with the middle of that season, after the 'location' episodes had ended, where the gradual coalescing of the plotlines normally occurs, well, that just never happened... The year's storylines, good or bad, just began to ramble on with no raison d'etre, and the writers themselves were obviously bored with their own narrative...

Add to that a bit of a drippier tone to the scripts and the dialogue (too many maudlin reconciliation moments between characters who would either never behave that way, or, at the very least, would never do so so quickly) and DALLAS had become more soap than opera. With some of the more interesting things they were attempting to do that year effectively neutralized by the fact that the writers clearly had no idea where or what or how they wanted things to go.

Ratings drooped slightly; Larry realized the problems and threw his weight around to get Katzman and Duffy back (and with Katzman came Paulsen). Dunne and his team were fired.

But then you had another problem. Katzman had not been part of Dunne's year, really (Katzman wrote some individual scripts and was listed as "creative consultant" but had no power over the direction of the narrative). So Katzman simply wanted the erase Dunne's year entirely, wiping it away with 'a dream' in a single exchange. With no concern for the permanent damage that decision would cause.

Bobby's first season back, and Pam's last season, was as snappy fun as DALLAS had ever seen, and may have the best, most-frequent re-watch potential of all of DALLAS' years. But it' s marred by the fact that they didn't take at least one episode with which to resurrect Bobby.

Viewers know that reviving long-dead characters is innately farfetched. The audience just needs the writers to do it in such a way that it permits that audience a chance to take a deep breath, nod, and say to themselves, "Okay, that's works well enough for me," and then move on.

But that didn't happen. The dream scenario, explained away in a two-minute moment by Bobby to Pam, damaged DALLAS permanently, validated all the smug "it's-just-a-soap-opera" dismissals its detractors had always dispensed. Critics who had grudgingly come to acknowledge over the years that DALLAS was genuinely good drama, found themselves rolling their eyes and giving up on it, the dream explanation becoming the groan heard 'round the world, the ultimate jump-the-shark event of all time.

The irony being that Bobby's first season back in Texas was great fun, DALLAS in classical form, both weirdly poignant and laugh-out-loud funny simultaneously. The ghost of Jock story absolutely Hamletesque.

But the damage was done. Decades later, when DALLAS is referred to (as it rarely is) at award show telecasts, it's met with derisive snickers. This, the most successful drama series in global television history.

That could have happened anyway, DALLAS' middle-American sensibility more quickly marginalized by Hollywood's idiotically elitist bubble (and in a way often-shitty DYNASTY, with its gauche glammer and stupidly illogical dialogue, is rarely laughed off). But gaffes like multiple Ellies and the use of The Dream explanation didn't help.

...And since Bobby was the one who'd flatlined, why wouldn't it have been his dream, if indeed The Dream needed to be used?? But they instead handed off blame to the nearest ex-wife, Pam. And Victoria professionally completes her contract, barely able to avoid rolling her eyes for the remainder of the season.

 

[Billy Nolan]

Or at least wrapped up more validly and quickly.

I don't know how much of this you may know, but when Patrick Duffy left in 1985, so did writer/producers Leonard Katzman, Art Lewis, and David Paulsen... Replacing them for the season (that was turned into a dream retroactively) was Peter Dunne and his team who'd previously guided DALLAS' spin-off, KNOTS LANDING, for several seasons.

Dunne's work on KNOTS had been quite good, but DALLAS was a different show with a different sensibility, and Dunne came in with the mindset that DALLAS needed to be 'reformed' in some way -- despite being TV's number one show for years (i.e., we must make the women 'stronger' even though our patronizing efforts will ultimately make her look dumber).

Also, unlike KNOTS' looser and more-experimental narrative, DALLAS had a certain Paulsenian sense of structure that was tighter and more plot-focused (in keeping with the needs of the parent series). So once Dunne rook over DALLAS, DALLAS immediately began to do some artful things that were -- initially -- kind of interesting... The problem began with the middle of that season, after the 'location' episodes had ended, and the gradual coalescing of the plotlines normally occurs, well, that just never happened... The years' storylines, good or bad, just began to ramble on with no raison d'etre, and the writers themselves were obviously bored with their own narrative...

Add to that a bit of a drippier tone to the scripts and the dialogue (too many maudlin reconciliation moments between characters who would either never behave that way, or, at the very least, would never do so so quickly) and DALLAS had become more soap than opera. With some of the more interesting things they were attempting to do that year effectively neutralized by the fact that the writers clearly had no idea where or what or how they wanted things to go.

Ratings drooped slightly; Larry realized the problems and threw his weight around to get Katzman and Duffy back (and with Katzman came Paulsen). Dunne and his team were fired.

But then you had another problem. Katzman had not been part of Dunne's year, really (Katzman wrote some individual scripts and was listed as "creative consultant" but had no power over the direction of the narrative). So Katzman simply wanted the erase Dunne's year entirely, wiping it away with 'a dream' in a single exchange. With no concern for the permanent damage that decision would cause.

Bobby's first season back, and Pam's last season, was as snappy fun as DALLAS had ever seen, and may have the best, most-frequent re-watch potential of all of DALLAS' years. But it' s marred by the fact that they didn't take at least one episode with which to resurrect Bobby.

Viewers know that reviving long-dead characters is innately farfetched. The audience just need the writers to do it in such a way that it permits that audience a chance to take a deep breath, nod, and say to themselves, "Okay, that's works well enough for me," and then move on.

But that didn't happen. The dream scenario, explained away in a two-minute moment by Bobby to Pam, damaged DALLAS permanently, validated all the smug "it's-just-a-soap-opera" dismissals its detractors had always dispensed. Critics who had grudgingly come to acknowledge over the years that DALLAS was genuinely good drama, found themselves rolling their eyes and giving up on it, the dream explanation becoming the groan heard 'round the world, the ultimate jump-the-shark event of all time.

The irony being that Bobby's first season back in Texas was great fun, DALLAS in classical form, both weirdly poignant and laugh-out-funny simultaneously. The ghost of Jock story absolutely Hamletesque.

But the damage was done. Decades later, when DALLAS is referred to (as it rarely is) at award show telecasts, it's met with derisive snickers. This, the most successful drama series in global television history.

That could have happened anyway, DALLAS' middle American sensibility more quickly marginalized by Hollywood's idiotically elitist bubble (and in a way often-shitty DYNASTY, with its gauche glammer, is rarely laughed off). But gaffes like multiple Ellies and the use of The Dream explanation didn't help.

...And since Bobby was the one who'd flatlined, why wouldn't it have been his dream, if indeed The Dream needed to be used?? But they instead handed off blame to the nearest ex-wife, Pam. And Victoria professionally completes her contract, barely able to avoid rolling her eyes for the remainder of the season.

Wow! Thank you so much for your wonderful informations. I really like these background stories.

 

[Crimson]

I have to admit that I'm currently losing interest in the show, as I feel like the development has stalled and everything is being rehashed from the beginning.

I'm hard pressed to think of any fiction TV show that sustained its creativity longer than 5 to 7 years. Every show hit a point where it's premise has been drained. After that, it can either become repetitive and stale or try new things and likely ruin what made the show special. DALLAS tried a lot of the former in its middle years and a lot of the later in its final years.

 

[Rove]

I've just finished the legendary dream season

The Dream Season. The season itself is pretty good until Bobby spins in the shower with a smug look on his face and says, "Good morning." Of course the following season all was revealed and Dallas grabbed Miss Ellie's shotgun from the hallway cabinet and shot itself, not in the foot as the saying goes, but in the head. There was no coming back from that explanation.

You are right though regarding the introduction of Tony. I wish this was a story introduced in an earlier season so the character and story could have been kept.

 

[Svengali]

.oh yeah: and it's a shame that Mark Graison apparently isn't coming back after all. His humor and cynicism were refreshing. And I would have liked to learn more about his time in the macho fraternity as a student.

nice movie with a young John beck : the other side of midnight 1977

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

I'm hard pressed to think of any fiction TV show that sustained its creativity longer than 5 to 7 years. Every show hit a point where it's premise has been drained. After that, it can either become repetitive and stale or try new things and likely ruin what made the show special. DALLAS tried a lot of the former in its middle years and a lot of the later in its final years.

I mostly agree. With some exceptions, every show reaches a point when it is not as as good.
I thought that Dallas made a major mistake by not keeping Steve Forrest as Jock.
Yes , I am fully aware of the assertions that recasts don't work too well in prime time, but
there was a more important consideration where Dallas was concerned.
The return of Jock would have expanded story lines, and actually created better scripts for BBG and Howard Keel, as well as Steve Forrest.
It would have restored the basic narrative that was changed (not for the better IMHO, and no, I was not as
impressed with season 6, even though it was quite successful) when Jim Davis passed.
The effects on the rest of the cast would have been more impactful, in addition for more material for BBG and Howard Keel
JR and Bobby battling Jock for control of Ewing Oil.
Ray caught between Jock and Clayton, while his marriage with Donna is challenged, and Donna
increasingly a powerful political figure who becomes involved in the "new" (newest battle for Ewing Oil)
Sue Ellen becoming stronger, and becoming more influential behind the scenes.
Even a spurned Jenna playing a role to ally against Bobby
Pam.. I guess her usual whining (By now, she was just an annoyance)
Cliff and Jeremy Wendell playing both sides against the middle, maybe even forming alliances with NuJock

So many possibilities that were never realized

 

[Crimson]

So many possibilites that were never realized

To me, there were so many intriguing possibilities in the early-middle years that were dropped. The show was so densely plotted for a few years there that they could abandon or cut short entire storylines. Yet within a few years they seemed to have run completely out of ideas.

 

[Svengali]

the dream season was the beginning of the end,

 

[Chris2]

Good analysis, Snarky. The only point I’d contest is about the dream season ratings “drooping slightly”. Overall, the dream season lost 10% of the show’s audience from the previous season. It ranked #6 for the year, but that overall ranking was propped up by strong viewership for the early episodes in the season that were dealing with the immediate aftermath of Bobby’s death.

By the latter half of the season, the show was no longer ranking among the top 10 series in the weekly Nielsen ratings. And this was a show that had been the #2 show in the US the previous year.

Times were changing and every top show eventually fails and/ or ends. But CBS was right to be alarmed at the ratings drop.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Times were changing and every top show eventually fails and/ or ends. But CBS was right to be alarmed at the ratings drop.

Especially if they were watching their own show.

What's interesting is that when Duffy, Katzman and Paulsen returned for the 1986/87 season, the technical ranking dropped from 6th to 11th place, but the actual audience headcount remained the same.

 

[Monzo]

the dream season was the beginning of the end,

When I watched the series in its original run, and no one knew how long the show would stay on the air, I felt like season 10 was the beginning of the end. The plots were still strong on paper, but somehow everything just didn't translate to the screen with the same energy as before.

Looking back, I think Lady Jessica marked the beginning of the end. The unwritten rule for successful characters used to be to introduce them slowly so the audience would want to see more of them, like Donna or Katherine. If new characters were shown too often right away, like Leslie or Peter, they couldn't win over the audience. This formula, which was different compared to the other big soaps, worked for seven seasons, but everything changed with Lady Jessica. She came in like a wrecking ball, and from then on, that seemed to be the motto for every new character. And which of the fresh faces managed to impress?

 

[Seaviewer]

the dream season was the beginning of the end,

When I watched the series in its original run, and no one knew how long the show would stay on the air, I felt like season 10 was the beginning of the end. The plots were still strong on paper, but somehow everything just didn't translate to the screen with the same energy as before.

Looking back, I think Lady Jessica marked the beginning of the end. The unwritten rule for successful characters used to be to introduce them slowly so the audience would want to see more of them, like Donna or Katherine. If new characters were shown too often right away, like Leslie or Peter, they couldn't win over the audience. This formula, which was different compared to the other big soaps, worked for seven seasons, but everything changed with Lady Jessica. She came in like a wrecking ball, and from then on, that seemed to be the motto for every new character. And which of the fresh faces managed to impress?

This is not an original thought, but it was not the dream season, it was the dream resolution. And, I agree, season 10 had plotlines that were strong in theory, but the stink of the reset still hung over them.

 

[Grangehill1]

I’ve said this before but it didn’t help that season 10 was the first season with the new cheaper editing technique. So it jarred straight away with everything that had gone before that. That first scene in Pam’s house was not only ridiculous but it LOOKED awful. So for viewers watching on first viewing not only were we confronted with the revelation that the previous year was a dream but also the show didn’t look like Dallas. It looked cheap. Leonard K really shot himself in the foot with both those decisions.

And alongside that all the hairstyles and fashions just looked wrong this year. They also really jarred. Nobody seemed styled.

I wonder if I could rewatch now that the show is in HD whether I could watch Return to Camelot in a better light with at least the picture quality being better.

And to add John Parker came back for many episodes in season 10 which also didn’t help. There’s more talent in a sponge. He could literally suck the life out of any dramatic scene with his awful music

I think the beginning was the end was the start of season 8 once Morgan Brittany departed.
In the space of a few episodes we’d lost John Beck, Audrey Landers, Barbara Bel Geddes and Morgan Brittany.
The recast of Ellie was a huge mistake and Dallas was seen as a bit of a laughing stock in the UK at least due to this decision

New characters like Jamie and Mandy just didn’t land as well with viewers although compared to what was to come later now I see them as classic characters

I think the show redeemed itself at the end of 8 and most of season 9 but then fell of a cliff for season 10. And ended up in a hole so deep in season 11 that it could never be saved

 

[Toni]

IMHO, the show jumped the shark between Miss Ellie´s wedding we never saw, and Season 8 Premiere, with footage from "No More Nice Guy" being re-used now for Bobby. I´ll never forgive them for those two things. Of course, hiring Donna Reed was the final blow, but the fact that the series lasted 6 more seasons is a real triumph, if we think about it.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

And to add John Parker came back for many episodes in season 10 which also didn’t help. There’s more talent in a sponge. He could literally suck the life out of any dramatic scene with his awful music

Ironically, John Parker -- who apparently turns 100 today -- was a talented composer. He wrote some wonderful scores for many shows, including some Native American-inspired scores for the last half-dozen years of GUNSMOKE.

Even some of his early DALLAS scores, like "Barbecue", were pretty good.

But as the series wore on, Parker's increasingly GREEN-ACRES/HEE-HAW scores became a lot harder to sit through (can we imagine 1982-1985 DALLAS with Parker still composing)?

But, he was reportedly Lenny Katzman's best friend. So that was that.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

When I watched the series in its original run, and no one knew how long the show would stay on the air, I felt like season 10 was the beginning of the end. The plots were still strong on paper, but somehow everything just didn't translate to the screen with the same energy as before.

Looking back, I think Lady Jessica marked the beginning of the end. The unwritten rule for successful characters used to be to introduce them slowly so the audience would want to see more of them, like Donna or Katherine. If new characters were shown too often right away, like Leslie or Peter, they couldn't win over the audience. This formula, which was different compared to the other big soaps, worked for seven seasons, but everything changed with Lady Jessica. She came in like a wrecking ball, and from then on, that seemed to be the motto for every new character. And which of the fresh faces managed to impress?

Interesting analysis, and it seems credible.
I liked Lady Jessica, as portrayed by the wonderful Alexis Smith.
She could have been a good supporting character as a semi-regular, somewhat like Jeremy Wendell
Season 8 was quite good on balance, with a real challenge to Ewing Oil, although parts were a bit contrived.
I think that there was a change in story somewhere - didn't Jenna say something to the effect that her father and Jason were not besties,
contrary to what Jamie said - Jamie as imposter? JR would have been right from the start
Season 9,the dream season - just horrible, didn't even look like Dallas
Even JR was far less manipulative, compared to other seasons (Yes, there was the Pam on a false mission,
but it was small potatoes for JR)
Season 10 was good for the most part, should have kept Steve Forrest as Jock. The last season that the show felt like real Dallas

 

[pete lashmar]

I always jump from season 8 to season 10, and absolutely no one bothered with continuity. It's quite shocking how different everyone looks, not least JR with his grey hair and BBG back (thank god). Then to repeat the "jock" storyline without Pam having any recollection was just damn stupid. And, as always I must say (it's contractual LOL) that Wes WAS Jock - the writers wrote themselves not so much into a corner, but into the tightest crevice they could find.

 

[Grangehill1]

On rewatches I normally jump as well. The biggest jar for me storyline wise is the sudden trouble the oil industry is in in Return to Camelot.

 

[Seaviewer]

No, I would never skip season 9. For me, the disappointment comes with the knowledge that some of those stories won't be continued - and not necessarily the bad ones.