Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie Oleson" data-source="post: 443184" data-attributes="member: 8">I get the impression that it was not a carefully developed concept&nbsp; - they made The Colbys because they could.The whole thing was a recipe for instant cancellation but, lo and behold, the series came with an unexpected positive payoff. These things can&nbsp;&nbsp; happen when you leave good writers to their own devices. Perhaps there&#039;s some irony in the idea that The Colbys succeeded despite&nbsp; the nefariously &quot;creative&quot; intentions, which brings me to the marketing and that also includes the presentation and the series&#039; intro theme.It was loud and attention-grabbing and meant to bedazzle and bamboozle audiences who had no need for yet another glamorous prime time drama.The intro is so pompous and bombastic (possibly Bill Conti&#039;s most extreme composition) that it borders on parody which may explain the &quot;dated feel/look&quot; of the intro theme and opening credits - and why it felt dated even back in the 1980s.The Colbys found its groove - a slightly more old-fashioned melodramatic version of Dynasty that could use the Dynasty tropes without necessarily having to rely on it.That&#039;s where the online confusion and disagreement begins.&quot;The Colbys sucks because it&#039;s a blatant Dynasty copy&quot; AND &quot;The Colbys sucks because the most important dynamics are too different from Dynasty&quot;.I suspect those naysayers aren&#039;t even aware of their silly contradictions.The Dynasty spin-off never reached the level of inventiveness of the Dallas spin-off but it had a solid two years run that gave us everything we needed to know about Jeff Colby&#039;s soapy origins. It also brought two popular breakout characters into the Dynastyverse (Sable and Miles) and therefore, all things considered, THE COLBYS is not to be sniffed at.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie Oleson, post: 443184, member: 8"] I get the impression that it was not a carefully developed concept - they made The Colbys because they could. The whole thing was a recipe for instant cancellation but, lo and behold, the series came with an unexpected positive payoff. These things [I]can[/I] happen when you leave good writers to their own devices. Perhaps there's some irony in the idea that The Colbys succeeded [I]despite[/I] the nefariously "creative" intentions, which brings me to the marketing and that also includes the presentation and the series' intro theme. It was loud and attention-grabbing and meant to bedazzle and bamboozle audiences who had no need for yet another glamorous prime time drama. The intro is so pompous and bombastic (possibly Bill Conti's most extreme composition) that it borders on parody which may explain the "dated feel/look" of the intro theme and opening credits - and why it felt dated even back in the 1980s. The Colbys found its groove - a slightly more old-fashioned melodramatic version of Dynasty that could use the Dynasty tropes without necessarily having to rely on it. That's where the online confusion and disagreement begins. "The Colbys sucks because it's a blatant Dynasty copy" AND "The Colbys sucks because the most important dynamics are too different from Dynasty". I suspect those naysayers aren't even aware of their silly contradictions. The Dynasty spin-off never reached the level of inventiveness of the Dallas spin-off but it had a solid two years run that gave us everything we needed to know about Jeff Colby's soapy origins. It also brought two popular breakout characters into the Dynastyverse (Sable and Miles) and therefore, all things considered, THE COLBYS is not to be sniffed at. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played JR Ewing?