New posts

A little forum update...We're planning an upgrade.

Find out more about what's planned and how you can help support the forum
Click here for the details

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kenny Coyote" data-source="post: 200059" data-attributes="member: 102">Thank you! That last paragraph gives you an idea of what I would have liked to have seen them do with the character of Sue Ellen so that it progressed instead of becoming stagnant. Seeing any character repeat her mistakes over and over again gets old.Running a show of that magnitude is appealing because you get to run things exactly the way you want. It great if you have a good vision for the way you want the storylines to go and have the competence and capability to pull it off all by yourself. You get all the credit when things go well. You also get all the blame when you make the wrong decisions. That's why I blame Leonard Katzman for bringing Patrick Duffy back. How can you blame someone else when Katzman is the one who had the final decision? That's what I asked someone who said Larry Hagman was to blame. Hagman could make suggestions, but Katzman had the final say, so how can you blame anyone but Katzman for approving that decision? The buck stops at the top. I never did get a reply to that. It's hard to argue that no, the buck doesn't stop at the top.Hindsight is 20/20, so it's easy to say this now, but it looks like running Dallas by himself was too much for Katzman to handle. Sometimes when people get so much success they start to think they can do no wrong. They get big heads and overestimate their abilities. I wasn't there, so I can only speculate, but that may have been what happened with him. It's one possibility.It would be interesting to know the specifics of what each guy contributed  - which ideas came from Katzman and which ideas came from Capice. I'd love to have heard Phil Capice do DVD commentaries on some episodes so he could have talked about that some and given his side of things. Then have commentaries by Leonard Katzmann on the same episodes to get his side of things. I think that would have been fascinating if they'd done that. I didn't get much out of the Patrick Duffy/Linda Gray commentary they had. They seemed more concerned with being funny than providing much of any real value. It's annoying to listen to someone who is trying to be funny but isn't.He certainly did put a lot of enthusiasm and creativity for the show for a long time and it's nice that you acknowledge the positive things he contributed, rather than just blame him for the downfall of the show. Sometimes people tend to focus on the negatives more than the positives of Dallas. I can understand why it happens here, on a forum like this. It's probably more interesting to talk about what went wrong with Dallas and get people's opinions on what should have been done to prevent the decline in quality of the show than it is talk about how great Dallas was in season one through eight.When someone works at that high of a level for as long as Katzmann did, they can get burned out. Again, I wasn't there so I'm speculating, but based in what we saw in seasons 11-14, I believe that's what was happening to Leonard Katzman. If you do everything yourself sooner or later you're gonna burn out. Also, when you're the top guy, sometimes you become so involved that you see the trees, but you're not seeing the forest.What do you do when that happens? They needed to get some new people in there with some fresh ideas for the show - people who knew the show well, who had a real enthusiasm for Dallas and could also look at things with more objectivity. I really believe that's what needed to be done - getting some new, highly creative people in there to help keep the quality up to par for what the show was known for. I know some people think Dallas continued for too may seasons, but I don't think you can go too many seasons in a show like Dallas as long as you keep the level of quality high.In a soap opera style show like Dallas where it's a continuing story, as opposed to a show where there is a plot that has a definite beginning, middle and end to the story, you can't have too many seasons if they're good!  Dallas could have continued successfully for as long or longer than it did as long as they had people with exciting ideas for new storylines for the characters.  Creativity is the only limitation for the longevity of a show like Dallas. When the writers and producer run out of quality ideas for how the show should proceed, they've got to bring in some people who can look at the show in a more objective way and add fresh, exciting ideas. Otherwise the show will just get worse and lose more and more viewers until it gets cancelled.I like your attitude [USER=82]@Toni[/USER]! I don't know why some people get upset if they see an opinion that differs from theirs. You and I don't agree on everything. I think April was the best new character in Dallas from that time onwards and was a valuable addition to the show. I think she was extremely likable. I know you don't agree, but that doesn't create a problem. It's just something that is bound to happen in a forum. The general idea of a forum is to exchange ideas and opinions. I find it interesting to get different perspectives on the show. I like to see good discussions get going and try to contribute to them in a way that's of some value to the rest of the forum members. I don't expect everyone to agree and it would get boring if that's all that happened! When people don't agree on the merits of an idea and they debate it, when each one is willing to counter the other's argument with ideas that back up their own argument, it leads to some of the most interesting content in the forum. It's a shame that some people take opposing views so personally. The objective is to have fun!</blockquote>

Verification: Who played Sue Ellen in Dallas?