Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the-lost-son" data-source="post: 310498" data-attributes="member: 672">It was a very intriguing storyline and I like the open ending which was very uncharacteristic for a soap at that time.Resurrecting Jock would have been a huge mistake in my opinion because the whole dynamic of the show had changed since Jock&#039;s plane crash.For example JR who was so devastated after his Daddy&#039;s death. He took the love he had for him and transfered it to his son John Ross. I&#039;ve never seen such a thoughtful transition of a character&#039;s motivation.All the bad things he did was to fight for his son&#039;s future (and not anymore for his dad&#039;s approval).As sad as it was - Jim Davis leaving the show opened the door for so many storylines which would not have been possible with Jock around. He had such an impact on the first three years, but his impact was even bigger in season 4 (DVD4).The whole Jock-recast-idea started during the dream season. The producers obviously tried very hard to copy Dynasty which took the no. 1 spot a year before.So therfor we got many international storylines, endless wealth, less smarter writing and as Dynasty never had any issues recasting characters without 2nd thoughts - this idea came up.On top of that I have no clue what a return of Jock would have contributed to the show?Jock running Ewing Oil? Already done.JR/Bobby fighting for his approval?Already done. Furthermore they now had children on their own. Larry Hagman was 56 at that time. It would have been hard for me to accept a man of his age fighting for his daddy&#039;s approval.or a love triangle between Miss Ellie/Clayton/ Jock?Pointless, it would have damaged all of them.Dallas was on a downwards movement at that time in &#039;87. It probably was its last good storyline with the Ewing family in the center. But a recast wouldn&#039;t have saved the show.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the-lost-son, post: 310498, member: 672"] It was a very intriguing storyline and I like the open ending which was very uncharacteristic for a soap at that time. Resurrecting Jock would have been a huge mistake in my opinion because the whole dynamic of the show had changed since Jock's plane crash. For example JR who was so devastated after his Daddy's death. He took the love he had for him and transfered it to his son John Ross. I've never seen such a thoughtful transition of a character's motivation. All the bad things he did was to fight for his son's future (and not anymore for his dad's approval). As sad as it was - Jim Davis leaving the show opened the door for so many storylines which would not have been possible with Jock around. He had such an impact on the first three years, but his impact was even bigger in season 4 (DVD4). The whole Jock-recast-idea started during the dream season. The producers obviously tried very hard to copy Dynasty which took the no. 1 spot a year before. So therfor we got many international storylines, endless wealth, less smarter writing and as Dynasty never had any issues recasting characters without 2nd thoughts - this idea came up. On top of that I have no clue what a return of Jock would have contributed to the show? Jock running Ewing Oil? Already done. JR/Bobby fighting for his approval? Already done. Furthermore they now had children on their own. Larry Hagman was 56 at that time. It would have been hard for me to accept a man of his age fighting for his daddy's approval. or a love triangle between Miss Ellie/Clayton/ Jock? Pointless, it would have damaged all of them. Dallas was on a downwards movement at that time in '87. It probably was its last good storyline with the Ewing family in the center. But a recast wouldn't have saved the show. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played JR Ewing?