Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarky Oracle!" data-source="post: 313754" data-attributes="member: 57984">It&#039;s pretty much all of the listed reasons above. The later seasons may not seem quite as vapid today because we&#039;ve had decades to adjust and downgrade our expectations. Plus, as oldDALLAS is now a relic from a bygone era, there is a natural tendency to minimize its flaws -- especially the flaws from its deterioration years---due to its age. We&#039;re sometimes more tolerant of crappity-crap from the semi-distant past; sometimes less so.Hell, as much as I&#039;ve bitched and whined about Seasons 3 thru 8 of&nbsp; DYNASTY -- and for damned good reason -- I can sit through those years now without clawing my arms and screaming death threats at my TV. You just accept it now as &quot;old stuff.&quot;The producers make most of the decisions, so the blame has to predominantly fall on them. Leonard Katzman understood, more or less, DALLAS. But he seemed to &quot;need&quot; an obstacle to get around. One like Philip Capice or even Peter Dunne, men who may have been competent in certain ways but didn&#039;t quite &quot;get&quot; the DALLAS flavor, or the things that went into it, But once Katzman had taken his throne as undisputed boss, he seemed to fall back on that common power-players&#039; assumption that: as long as I&#039;m in charge, everything is fine.David Paulsen left a year after Victoria, possibly because he saw the overly-satirical tone that Katzman seemed to be permitting or even endorsing. And post-WSJR?, Katzman couldn&#039;t seem to do DALLAS without Paulsen&#039;s sense of almost-Shakespearean seasonal narrative structure. In contrast, Howard Lakin seemed to dive right in to the encroaching silliness,Suffice it to say that Mis-Ellie, the matriarch&#039;s recasting, was the first major crack in the DALLAS veneer. Then there were the producer changes for the season when we thought Bobby was dead. Then Bobby was revived via an ill-conceived dream. And even though her last year there was great, after Pam left, the show seemed to mostly ignore her absence. And then there was the campier tone which crept in.It was as if the remaining creators were now just trying to &quot;wing it&quot; until the network finally brought down the axe.The reason the ratings surged to #2 for &quot;Conundrum&quot; was nostalgia -- a wistful nostalgia for a resonant family-centered show that had once meant so much to the audience, and one they&#039;d eventually abandoned because that affection wasn&#039;t really reciprocated....... And what&#039;s more &quot;family&quot; than that?[ATTACH=full]34829[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarky Oracle!, post: 313754, member: 57984"] It's pretty much all of the listed reasons above. The later seasons may not seem [B]quite [/B]as vapid today because we've had decades to adjust and downgrade our expectations. Plus, as oldDALLAS is now a relic from a bygone era, there is a natural tendency to minimize its flaws -- especially the flaws from its deterioration years---due to its age. We're sometimes more tolerant of crappity-crap from the semi-distant past; sometimes less so. Hell, as much as I've bitched and whined about Seasons 3 thru 8 of DYNASTY -- and for damned good reason -- I can sit through those years now without clawing my arms and screaming death threats at my TV. You just accept it now as "old stuff." The producers make most of the decisions, so the blame has to predominantly fall on them. Leonard Katzman understood, more or less, DALLAS. But he seemed to "need" an obstacle to get around. One like Philip Capice or even Peter Dunne, men who may have been competent in certain ways but didn't quite "get" the DALLAS flavor, or the things that went into it, But once Katzman had taken his throne as undisputed boss, he seemed to fall back on that common power-players' assumption that: [I]as long as I'm in charge, everything is fine.[/I] David Paulsen left a year after Victoria, possibly because he saw the overly-satirical tone that Katzman seemed to be permitting or even endorsing.[I] [/I] And post-WSJR?, Katzman couldn't seem to do DALLAS without Paulsen's sense of almost-Shakespearean seasonal narrative structure. In contrast, Howard Lakin seemed to dive right in to the encroaching silliness, Suffice it to say that Mis-Ellie, the matriarch's recasting, was the first major crack in the DALLAS veneer. Then there were the producer changes for the season when we thought Bobby was dead. Then Bobby was revived via an ill-conceived dream. And even though her last year there was great, after Pam left, the show seemed to mostly ignore her absence. And then there was the campier tone which crept in. It was as if the remaining creators were now just trying to "wing it" until the network finally brought down the axe. The reason the ratings surged to #2 for "Conundrum" was nostalgia -- a wistful nostalgia for a resonant family-centered show that had once meant so much to the audience, and one they'd eventually abandoned because that affection wasn't really reciprocated....... And what's more "family" than that? [ATTACH type="full"]34829[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]

Verification

6 + 4 =