Read the Top 10 Explanations for the Mothman.

Related articles

• December 15. Mothman and MIBs! #dsxp #darkshadows #mothman (collinsfoundation.net)

Please ignore the gate hahaha! I honestly didn’t think it would look weird. Which is pretty stupid of me.

Photos were taken by my brother..

Thrifted sunglasses, Mango top, F21 maxi skirt, Schu sandals, Longchamp bag

The fail hair flip photo. HAHAHA. I don’t know how they do it. Goodbye model dreams!

© Trina

Hij draaide in de IMAX zaal en noob ikje had geen idee wat dat nu precies inhield behalve een hogere prijs. Nou, nu weet ik het wel. Mijn oren trillen nog na en ook mijn ogen moeten nog bij komen van dat grote scherm waar alles op rond vloog.

Maar OMFG it was worth everything.
De invloed van Tim was duidelijk aanwezig maar de rol van Depp was het ook weer op het lijf geschreven. Kostuums en schminck waren geweldig en we hebben vollop genoten van het spectakel!

Alright people…I actually broke down and went to see this movie.  I will say this, Mr. Ebert was being kind when he gave it 2.5 stars.  Now I am going to write about what is WRONG with this film, and it shouldn’t matter whether the viewer saw either the original or the Revival Series prior to viewing it, but before I do, I will say this: I think that it is truly sad that while Johnny Depp is probably one of the greatest actors alive, he is wasting his talent on steering clear of a mainstream audience–always taking some of the strangest parts an actor can get, and it is a formula that has worked for him until this film.  It is fine to be a rebel of sorts in Hollywood, as long as you know whatever the hell your cause is and if it is a cause worth standing ground for.

I will also preface this review by saying that to any kid who ran home to watch the original identified with the show on many levels. To us, the “special effects” seemed real back then…The characters seemed real.  Many who watched WERE CHILDREN.  Some of us who were bullied identified with Barnabas a bit, I think…While I cannot speak for others, I never got over the fact that I wanted to see Angelique get her sociopathic, obsessive-bitch ass kicked…Then again, this movie is not Dark Shadows to me, but a new story written using the same characters and setting as the classic show.

First, I cannot fault Depp for his Barnabas portrayal here. In fact, aside from the clown make up which he’s been using in his past few films, he actually did attempt to give the character of Barnabas Collins a depth of sincerity but was derailed by the horrible script writing of Seth Grahame-Smith. What blew it for this characterization is the lack of emotional range. Depp simply was not right for the part. He played the parts well where he was required to be cold and unforgiving, but the emotions of love and empathy did not seem to be convincing to me. This is sad because, as stated earlier,  he is probably one of the greatest actors alive, and he simply could not deliver this part well enough to keep me interested.   He did not allow Barnabas to breathe through him. He tried to control it and put too much of himself into it as he envisioned it rather than letting that part emit from him naturally.

Mr. Smith also had this character do several really STUPID things.  The apologetic serial killer crap was just that–crap. This was a character true fans know would not go around announcing that he is a vampire to ANYONE and he certainly wouldn’t want to bring attention to himself. Changing the storyline shot the credibility to hell. Someone needs to tell Mr. Smith that fans do not buy into bullshit–even if others who had a stake in the project did.

Each actor was given an interesting part, but due to the lack of integrity in the script, there was little to no character development with the other characters involved, and I feel that was because there were too many separate story lines and plots going on with the characters… It seemed that this movie somewhat rushed through the back story about Josette, Barnabas and Angelique. It  was given in the first 15 minutes or so and was not really allowed to develop well.  This is one thing that shot the movie down.  It also went to the pace of glacial meltdown after that until those last 20 minutes. I won’t give away the ending, but I will say that those who loved both series (the original and the Revival) will be very disappointed, if not pissed off.  Here are a few reasons why:

It is one thing to take dramatic license and add to a script. It is another thing to bastardize the entire story line and it’s characters just because one has bought the rights to do it.  According to the REAL story, Angelique curses Barnabas prior to Josette’s demise. The part about her bewitching Jeremiah and Josette so that THEY married was completely omitted–not to mention the fact that Barnabas’ parents were NOT killed but remained part of the story line throughout both the original series and the Revival series. He never delved into black magic himself either. Now granted, he did learn about some of it from an Indian Shaman per other fans of the original series–and I don’t remember which episodes that was revealed in. Hence that is the beginning of the bastardization of the character. Bottom line per what I have learned, if anything, he “dabbled” with it.

PLEASE don’t try to tell me they had to rewrite it to make it pleasing to a new generation. That is such bullshit.  They could add some humor without doing the above. It ruined the credibility of the film with fans who know how the story actually went. Also I have a problem with a “witch” leading a mob to bury a vampire alive in the film.  The mob would have known to stake him at least. IT’S SIMPLY NOT PLAUSIBLE OR CREDIBLE to have Angelique in such a position of power–especially in the 1700′s scenes. Besides that Barnabas had killed her and she cursed him with her dying breath. Again…Credibility shot to hell. Victoria not knowing her own damned name on the train didn’t help either. THAT was stupid, as were the character infusions (like Maggie/Victoria/Josette–3 in one). Not campy.

Then after 48 minutes into the picture, I was asking myself, “Where in the bloody hell (no pun intended) is this movie going?  I mean, vampires supposedly SLEEP by day…This version of Barnabas was all over the place. I don’t want to hear anyone bitching about the Dark Shadows Revival series day for night shots ever again when there are plenty of them in this damned flick. What did Barnabas have on? 1000+ proof sunscreen? Really?! An HOUR into it, I was still wondering where the hell the story was going. The oral sex w/Julia…The sex w/Angelique…Give me a break! The latter was reminiscent of “War of the Roses“…The finale–as another reviewer stated–was reminiscent of “Death Becomes Her“…I didn’t find Eva Green‘s performance or Ms. Heathcote’s as really standing out either. I’ll fault Mr. Burton for that. The writing sucked but Ms. Green’s performance was also somewhat “plastic”…

I felt as though I was watching the cast being violently thrown into a bowl of separate ideas which I would expect from anyone who read Stephen King and watched a ton of vampire movies, and then watching the powers that be blow it all up in the faces of the cast and the fans. I have a problem with the story being written so that Angelique was running the town and the family “lost” their wealth. That doesn’t work for the storyline because Angelique wanted to use Barnabas to rise above her own station throughout both of the series. She was not rich either. She was Josette’s servant girl. Maybe Mr. Smith wanted to punish the 1% on film by using the Collins family as a symbol for what he thinks should be done with the wealthy…I’M BEING SARCASTIC AGAIN.  However, that aspect of the storyline is still bullshit.

With only 40 minutes left, total disappointment…NOT in Depp’s acting–although veteran actor  Ben Cross beats him hands down when it comes to the part of Barnabas…Not in Ms.Pfieffer’s acting either. AS I said the writing itself with the entire changed story line sucked balls.

There are some aspects of it that did appeal to me. The write-in of Victoria’s childhood did appeal to me–no spoiler. Let’s just say that psychologically, I can see how she feels connected to Collinsport–and why she likes being there–probably because that came out of some of the best fan fiction I have ever read.  If you don’t believe that, start reading some of it…The apologetic serial killer crap doesn’t appeal to me either–again, it’s bullshit. Barnabas tried not to bring attention to himself–and he certainly wouldn’t be announcing to anyone that he is a vampire for fear that this could mean the end of him.

In short, if a writer makes characters do STUPID things, like rip the back of a television off and yell at it or kill a group of hippies for no real apparent reason, it’s a total fan turn off. Again it goes to credibility. Barnabas would have not done anything that would come close to bringing attention to himself. This apologetic “serial killer” aspect they added to him is rubbish. Oh cool! I didn’t use the vernacular as much as I could have yet…There were also too many references to the “birthing hips” thing, which got really old by the time he was on the balcony with Vicky.

I also felt a particular empathy with David’s (Gulliver McGrath) character–having been abandoned emotionally in more ways than one. No  spoiler there either. All I know is that this kid has the same appeal that Haley Joel Osment had in the Sixth Sense. The boy is a good actor.  I hope that out of this film, someone is paying attention to that kid. He is going somewhere with this career eventually. You may not like the “masturbation reference” but he did deliver that as a kid who is observing a lot of bullshit in his life. It was a realistic portrayal. Watch the kid throughout that film. You’ll see what I mean. I think he stole the show from Depp in a way.  They should have really given that kid more attention because he was very convincing…It might have made the movie more successful.

What makes this movie tragic to me, is that if the writer Seth Grahame Smith had taken the FIRST movie to devote to the mystery of Vicky and tie it in that way with the Josette/Angelique plot, the rest could have come together in part 2 and kicked total ass. As I said earlier, they tried to cram too much into 113 minutes and it doomed the picture.

Eva Green was not the right choice for Angelique either.  She seems to be too limited in range for the part, and the only real emotion she emits seems to come through at the end. The mistake made here is that she is the villain and Smith tried to make the audience pity the sociopathic bitch toward the end.  A villain as evil as Angelique Bouchard should never be portrayed in that way.  Bella Heathcote’s portrayals lacked as well–but it was because there was not enough focus upon the real storyline for her characters to develop.

Michele Pfeiffer also did a great job in this film. Probably because Smith knew not to give her a bullshit character story line. Had this been in what I would consider to be a legit take on Dark Shadows, she would totally rock.  I hope if there is a legitimate script written a few years down the road, that she will be considered for the part again. The characterization she was given was actually good.  And she allowed the character to breathe through her. Best scene is where she realizes Carolyn is a werewolf…She displayed genuine parental shock and I loved it!  I also loved her opening scene where she is interviewing Victoria for the governess job! She portrayed Elizabeth as a strong matriarch of the family and that is about the only thing in this film that is true to the Dark Shadows I know.

Helena Bonham Carter cast as Julia was also a huge mistake. She came across as “plastic”–even in the scene where her character is in REAL danger.  She was also made to do some really stupid shit, and it will not set well with fans…The oral sex innuendo should have been left completely out of this film too.  If I were Ms. Carter, I wouldn’t even list this film on the résumé.

Jonny Lee Miller’s Roger came across as a complete thug rather than the snob with no ability to parent that I viewed him to be. Wrong move.  This character was made to do stupid shit too.

Then there is Willie as portrayed by Jackie Earl Hailey.  There wasn’t too much to be upset about here. He also did well given that he didn’t have THAT much of a part.  That character should have gotten more attention too.

Chloë Moeretz–She tended to mumble some lines and the part given to her was so out of whack that if I were her,  I wouldn’t list it on my résumé either. The werewolf bit was ridiculous.  Also I felt that they made her character one that could not be empathized with as opposed to Gulliver McGrath’s character. I felt that this part would have been right for her if set in the 90′s “grunge rock” period. The writing sucking is what I blame all the flaws with her characterization on. The girl did try to bring this character to life, but it’s impossible to make audiences empathize with her with such an abysmal script.

The only good that will come of this film is the fact that it will bring much more attention to the original series and to Dark Shadows: The Revival .  It is nice to see that after all these years of dealing with criticism for the day for night shots and for the mullet, that Ben Cross is finally getting some belated and well-deserved appreciation for his portrayal of that part.  Mr. Frid, whom I adored as a kid, is now gone. I also wish they would air the 2004 pilot so I can compare notes.  I regret that Mr. Smith thought he could improve on Dan Curtis’s formula. I think there is a lesson to be learned in this…NO WRITER can do that.

People can stop blaming The Avengers for what has happened  with this film as well. They are in different genres with different audience make-ups. The failures in this film lie with Mr. Smith’s poor writing and Mr. Burton’s poor direction. There is also a fact here that people seem to ignore that not all people are going to flock to see Johnny Depp any longer…That’s just the way it is. We’re all getting older and a lot of us who loved 21 Jump Street have grown up–and older…

Despite the brief cameo of the original cast and that of Christopher Lee, this movie does not have the bite it should have had for it being part of the franchise. The entire story–minus the Josette thing at the beginning could have been dealt with in an hour on a TV production rather than this 113 minutes of wasted celluloid.  There is no excuse for the dragging ass pacing of this film for the first 89 minutes with much of the material written being borrowed from elsewhere. There was no innovation–only the writing of a new story dressed up in the Dark Shadows name.

By the way, I have to mention that I did like Alice Cooper’s appearance in the film…

Speaking of that, I don’t want to hear any more bitching about The Raven with John Cusack either. It moved forward at better pace than this one, and had Poe portrayed as a hero of sorts. I think Poe would have liked THAT!

As for Dark Shadows 2012: more could have been told and less time wasted–with more time given to character development had they left some of these plots/sub plots out and devoted more time to ONE single element or even two.  It would have allowed more time for character development. It boils down to this, stellar cast…Interesting idea…Yet it was wasted on a script that was totally wrong…It is definitely NOT a family film either. Hence the title of my review…Dark Shadows: Wrong and Loathing It.

Hammer Films was also getting ready to pack it in. Its last period-piece classic, Vampire Circus, was released in 1971 by 20th Century Fox, heavily cut in America for a PG rating, which was pointless, because the excised perversion was what the movie was all about! As sapphic vamp films go, the 1970 Ingrid Pitt starrer The Vampire Lovers isn’t bad, but 1971′s Twins of Evil is ridiculous. And the less said about Allan Gibson’s Dracula updates — Dracula A.D. 1972 and The Satanic Rites of Dracula — the better.

The original Dark Shadows series starring the recently departed Jonathan Frid has its devoted followers, but that’s a cult I don’t really understand. I was just a little kid when it was on, but I still remember watching Grayson Hall as Dr. Julia Hoffman and thinking, “Jesus, this woman is a hambone.” I kept waiting for the creepy stuff to happen, but it was a lo-o-o-o-ng wait.

Much better were the movies. They had much more vampire activity and lots of gore (for the time). The first, House of Dark Shadows, starred most of the cast, including Hall and Frid, and plays like a faster, gorier version of the series.

The image that sticks in my mind in House is Barnabas getting really, really old (thanks to jealous Dr. Hoffman) and trying desperately to get some blood to reverse the process. Makeup artist Dick Smith (who also did The Exorcist) re-used the bald head appliance he made for Dustin Hoffman in 1970′s Little Big Man on Frid. To restore his youth, he goes to Maggie (Kathryn Leigh Scott) and puts the bite on her. Enjoy Hall’s hilarious emoting and the humorous makeup on Frid here:

I remember going to the good old Avon Art Theater (which, despite the highfalutin’ name, served as my hometown South Bend’s exploitation/trash house during the 1970s) to see Robert Quarry as Count Yorga, Vampire (1970). Even today, it’s surprising that this American International pickup got a GP (the predecessor to PG) rating, as it’s pretty sleazy. Originally conceived as a softcore porn film, it still has aspects of its original, dirtier self. There’s at least one inexplicit but extended sex scene and women are running around in see-through blouses with their nipples a-poppin’.

Interestingly, the scene most everyone still talks about is the one in which the recently-vampirized chick is caught eating a kitten. Allegedly this scene was heavily trimmed to get the lower rating so that you could barely see what was going on, but maybe I saw a less brutally cut print, because I certainly remember the shock scene quite clearly, emphasized by the sickly green low-budget cinematography.

The Return of Count Yorga arrived in 1971, followed by The Deathmaster the following year. Neither one is very good, but the wise folks at American International decided to refer to Yorga as the deathmaster in the first film, making it confusing to audiences which film was which. But it didn’t really matter — neither one had the sleazy charm of the first Yorga.

American International also made sure the blaxploitation circuit was served with 1972′s Blacula, starring the elegant William Marshall as Mamuwalde, an African prince resurrected in (then) present-day Los Angeles to encounter all manner of jive-talking stereotypes. 1973′s indifferent sequel, Scream Blacula Scream, also features the awesome Pam Grier. It’s a tragedy that AIP didn’t hire writer/director Jack Hill — the king of exploitation and blaxploitation — to oversee these films. They’d have been so much better…maybe even classics.

More serious-minded was 1973′s Ganja and Hess, starring Night of the Living Dead‘s Duane Jones as a scientist who becomes infected with an insatiable need for human blood. Considered a rare example of ’70s African-American art cinema, it owes more to Buñuel than Blacula.

Another arty vampire flick from 1973 was Lemora: A Child’s Tale of the Supernatural starring cult fave Cheryl (Rainbeaux) Smith as the title character, a backwoods girl who runs afoul of a pack of bloodsuckers, one of whom (Leslie Gibb) wants to get to know her a whole lot better. Dismissed upon its original release, the film was rediscovered in the ’90s and now has a cult following, especially after the untimely demise of Smith in 2002.

1971′s Daughters of Darkness, starring Last Year At Marienbad‘s Delphine Seyrig, brought Euro arthouse eroticism to the forefront. She plays a mysterious, Dietrich-style countess who seduces a pair of young travelers in an eerie coastal hotel. Seyrig is a striking bloodsucker and it’s easy to see why both Stefan (John Karlen) and Valerie (Danielle Ouimet) are so easily swayed.

Those who remember Karlen as Tyne Daly’s bearish husband in “Cagney and Lacey” will be shocked to see how young and well-built he is in this film. Though not explicitly gory, it’s got some Eurostyle nudity and a great vampire death-by-shower scene.

Bob (A Christmas Story) Clark and scripter Alan Ormsby blended the short story “The Monkey’s Paw” with a Vietnam war protest to make 1974′s Dead of Night, aka Deathdream, about a soldier, Andy (Richard Backus), who’s killed in action but whose mother wishes for him to come back to her. He does, and his elated parents think the reports of his death had been a clerical error, but actually dead and must feed on human blood to stave off the decaying process. Andy spends his days brooding in his room, refusing to see friends and relatives and only going out at night, behavior his parents write off as battle shock. But they soon realize there’s something even more terrifying wrong with their son.

Clark and Ormsby had previously made the cheap and overrated zombie comedy Children Shouldn’t Play with Dead Things, so it’s surprising that this grim, sober and effective little shocker would come from them. It manages to be both eerie and tragic and still has an emotional heft today. When it was shown on KHJ’s Movie Macabre in 1982, Elvira’s puns and interruptions seemed terribly out of place.

Of course, there was time for vampire comedy before the ’70s wound down. David Niven appeared in 1975′s Old Dracula, a dreadful spoof whose original title — Vampira — was altered by hopeful distributors praying that fans of Mel Brooks’ Young Frankenstein would race to the boxoffice. They didn’t.

1979′s Love at First Bite was more successful. George Hamilton is fine as the Lugosi-style vampire who travels from his native Transylvania to New York to find his bride, but Arte Johnson is a big slice of ham as his devoted assistant, and Susan Saint James, channeling Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane in the previous year’s Superman, is annoying. However, if I was forced to choose, I’d definitely prefer to sit through this than Brook’s 1995 disaster Dracula: Dead and Loving It.

So which camp will Burton’s Shadows reboot fall into — brilliant black comedy or awful spoof? I’ll find out on May 18th, at which time I’ll post my review.

Ben Cross now owns the role according to his fans and he's gaining new ones! He is getting some well-deserved and long overdue respect as is the rest of the Revival series cast. Perhaps Hollywood should take note of this when making films...

Now my question is, why not release to 2004 pilot so fans can compare differences?  I do know this much–the new fans of the Revival series that are coming on board are saying that Ben Cross now owns the Barnabas role since the trailer’s release. Some of these new fans prefer the original but now appreciate the portrayal of Barnabas by Mr. Cross more now than they did in 1991.  Like it or not, Cross stayed more true to the basic instincts of such a character than most.  He tempered that battle between beast and man and is somewhat different from Frid in his approach to it.

I always say that Jonathan Frid made him more human to me as a small child, but Ben Cross made him a real “being” to me a few years back.   That being said, I am glad that finally the cast of the Dark Shadows Revival series is getting some long overdue positive recognition for their attempt to breathe fresh life into the show.  The late Jean Simmons was phenomenal as Elizabeth…RIP…Adrian Paul–outstanding…So was the rest of the cast–especially the duo of Ben Cross and Joanna Going.

I’ve heard the complaints about Ben’s mullet….I’ve heard the complaints about the Day for Night shots, but I’ll take that over a comedic farce any day of the week and that is what the new version will end up being–this time around.  If you are fans of the Revival series, there is a page for it on FB here:  https://www.facebook.com/DarkShadows.Revival .  For fans of Ben Cross, his page is here and he’d love to hear from you:  https://www.facebook.com/actorbencross …I’m sure Adrian Paul wouldn’t mind either…Here’s the link to his page–and he’s a phenomenal human being!  Look at the things he supports!  https://www.facebook.com/adrianpaulofficial  If you ever watched “Highlander’ you know who Adrian Paul is, kiddies.

I also suggest Mr. Depp do one thing for his next film…Skip the White Face make up. It will not  help with the Lone Ranger remake he is in either. Barnabas looks like a cross between Beetlejuice and a Vulcan. Here are both pics…Once you look at them go back and think about Beetlejuice (which starred Michael Keaton wearing the same make-up), Sweeney Todd, Edward Scissorhands, Etc…All are relatives in Depp’s character genealogy.  Enough with it already!

As talented as Mr. Depp is as an actor, I am beginning to wonder what other shows I loved as a  child will get laid to waste? People on Facebook and other sites are asking this also. Hopefully he will start paying attention.  He is one of the best actors there is, and I will never understand why he and Burton seem to be putting more of the shows in their cross hairs.  It is said that he’ll make “The Night Stalker” into a movie also. God forbid! Even the ABC ran version based on the original was not good!

Earlier I wrote a post in which I described how certain people are telling me how I should not judge an entire movie by a two-minute trailer.  That is a statement made in ignorance (at best) because the trailers are the most important vehicle to make a viewer want to watch a film or decide to save their money.  I am going to describe what the two shows above have in common…I am also going to leave you with a question at the end to ponder.

Many people who know me personally know I ran home from school EVERY DAY so that I would see if “Barnabas was well yet”…I wanted him to be cured and that bully “Angelique” to get the royal ass kicking she deserved.  I have done a lot of reading and such and studying for the past few months.  This is what I PERSONALLY look for in any movie or show I watch, and if I don’t see it, I don’t view it again.  If the trailer sucks, it will result in more monetary loss than gain in the long run because those who came up with it failed to do their homework before filming the project.  Translated that means: THEY DIDN’T DO ANY MARKET RESEARCH FIRST.  If they had, they would have KNOWN that this was not a good thing they were trying to accomplish.

First off, what did Barnabas ever do to deserve being cursed and having his entire family tormented?  Bottom line, he screwed around with the WRONG woman…In today’s time, since he wasn’t married yet, it wouldn’t matter.  The man had a flaw and it got him in hot water–period.  Was this “hot water” truly deserved? No…It was not and that is what made us as children (especially if we got bullied) empathize with the Barnabas character…This was also played out in the Revival Series VERY well.

Then there is this element of “mystery”–which really was not a mystery to us in the 90′s when the Revival series came out, but while fans of the original series were looking for a “Jonathan Frid” many were not disappointed with Ben Cross‘s rendition of that character.  Dan Curtis‘s method of casting and directing ensured that BOTH actors were able to evoke and keep our attention.  The difference lies in that Frid’s rendition came across as more “human” than beast.  Cross’s rendition made him more menacing and flawed, but like Frid’s character,  he was still a good man with a good heart.  And in Cross’s rendition, the strong emotions his Barnabas experienced were portrayed very, very well.

My apologies to Mr. Depp here, but after seeing that performance in the trailer, it proves that Mr. Cross raised the bar too high. No other actor since him has portrayed him as well.  It would be great if the original cast invited cast members from the Revival to take part in the fests also.  They are still part of that legacy–and are more recognizable now than they were then.  The Revival Series will probably now get the respect it so richly deserved. The Gulf War is what led to the show’s fate–not the writers, cast or crew.  They totally rocked and so did the direction of Dan Curtis in both series.  The formula Mr. Curtis had was not broken. Market research would have proven that had Mr. Burton or Depp done it and/or paid any attention to it. I find it no coincidence that Mr. Curtis tended to use actors with Shakespearean backgrounds in theater as well.  Look at Frid and Cross…Both carried the character very well.

In BOTH shows, our curiosity was aroused and our intellect was challenged enough that we responded!  Boy did we!

Now who is the visible villain in BOTH shows?  “Angelique” DUH! Really?!   Both had intense eyes.  For each time period–both were realistic–meaning that Lara Parker kicked ass at this part in the ’60′s but Lysette Anthony did in the Revival Series.  Ms. Anthony succeeded in doing an excellent portrayal of a voodoo witch with the correct (French) accent too since that character  came from Martinique.

Lysette Anthony as "Angelique"--Dark Shadows Revival

Lara Parker--"Angelique"--Dark Shadows Original Series

There is one problem and that is the total lack of a hero or heroine.  That was not clear in either series really but Barnabas did show heroic tendencies at times.  The character of Barnabas Collins is also the first vampire to come across as romantic, despite the fact that a lot of women do not like the idea of a permanent hickey on their neck–oops! Sorry! Barnabas would say it’s just a “love bite”, I’m sure.  I am grinning here.

The reason this is an unknown is that the original series was intended to be a long running show and it was.  But what do fans want here?  I think they want a RESOLUTION to the dilemma.  Either cure Barnabas’s curse or put a stake in him and kill of Angelique so the rest of the family can live in whatever after may be–OR some enterprising writer needs to come up with new characters to cure him of his curse and make the story line so realistic that fans would accept any new characters brought in.  It won’t happen for this movie though. They are already talking about sequels–AGAIN–lack of true market research…They would have known this had they done that task. If they would resolve the Barnabas issue and move on to Quentin it might have fighting chance in hell of long-term success–but ONLY if they didn’t deviate too far from fans expectations.  It was never meant to have comedic schlock in it. That would work for the “Fearless Vampire Killers” but NOT for this one.

Why?  This is simple.  This show had been established for decades.  The comedic schlock only lowered the plausibility of it at this point. It also put a mar on the credibility of the franchise and it isn’t even out yet. Fans of the original and the Revival are in an uproar.  The humor that came about came naturally when it occurred in the original series and in the 1700′s flashbacks of the Revival.  That is how it was meant to be written.  Dan Curtis did show that Barnabas did have a “life”.  To add the type of humor in the new film shatters the audience expectations  of a show they love–and this all from a 2 minute trailer.  Never tell a viewer not to judge a movie by a trailer. That is what trailers are DESIGNED to do–enable a viewer to make a decision.

One great thing about BOTH shows is that either Barnabas and/or some other character is always in danger…There was that element that it wasn’t only Barnabas that could be destroyed in a given moment if found out–but Angelique had a pendulum swinging over the heads of his entire family.  One didn’t really know where that was going at times.

Then you have that “love story” aspect…It is there. It is tragic.  However if it had been kept in the spirit of the original–even with a surprise twist by adding a new hero or heroine to resolve it, it could have worked whether or not Josette Dupres remained part of the equation.  There were clashes of wills between the vampire Barnabas and Josette when she became frightened and jumped from the cliff. Clashing of wills was present throughout the original. In the Revival it was there also–even between Barnabas and Willie at the point where Willie had tried to dissuade Victoria from coming there and tried to get her to leave the old house before it got dark.  This was the result:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_zoTfRmm9o

In the original series, Victoria left Collinsport for good.  This would have been a perfect opportunity to bring in a character or two to resolve the issue.  Had that been done, I think the viewers would have been left with a sense of closure by the end of the series.  If it were me writing it, I would want the audience to feel closure at the end–whether it’s tragic or the “fairy tale” ending the women would LOVE…In the original series, Barnabas declaring his “love” for Angelique is not credible.  It was–for lack of a better word–bullshit.

Angelique would destroy anyone or anything to have control over Barnabas. That is obsession–not love. After all she had done to his family, I seriously doubt that he could “love” her.  To continue with that unrealistic expectation would be insulting to the fans as well and they are not going to buy into it.  At best, Angelique COULD be considered mentally off-balance.  AT worst, a psychopath OR a sociopath depending on which version one watches.

Just from the trailer, the things I mention do not appear to be present.  The new movie looks more like a Beetlejuice type of film.   I think those who watched that movie or “The Vampire’s Assistant” and liked them will love this movie.  Those who know what was meant to be in both the original and the Revival series will probably hate it–despite the names of Depp/Burton being attached to it. Big names do not always equal box office success either.  We will know soon, won’t we?  I’ll wait for the dvd myself.

There is one thing that the original Dark Shadows does not have in common with the Revival series and that is longevity.  Had it not been for the Gulf War, I’m sure the Revival series would have picked up and taken off eventually.  NBC really screwed up by not giving it a second shot…Those who watch it now tend to agree with that assessment.

After seeing the trailer for the new Dark Shadows movie, I got totally turned off of the idea despite the fact that I loved the original series and I loved the Revival series of the 1990′s too.  However, I cannot look at the trailer from the link below and see anything that I can remotely identify with from my childhood, or the Revival version–both of which were the vision of the late Dan Curtis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isjg9O7ifwM

Many criticized the original in recent years for the bloopers and low-budget adjustments that had to be made by cast and crew–but to an entire generation of children, these characters seemed real. I would have kicked Lara Parker in the shins and ran for my life when I was a five-year old girl.   Barnabas, played by Jonathan Frid, was bullied by her in my young mind and I wanted to see him “get well”.  I viewed him as “ill and unable to help it”…I’m sure I am not the only little child who empathized with Frid’s rendition of the character in this way.

Then the show was gone.  My parents divorced.  Over the years my life changed and such…Then I went to work for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. It was in my room at the officer’s  quarters that I got very bored one night and began playing around on hulu.com.  It was there I watched episode after episode of the “Dark Shadows Revival” series.  I was hooked by the portrayal Ben Cross gave…It was here I discovered Ben Cross the actor as well and found his Facebook page.

I was still able to empathize with his Barnabas, even though at the time he beat Willie, I felt that Barnabas was WAY out of line.  Yet, Mr. Cross tempered that character enough to show a realistic point–it would be hell for someone in that character’s predicament to temper that battle within between the beast he could turn into and the man he once was.  He was a good man–and his flaw was messing around with the WRONG woman.

Oh well…Cest Le Vie…Now we have this new one coming out and from the trailer, I can already tell that I cannot empathize with Depp’s rendition.  He looks more alien than human–as if he’s a combination of Nosferatu and Beetlejuice.  Barnabas should NEVER look like this…I can also tell by Burton’s direction that this is going to be more of a farce that will make the Barnabas I grew up on and adored to look more like a buffoon.  The scene in the trailer between him and Angelique made me think more of “War of the Roses” than Dark Shadows. Sorry.

I also cannot picture a vampire, while trying to adapt to the time period he’s in, making boob remarks and telling a 15-year-old relative that is not married about how her “child-bearing hips” aren’t in use…Barnabas was a gentleman and in past movies and the two series I mentioned, Shakespearean actors were tapped to play him. I believe Dan Curtis had very good reason for casting his production in such a way and having those characters portrayed as they were.

One more thing I will point out is that I KNOW my history here. While a lot of upper class colonists did wait until later to marry, there were some who did marry younger.  That is the only reason why the writers will get away with that remark about those “child-bearing hips”.

I only have one more thing to add here…The voice…I heard and saw more of a cleaned up version of  “Jack Sparrow” than I did any Barnabas Collins that was ever portrayed. For what it is worth though, the schlock I saw in the trailer would have been perfect for a remaking of  “The Fearless Vampire Killers“.  Here’s a clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q-sukI-ZpU

I apologize to the die-hard “DarkShadows” fans and to all the loyal Depp fans out there, but I cannot justify going to see this particular film. It is sad to me that an actor as great as Johnny Depp has chosen to portray the character a lot of us loved growing up in the fashion that this trailer makes him out to be.

One thing Hollywood critics need to get through their heads is that people are not going to pay attention to what they write for the most part–only the academy will.  The ones who will flock to see this are the ones who are die-hard Depp fans no matter what he does, and those who don’t know what all the fuss is about.  Unless one of my family members or friends buys the ticket, I’ll wait for the over-priced dvd.

Other than Frid’s performance,  this is how Barnabas should be portrayed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOL5DogfA2w

I don’t care how many people criticize the make up, Mr. Cross’s mullet and such.  He raised the bar too high for anyone to follow suit, and the trailer from the new movie only makes this viewer appreciate his rendition of the character even more.

On the other hand I heartily recommend this movie because the whole family can watch it!  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOqSi-_cXeE  It has a taste of “Remember the Titans”, “Bad News Bears”, “The Mighty Ducks”–and any other good sports movie that was meant for a young and old audience alike!  This one will be one of the best of 2012 and will be in theaters on May 18th~! At least this trailer has a good feel about it!  The name of the movie is “Crooked Arrows” and is about a Native American Lacrosse team! It will be worth spending the money for the ticket on. Check out the likes on its Facebook page already!

inspirational salsa: barnabas collins

10.  Shelley Winters  (A Patch of Blue)  In this one, she played a  HO  I WANTED to slap!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAK4iYYcHg8

9.    Barbara Stanwyck    (Double Indemnity)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z-JiVSVrpo&feature=related

8.    Dame Judith Anderson (Rebecca)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxO68PacfxE&NR=1

7.    Glenn Close  (Fatal Attraction)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZHe3GYQp_8

6.    Al Pacino  (Scarface)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZRKGHB8GxQ

5.    Jack Nicholson  (The Shining)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7JB68sLGY8

4.  Farah Fawcett (Small Sacrifices)   ***An actress that didn’t get the recognition I feel she deserved!  This actress played this bitch to the hilt!***

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2c2fAhYkqI&feature=related

3.   Ben Cross (Dark Shadows 1991)  Ben Cross as Barnabas!  And he was the best frigging  Barnabas too! The difference in this character and most “villains” is this character is not a villain by choice–but by necessity.  This character is probably the only villain I could have any empathy for because his plight is forced upon him.  However, the beast is not something he can always control. The man playing this character is, in my opinion,  the most  UNDERAPPRECIATED actor on the planet! My only regrets were that it ended after only 12 episodes–and Angelique didn’t get HER butt kicked!  If you watch these episodes,  Ben tempered that character  just enough to make him realistic to an audience that used to run home from kindergarten to watch the original Dark Shadows with Jonathan Frid! As much as I loved Frid as a child, this guy made that part his own. In doing so, the bar got raised too high for anyone who follows in my opinion.  Not even Johnny Depp could pull it off.  Sorry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_zoTfRmm9o

I definitely wouldn’t want to be on his bad side after watching the clip in that link!

2.     Bette Davis (Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?)–*Just to note–when she played a bitch–she played it right!*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTtpDwrKaxo&playnext=1&list=PLE42FFF75FF785B0D

She should have received an Oscar for this one!

1.    Anthony Hopkins  (Silence of the Lambs) ***Need I say more here?!***

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMVqIISyp60&playnext=1&list=PL260A1CBFB75E6CF4

Honorable mentions:  Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight),  Faye Dunaway (Mommy Dearest),  Elizabeth Montgomery (Amos), Ricardo Montalban (The Wrath of Kahn) , Bruce Dern (Silent Running), Cherlize Theron (Monster), Powers Boothe (Guyana Tragedy:  The Story of Jim Jones), Patty McCormack (The Bad Seed) and Chuck Connors (Roots)

I know that a lot won’t agree with my list and that is fine…Like I said, these are my picks…I think every blogger should make a list of SOME sort.  There is a common thread I noticed between Ben Cross and Anthony Hopkins.  They have very intense eyes…That is one thing I notice when an actor plays a part–if the character is “in the eyes” and they can both pull that off without a hitch.   A lot of younger actors cannot pull that off today.

Everyone should have a few guilty pleasures and one of mine is the romantic gothic fiction that was so popular in the 60′s and 70′s. Long out of print, to only be found tucked away in the dark corners of charity shops, ebay and car boot sales, I find their bewitching covers and the terrible deeds hinted at within impossible to resist.

So what is it about these small, usually unappealingly mouldy smelling paperbacks I find so attractive? Maybe it  was too much time spent watching Dark Shadows growing up or a gradual disenchantment with an over hyped, over priced market in modern horror, but time and time again, like the proverbial moth to a flame, I find myself irresistibly drawn to these haunting tales of romantic suspense and supernatural horror.

Of course with all great loves there are a few fatal flaws. The obligatory happy endings for one. One could, and should, argue that love can only truly be called gothic if it is unrequited, doomed, tortured, twisted or taboo – think Poe’s  Madeline and  Roderick or Emily Bronte’s Catherine and Heathcliff.

But I guess  for this particular genre, market forces dictated that the hapless heroine survive long enough to be swept off her feet by a real live hunk of (mostly) human love. To be fair, I’m sure many readers bought these books specifically for the ‘riding off into the sunset’ happy endings, but for those of us who prefer intrigue over romance, there are usually more than enough plot twists, villains, and unhappy skeletons in the closet to keep us coming back for more.

Another criticism levelled at this type of fiction is the overall quality of writing. It is true that in the wrong hands these stories can come out cliched and cheesy, with stereotyped characters, predictable plot twists and those “oh come on! give me a break!” moments that jar the reader out of the story. The subject matter and sheer numbers of these titles that were mass produced no doubt makes gothic romance an easy target.

But  I do not think this genre is any more guilty of “hack” writing than any other and in the right hands many of these books contain absorbing, evocative stories, full of the kind over dramatic gothic melodrama that’s so fun to lose yourself in occasionally, and they are a credit to their authors – particularly when you consider the very restrictive guidelines they  must of conformed to just to get published. In any event, literary snobbery aside, any book that gets people reading is a great book and there is no doubt the gothic romance genre has a loyal and avid readership.

So this blog is a collection of excerpts, cover art and reviews on some of my favourite reads in vintage romantic gothic ficton. In their hey day during the 60′s and 70′s there must have been thousands of these books published  but these days they are becoming harder to come by and, just like the haunted houses they  depict, many of them are falling into ever increasing states of decrepitude.  I can only live in hope that someone, someday resurrects this forgotten genre and starts reprinting some of these titles, complete with their original gorgeous artwork, soon.