Do TNT creators get it?

[James from London]

On looking at her work I'm beginning to wonder where she came from to get a job as big as Dallas was before it became what we know it as now. 12 episodes of Cane 7 years earlier put her at the top of the list of potential showrunners? I'd love to see an interview or a documentary about the entire process.

From my very limited understanding of how television works, I know that having the title of "showrunner" doesn't mean you necessarily run the whole show, so I don't know for sure who was ultimately responsible for what on New DALLAS, but I loved the whole thing and wish CC nothing but the best.

Speaking more generally, I understand that the three successive producers/showrunners of the rebooted DOCTOR WHO series have all made it a point to avoid social media during their time on the show, believing that drama isn't a democracy, which makes sense to me. That isn't to say they weren't answerable to the BBC, who may be more aware of/influenced by outside opinions. And of course, other showrunners/producers etc. have a much more direct dialogue with their viewers, which seems to work for them.

 

[Miss Texas 1967]

From my very limited understanding of how television works, I know that having the title of "showrunner" doesn't mean you necessarily run the whole show, so I don't know for sure who was ultimately responsible for what on New DALLAS, but I loved the whole thing and wish CC nothing but the best.

Speaking more generally, I understand that the three successive producers/showrunners of the rebooted DOCTOR WHO series have all made it a point to avoid social media during their time on the show, believing that drama isn't a democracy, which makes sense to me. That isn't to say they weren't answerable to the BBC, who may be more aware of/influenced by outside opinions. And of course, other showrunners/producers etc. have a much more direct dialogue with their viewers, which seems to work for them.

If TNT were smart they would've had someone doing some market research the minute the ratings started to tumble. It was clear as day from the fans here what the biggest points of contention were.

On rewatch I found things to like about the show, it wasn't awful, but I was also coming back again and again because of the Dallas name, if it was something else I might have given up.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

if it was something else I might have given up

If it was something else then it wouldn't be about these characters, so that's a very paradoxical argument Miss Texas!

 

[Miss Texas 1967]

If it was something else then it wouldn't be about these characters, so that's a very paradoxical argument Miss Texas!

I mean if it was the same show in character stereotypes (oldest son, youngest son, ex-wife, sons who are cousins, their girlfriends etc.), storyline and setting (family ranch, city office etc.) then the quality of the show likely wouldn't have kept me interested. I don't know what the breakdown of the audience was at the end, whether it was people who had never seen the original and therefore all the characters were new to them or whether it was people hanging on to hope of seeing their old favourites back and better than ever, but whoever it was the audience dropped and that was likely because people didn't like what they were seeing.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

I mean if it was the same show in character stereotypes (oldest son, youngest son, ex-wife, sons who are cousins, their girlfriends etc.), storyline and setting (family ranch, city office etc.) then the quality of the show likely wouldn't have kept me interested

Are you sure?

 

[Miss Texas 1967]

Are you sure?

I'm sure

 

[Rove]

I'd love to see an interview or a documentary about the entire process.

The continuation was first discussed in 2010 but didn't air until 2012. I'd like to know why the process took so long.

 

[stevew]

Lol!

On looking at her work I'm beginning to wonder where she came from to get a job as big as Dallas was before it became what we know it as now. 12 episodes of Cane 7 years earlier put her at the top of the list of potential showrunners? I'd love to see an interview or a documentary about the entire process.

Very interesting indeed.

 

[Garry]

This is achievable if the family approve it. When Rogue One was released in 2016 I wondered how the studio managed to use Peter Cushing (who died in 1994) to reprise the role of Grand Moff Tarkin. Lucasfilm sought permission from Peter Cushing's estate.

The same rule could apply to Jim Davis, Barbara Bel Geddes, Larry Hagman, Howard Keel and others depending on the deceased family. I'm not sure regarding the legalities surrounding that horrid paint-by-numbers thing of Jock and Miss Ellie which appeared in TNT Dallas. I'd be interested to know if permission was sought.

The reason you never saw a photo of Jim Davis on TNT's Dallas was because his estate had demanded too high a price for his image to be shown so Warner refused to pay up. The portrait of Jock and Ellie (as bad as it was) was deliberately abstract so it could only bare the slightest resemblance to Davis.

 

[Rove]

so Warner refused to pay up.

Just sad. Firstly David Jacobs was given the cold shoulder as the creator of Dallas and the union had to step in to ensure his name was placed in the opening credits as "created by" and then Warners - a billion dollar company - wouldn't offer a few measly dollars to use Jim's image?

This would be the same company content in owning the rights to Dallas but refuse to do anything with it...well apart from that God awful continuation.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

After a quick Google search I want to say the answer is no, at least nothing that was reported on.

It doesn't look like CC has done anything since Dallas was cancelled either, 1 episode of Blood and Oil and a movie that was announced but the IMDB listing was last updated in 2018... Actually, almost everyone else listed as a producer on the show has had more going on than CC since Dallas ended, so maybe within the industry there were words spoken.

The reason she hasn't been heard much off since she was fired off Blood & Oil is because I sent her a Birthday Card similar to the Christmas cards I sent her! There was a lovely strip of semtex attached to the card which would detonate after she opened it!

 

[Kenny Coyote]

If TNT were smart they would've had someone doing some market research the minute the ratings started to tumble. It was clear as day from the fans here what the biggest points of contention were.

On rewatch I found things to like about the show, it wasn't awful, but I was also coming back again and again because of the Dallas name, if it was something else I might have given up.

I watched because the original actors and the characters they played had already established such a level of value to me that I couldn't not watch them.

 

[Miss Texas 1967]

I watched because the original actors and the characters they played had already established such a level of value to me that I couldn't not watch them.

That's my point, we knew the characters and actors and the history of the show. If it was just a show which had the same premise but no history or dedicated fanbase then the storylines alone wouldn't have kept as many people coming back to watch every week.

 

[Rove]

That's my point, we knew the characters and actors and the history of the show. If it was just a show which had the same premise but no history or dedicated fanbase then the storylines alone wouldn't have kept as many people coming back to watch every week.

It's why over 8 million U.S. viewers turned into the premiere episode of TNT Dallas, such is the power of the brand name. In capable hands Dallas has the potential to become must-watch viewing...again.

Plenty has been said about Dallas belonging to a particular time (I don't buy it) and many have argued Dallas isn't Dallas without JR Ewing. I could have said the same when Jock (Jim Davis) departed our screens however look what competent writers can create with real life tragedy.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

If it was just a show which had the same premise but no history

But then it couldn't be this story. It's like saying "if Dracula wasn't about the vampire…".

It's true that TNT Dallas was crime-heavy in its plotlines, but then again, it was also a crime that skyrocketed 1980s Dallas into the hit ratings, and Dynasty finally became the #1 hit show because of a massacre cliff-hanger in a European kingdom. At least the Texas-Mexico connection made more sense.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

But then it couldn't be this story. It's like saying "if Dracula wasn't about the vampire…".

It's true that TNT Dallas was crime-heavy in its plotlines, but then again, it was also a crime that skyrocketed 1980s Dallas into the hit ratings, and Dynasty finally became the #1 hit show because of a massacre cliff-hanger in a European kingdom. At least the Texas-Mexico connection made more sense.

I'm not sure she really means she watched because it was "this story" because when I gave my reason for watching:

I watched because the original actors and the characters they played had already established such a level of value to me that I couldn't not watch them.

Then @Miss Texas 1967 replied:

That's my point

If my reason was also her reason, then our watching TNT''s show has nothing to do with any story or scripts the TNT show created and nothing they did as far as any new actors they cast for TNT's show happened to cast. I suppose you could say if TNT hadn't hired Larry Hagman, Patrick Duffy, Linda Gray and Ken kercheval then we wouldn't have watched but it's hardly a sign of brilliance on the part of the TNT show that they cast the original characters to play the same roles they played in the original!

The thread asks if the TNT creators "got it"- did they get the story - and the answer is no. If they had, we wouldn't have all these people saying they didn't! Bringing Larry Hagman backs JR or Patrick Duffy as Bobby doesn't mean they "got it." They didn't even understand those characters, or Ken Kercheval's character!

The only thing TNT "got" was the right to use the Dallas name and getting those 4 actors to agree to be part of their show.

The people who were in charge of running TNT Dallas didn't "get" what it was that made Dallas work. Actually watching the whole show might have helped them get it, but they didn't watch more than a third of it. Not that watching all of it would have been any guarantee they'd have understood why Dallas worked and became a phenomenon, but it would have made it at least more likely that they would "get it."

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

then our watching TNT''s show has nothing to do with any story TNT show created

The whole point is that these new stories were happening to Dallas characters in a modern time "Dallas".

They didn't even understand those characters

Maybe, maybe not. But the way the old characters reacted to the New Dallas rules is also what made it fresh and exciting.

The people who were in charge of running TNT Dallas didn't "get" what it was that made Dallas work

I guess they focused on what would make New Dallas work.
I'm not saying it was perfect, there's always room for improvement, but the same applies to the 1980s version.

 

[Kenny Coyote]

The whole point is that these new stories were happening to Dallas characters in a modern time "Dallas".

The thread asks "Do TNT creators get it." That they used characters from the original Dallas is hardly a sign or brilliance or proof that TNT's creators"got it."

I would have watched those 4 actors playing those characters they played in original Dallas in any new show, regardless of what the show was named or who was in charge of running the show. There was nothing TNT's creators created that made me want to watch it. It was what CBS' original Dallas created that made me want to watch.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

That they used characters from the original Dallas is hardly a sign or brilliance or proof that TNT's creators"got it."

But it was a sign of brilliance that they introduced lots of interesting new characters.
Maybe you should try to watch what TNT Dallas is all about, rather than everything it isn't.

But there are similarities: both Miss Ellie and Ann Ewing were found in the trunk of a car

 

[Rove]

that these new stories were happening to Dallas characters in a modern time "Dallas".

I do see your point Willie. The main contention I had with TNT Dallas was the crime ridden influence. TNT Dallas even started on an uneven keel when long time viewers like myself were meant to suspend belief Christopher had no idea he was dating his cousin Rebecca Suter.

Watching characters like JR, Bobby, Sue Ellen and Cliff navigate a modern Dallas would have been interesting if only they focused on the characters struggles within a modern environment. Keeping John Ross out in the oil fields rather than in the confines of Ewing Oil could have been a cause of frustration with JR. Christopher could have butted heads with Bobby, JR and John Ross if his desire was green energy.

If the writers created a tom-boy like Pamela Rebecca who was happy working the oil fields with John Ross and secretly enjoying a relationship I could have settled for it because you knew this relationship - much like Bobby and Pam's - was doomed, especially when those crusty old farts JR and Cliff discovered the truth with Sue Ellen caught in the middle of it all.

What I couldn't contend with was the Ramos, Ryland families and that sordid mess involving the Mexican drug cartel. When I watch Lorimar Dallas I note how the writers kept the focus solely on the Ewing's, Southfork and Ewing Oil. It allowed us to peek behind the blinds and discover how a rich family battled. I think that's where TNT Dallas creators struggled what made for riveting viewing. They may have thought a threesome would make for memorable viewing but most found it revolting.