Lauren Colby's paternity

[Michael Torrance]

One of the most boring aspects of the Colbys was the Jeff-Fallon relationship. Jeff had already grown full jerk on DYNASTY when he was shipped off to the Colbys, and Emma Samms' Fallon was, well, it has all been said.
But since the show already had committed to making them its Romeo and Juliet couple (alas, without the double suicide), I am baffled by the writers' decision to have Lauren be Jeff's. There was so much potential in the other outcome: keeping Miles and Fallon connected, the complications to Miles' marriage, Sable deciding there is still meddling to be had, and of course Jeff' jealousy once Miles connected to his little girl. What exactly did the show gain by having Fallon carry yet another Jeff spawn?

 

[ArchieLucasCarringtonEwing1989]

It was to.push the Jeff/Fallon-ship to be the second greatest couple in the Dynasty-verse agenda, personally I never really shipped them even during the days when PSM played Fallon, Emma Samms!Fallon just made me like the couple less than I did during their earlier years together.

Fallon should not have ended up with anyone until perhaps toward the middle of the series run, sure she could have one kid with Jeff but no more, I think Fallon's best romantic partner was with Zorelli I season 9, maybe she should've had his baby.

It wasn't like Lauren was seen much in the final years of the series, perhaps it would've been more interesting to have had Lauren as Miles' child

 

[GillesDenver]

I like to imagine that Fallon paid the doctor or a nurse to change the results. That could explained why she is overstressed in the last two episodes of "the Colbys". And the phonecall she has in the penultimate episode could be from someone of he hospital who knew the truth and tried to blackmail her.

 

[Alexis]

One of the most boring aspects of the Colbys was the Jeff-Fallon relationship. Jeff had already grown full jerk on DYNASTY when he was shipped off to the Colbys, and Emma Samms' Fallon was, well, it has all been said.
But since the show already had committed to making them its Romeo and Juliet couple (alas, without the double suicide), I am baffled by the writers' decision to have Lauren be Jeff's. There was so much potential in the other outcome: keeping Miles and Fallon connected, the complications to Miles' marriage, Sable deciding there is still meddling to be had, and of course Jeff' jealousy once Miles connected to his little girl. What exactly did the show gain by having Fallon carry yet another Jeff spawn?

I bet it was interfering from Esther and the Pollocks. Sort of Jeff and Fallon have to be the love that lasts forever - On The Colbys. Even though as you say there is more plot mileage (is that a pun?) to be had from making Lauren Miles' daughter.
Dynasty often seemed to fight any kind of logical plotting. Even soap logic.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Just another love triangle, just another paternity issue and just another baby's life in peril.
But that's not the whole story.
This was a contest, and Sable - clutching at straws - wanted to be the queen grandmother of Miles' baby. Desperately and ruthlessly.

 

[Ked]

Just another love triangle, just another paternity issue and just another baby's life in peril.
But that's not the whole story.
This was a contest, and Sable - clutching at straws - wanted to be the queen grandmother of Miles' baby. Desperately and ruthlessly.

Sable was the only thing that really made THE COLBYS interesting.

 

[Michael Torrance]

Dynasty often seemed too fight any kind of logical plotting. Even soap logic.

Well, I agree about DYNASTY, but this was on THE COLBYS.

Just another love triangle,

I have almost finished re-watching DYNASTY season 3 after re-watching the first two seasons as well on CBS Drama. I kinda always had that impression, but now that my memory has been assisted by the repeats, it is obvious there was never any love there on DYNASTY. When Fallon wants to divorce Jeff, she cries out to Blake "daddy you have to let me out of this marriage,” stating that making Blake happy is the only reason she has not divorced him yet—as if she is in a 19th century novel. When they do divorce, she tells him that he is a great guy that she just can’t go for “probably unluckily for me.” They agree to stay friends because “that is what they started as” and “should never have gotten married.” But, they also agree that they got LB out of this, which is good. Theirs was going to be a friendly divorce, unlike the Blake-Alexis divorce from hell, because there were no unresolved feelings and leftover passion disguised as hate—it was a one-sided infatuation that she let turn into a marriage and that lasted longer than it should have just to please her father. I don’t think that had Pamela Sue Martin NOT told them season 4 would be her last they would have her get engaged and almost married to Jeff at the end of the season to create a cliffhanger. It was just a soap trope to have her leave in limbo.

Now, I know this is irrelevant to THE COLBYS because there Jeff and Fallon were some kinda star-crossed lovers, but even for that rewrite to work they had to be adored by the audience, and I doubt that were the case even by COLBYS fans. I have argued in another thread that based on who Fallon was on DYNASTY, having her leave Jeff for Miles made all the sense. Lauren being Miles’ would have helped that even more.

Sable was the only thing that really made THE COLBYS interesting.

Sable was a dynamite character and actress. But I would be lying if I didn't admit that I was willing to sit through a lot of nonsense until Miles/Calfield came on my screen, especially shirtless.

 

[Alexis]

Well, I agree about DYNASTY, but this was on THE COLBYS.

But the Pollocks were still credited as what? Executive producers. They thrived on "surprise" plotting. Basically babble and nonsense.

 

[Michael Torrance]

But the Pollocks were still credited as what? Executive producers. They thrived on "surprise" plotting. Basically babble and nonsense.

I know often words are so overused as to be rendered meaningless, but I do find both their school of surprise plotting and the fact that they were able to bring Esther Shapiro to their camp (a PhD in comparative literature, FYI) utterly shocking.

 

[Ked]

When Fallon wants to divorce Jeff, she cries out to Blake "daddy you have to let me out of this marriage,” stating that making Blake happy is the only reason she has not divorced him yet—as if she is in a 19th century novel.

she let turn into a marriage and that lasted longer than it should have just to please her father.

So many people seem to forget that the real reason Fallon married Jeff in the first place was because Cecil Colby more or less blackmailed her - that he wouldn't bail Blake out if Fallon didn't marry his nephew. Course then again, Blake did find out the real reason and told Fallon to make it work. Which I never really understood... was that his own way of getting wild-child Fallon to settle down? Or was it something else?

 

[Alexis]

Which I never really understood... was that his own way of getting wild-child Fallon to settle down? Or was it something else?

I always just though that Blake really liked Jeff and though he was of the right kind of pedigree to marry his daughter. That he would be good for her. It kinda made sense in a way.

 

[Willie Oleson]

even for that rewrite to work they had to be adored by the audience

Had to? Why does a soap have to follow the rules, whatever these rules are?

having her leave Jeff for Miles made all the sense. Lauren being Miles’ would have helped that even more.

Why does it have to make sense, be neat, feel comfortable?

the real reason Fallon married Jeff in the first place was because Cecil Colby more or less blackmailed her

Hm, yes, I'm not sure if I'd call it blackmail. Maybe more like a wicked, dirty deal.
I guess Blake's reaction was sort of "you've made your bed now lie in it". Marriage is a not a frivolity, and of course he also liked Jeff very much.

 

[Michael Torrance]

I always just though that Blake really liked Jeff and though he was of the right kind of pedigree to marry his daughter. That he would be good for her. It kinda made sense in a way.

Yes, both he and Cecil thought the two youngsters would have an influence on the other. And they did--just not the expected one.

Had to? Why does a soap have to follow the rules, whatever these rules are?
Why does it have to make sense, be neat, feel comfortable?

It doesn't have to follow the rules of the genre (for star-crossed lovers in that case) and it doesn't have to make sense. But then it has to live with the consequences. Were these choices bold ones by creators who wanted to break new ground or idiotic ones by ones who did not bother to know the conventions of the genre they were serving? Both reviewers and the public back then gave their own answers. We of course can still give our individual ones today.

 

[Willie Oleson]

They're not the most spectacular romance couple, but I liked the effect they had on the other Colbys - and the fact that they usually came up trumps made their antagonists even more frustrated and desperate and ruthless. It was an upside down Dynasty, kinda like Flamingo Road, therefore I wouldn't say they were breaking new ground.

 

[Ked]

Gosh Miles looks like such a baby in that shot. "Wah! Wah! Mommy, Jeff took my toy- I mean girlfriend! Wah!"

 

[Ked]

Hm, yes, I'm not sure if I'd call it blackmail. Maybe more like a wicked, dirty deal.

Yeah, that's a better word for it.

I always just though that Blake really liked Jeff and though he was of the right kind of pedigree to marry his daughter. That he would be good for her. It kinda made sense in a way.

I guess Blake's reaction was sort of "you've made your bed now lie in it". Marriage is a not a frivolity, and of course he also liked Jeff very much.

Both of those are good explanations.

 

[Willie Oleson]

therefore I wouldn't say they were breaking new ground

Like hell they weren't.
What made THE COLBYS so brilliant is that it often looks as if it's told from the perspective of the bad guys.
On DYNASTY we witnessed Krystle and Steven and Jeff etc being "attacked" by the villains, on THE COLBYS they showed the villains being super annoyed and obstructed by the "good guys".

If you'd combine these shows you'd have THE AFFAIR.

 

[Ked]

What made THE COLBYS so brilliant is that it often looks as if it's told from the perspective of the bad guys.
On DYNASTY we witnessed Krystle and Steven and Jeff etc being "attacked" by the villains, on THE COLBYS they showed the villains being super annoyed and obstructed by the "good guys".

I never thought of it like that. ^^

 

[Michael Torrance]

therefore I wouldn't say they were breaking new ground.

Like hell they weren't.

You need to show me how you do that

 

[Willie Oleson]

I'm a very flexible guy.