Was The Colbys a flop?

[Michael Torrance]

You are creating the spin off of the #1 TV show, with a huge budget, with big names, and of a particular show which was always generating a hurricane of publicity (DYNASTY) and THAT is the the storyline you have to set things in motion?

Well, they had to find a reason to move both Jeff and Fallon (but seperately!) into the Colby mansion. The first episode is probably my least favourite as it felt so hokey, but then Sable decided that Jeff didn't belong there and from that point it became excellent soap.

It just upset me too much. So much, I typed "the" twice.

I, technically, am a peasant as well. I just have read stuff, then and later, about DARK MANSIONS, a semi-supernatural soap which was to star Joan Fontaine (Olivia's bitch sister). Spelling told her to drop some mutton so she'd photograph better.

I don't remember much about the pilot and I don't think I saw much of it, so I can't assess it myself. But the too-literal title put me off, although I was never irritated by the title DARK SHADOWS for some reason.

Ok, I searched and found the pilot/movie online

The credits look like NBC's DARK SHADOWS revival (which I loved, though I have not seen the original).
As for the DARK SHADOWS title, it was a case of "so bad it's good." I mean, it's laughable--what else can shadows be but dark? Yet somehow I accepted it also as evocative.

 

[Carrie Fairchild]

I think my fondness of The Colbys is biased by my love of Stephanie Beacham and her powerhouse performance as Sable. But really, when you look at the opening premise, it's a bogged down mess compared to the other 80's soaps.

Dallas: Romeo & Juliet on a ranch
Dynasty: working class woman marries a millionaire
Falcon Crest: east coast family inherit a vineyard and face off against tyrannical aunt
Knots Landing: couple start a new life in a seaside cup de sac
The Colbys: presumed dead recast shows up with amnesia married to your cousin while patriarch thinks he's dying because of a misdiagnosis and falls back in love with his sister in law who nobody really cares about.

The Colbys eventually sorted itself out with storylines like the trial and giving Sable more prominence but that weak opening didn't help. As has been pointed out before, it was a bit late in the day to be launching a spinoff too. None of the 80's soaps launched after 1981 lasted long, so by 1985 they were pushing their luck. ABC really should've taken a chance with Dark Mansions that season. It wasn't perfect but at least with it's Gothic tones, it would've stood out a bit from the other soaps on air at the time.

The Colbys: presumed dead recast shows up with amnesia married to your cousin while patriarch thinks he's dying because of a misdiagnosis and falls back in love with his sister in law who nobody really cares about.

The Colbys eventually sorted itself out with storylines like the trial and giving Sable more prominence but that weak opening didn't help.

You've got a good point.

As has been pointed out before, it was a bit late in the day to be launching a spinoff too. None of the 80's soaps launched after 1981 lasted long, so by 1985 they were pushing their luck. ABC really should've taken a chance with Dark Mansions that season. It wasn't perfect but at least with it's Gothic tones, it would've stood out a bit from the other soaps on air at the time.

The genre was really hard to do then, as primetime producers weren't used to the creative rigors involved with a series with continuing storylines. In fact NBC never managed to generate even one which worked or was successful. And the four shows that were hits crashed with a rarified spectacularity (except for KNOTS, and that was because it had an executive producer with unusual clarity -- and I don't mean Michael Filerman).

Did ABC dismiss DARK MANSIONS or did Aaron Spelling decide not to pursue it? Robert McCullough, the man who'd made FALCON CREST a hit before he was fired, said he lost favor with Spelling because test audiences snickered at DARK MANSIONS (McCullough felt the spooky musical score was too campy).

Ha, true. I wonder if the original idea of Fallon running a hotel would've done better? At least that's not as cluttered idea like what they ended up with

Just look at HOTEL and stick Fallon in the middle of it. What kind of spinoff is that? Give me THE COLBYS any time, but also give me more Sable and Constance, and no doomsday timeslot as they were handed.

Bob McCullough talks about the production of Dark Mansions here.

http://www.podbean.com/media/share/dir-k6a84-22a571b

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

It just upset me too much.

Ah, but that was the point, Michael Torrance! It was a very upsetting situation, it was hardcore soap

 

[AndyLaird]

The Colbys: presumed dead recast shows up with amnesia married to your cousin while patriarch thinks he's dying because of a misdiagnosis and falls back in love with his sister in law who nobody really cares about.

Well it could happen to anyone...

Fair point though. It's another reason why I prefer to see TC as, in effect, an extra episode per week of Dynasty, continuing the Fallon and Jeff story and adding new storylines with Jeff's relatives, not as a standalone show.

 

[Zable]

It's another reason why I prefer to see TC as, in effect, an extra episode per week of Dynasty, continuing the Fallon and Jeff story and ...

How would you bring Fallon back from the dead then?

 

[AndyLaird]

How would you bring Fallon back from the dead then?

I'd leave it as it was. Not a fan of "back from the dead" storylines but this one was as plausible as they ever are.

 

[Zable]

I’ve forgotten, was there any character appearing on The Colbys who mentioned Fallon as being thought of as dead? It’s not been in my head that Fallon of The Colbys was a resurrected character for the purposes of the series.

I’d thought Fallon of The Colbys played simply as a missing-for-sometime Carrington heiress who had amnesia, not one whose family had given her a burial with all the drama of an uncorked Jeff. ….When Fallon of TC regained her memory, she didn’t remember some things exactly as you’d expect Fallon of Dynasty to have. There was no physical reason for her ‘distorted’ memories, only that there might be gaps as she started to regain her memories.

If TC the series didn't exist, but Fallon returned to continue her story with Jeff, I’d be happy with a plausible enough explanation to account for how she was alive, but I’d want her story details to match the story of Fallon of Dynasty before her disappearance, re people and events. Like, if she’s gonna talk about jewellery Jeff gave her, the details should match. Or, if they’re gonna reveal in flashback what she’d done with her wedding dress the night she vanished, let it match how we’d last seen it. Stuff like that. ....I’d want her family to be truly aghast that they’d buried someone else as her, and I’d want them to spend time piecing together who it was and how that came about. Especially if their returning Fallon was amnestic too. … And, who knows, returning Fallon could eventually turn out to be a Wes Parmalee sort, but not before making family trouble for Adam. I liked that The Colbys had that angle to Fallon's story. And thought it sucked it wasn't followed up on Dynasty.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

I’d want her family to be truly aghast that they’d buried someone else as her

 

[JROG]

The funny thing about that Stanwyck quote is that people who don't like the show (and, somehow, seem obsessed with their hatred of it), use it as some kind of be-all, end-all proof of the show's wrongdoings, when in fact, it's simply Stanwyck raging about a show from her point of view as an actress.

Her main concerns are two: That it vulgar (had she never seen a primetime soap before?) and not aware of it, which is ridiculous. 3 years earlier, she'd tried to fυck a priest on The Thorn Birds. Now, she had standards?

Number 2: That she kept playing the same scene over and over again. In which case, her issue is what they did with her own character (which seems her main concern). And... she has a point. Much as the show improved in its first season, Connie had less and less to do and they kept drawing out one plotpoint for 4 episodes. I can see why she'd be bored with what she had to do.

But does that take into account anything else on the show? No, not really. How very actressy of her!

Besides, she says she only signed on for 13 episodes and yet was there for the whole season, so.... I don't know how much I can trust her objective 'criticism' of the show.

 

[colbyco]

Many, many analysts and media historians have said that there was some titanic shift in audience tastes, and while I could be plain wrong, I just don't buy it. No sitcom could have beaten DYNASTY in season 2 or DALLAS in season 3 (80-81, not counting the mini-series as separate). But DYNASTY in season 6 and DALLAS in season 8 were sitting ducks.(...)

- Yeah sitcoms were on tv all the time. But sitcoms had its big times (MASH, Cosby, Two and a half men, Big Bang) and less succesful times.
Till 1984 there was no new sitcom who had the power to beat the prime time soaps. But Cosby became a unusual fast monster hit. Even Dynasty´s first episode of S6 was the most watched in its history it didn´t reach number 1 while episodes of S5 and S4 (with less viewers)
reached number 1.

Well, they had to find a reason to move both Jeff and Fallon (but seperately!) into the Colby mansion. The first episode is probably my least favourite as it felt so hokey, but then Sable decided that Jeff didn't belong there and from that point it became excellent soap. (...) .

- I have to say this episode is one of my favs. Ok Jason´s "health problem" was not the best storyline but I loved how the family landed with the helicopter while the world press waits for them. In Germany we say "this is really a big performance" - something even Dynasty hadn´t done before. And when the whole family (dressed up) waits for Miles and he moves in with his new bride - this is really a cliffhanger.

 

[Michael Torrance]

The funny thing about that Stanwyck quote is that people who don't like the show (and, somehow, seem obsessed with their hatred of it), use it as some kind of be-all, end-all proof of the show's wrongdoings, when in fact, it's simply Stanwyck raging about a show from her point of view as an actress.

Number 2: That she kept playing the same scene over and over again. In which case, her issue is what they did with her own character (which seems her main concern). And... she has a point. Much as the show improved in its first season, Connie had less and less to do and they kept drawing out one plotpoint for 4 episodes. I can see why she'd be bored with what she had to do.

But does that take into account anything else on the show? No, not really. How very actressy of her!

I don't know which ones you refer to who use that quote as their proof of the show's quality. In the current thread, I brought up her quote and Montalban's as two actors/actresses who did not like the show as a different perspective from John James, who was quoted as liking it. And he was the focus on the new show, so of course he did.

Her main concerns are two: That it vulgar (had she never seen a primetime soap before?) and not aware of it, which is ridiculous. 3 years earlier, she'd tried to fυck a priest on The Thorn Birds. Now, she had standards?

I never read her quote to mean vulgar in some prudish sense, only vulgar as in crude in terms of quality (especially of character and plots). And I would say that being on THE THORN BIRDS was very much proof that even at an old age she had standards--after all her performance there put her on the radar for this role.

But Cosby became a unusual fast monster hit.

It was a sitcom with a new formula: a black family that acts exactly like an upper middle class white family. The quick appeal and twist on the genre should have been warnings for other networks to not put something unproven against it.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

I brought up her quote and Montalban's as two actors/actresses who did not like the show as a different perspective from John James

No Michael, you brought it up to make a point because she was "more knowledgeable than JJ", which makes her opinion more credible.
I mentioned Charlton Heston and his praise for the show, but somehow it got swept under the carpet:bump:

 

[Michael Torrance]

No Michael, you brought it up to make a point because she was "more knowledgeable than JJ", which makes her opinion more credible.
I mentioned Charlton Heston and his praise for the show, but somehow it got swept under the carpet:bump:

Thank God for the quote/reply function

THE COLBYS was a colossal bad investment on the part of network and producers .

That wasn't the vibe I got from John James.

JJ: "After the show [The Colbys] wrapped, ah, I wasn’t sure whether or not if I was going to [rent?] to Dynasty, it [TC] just ended. Which was sad. I thought it was a very well produced show. Might have been too expensive. Might have been for a purpose. ABC was for sale. They put another show on the air that did pretty good. Created some shareholder value. Did its purpose. Wasn’t a hit. But, we didn’t hear. All of a sudden, well, goodbye. That was it."

Barbara Stanwyck, perhaps a bit more knowledgeable than John James, called it "the biggest pile of garbage I ever did" and then quit.

Honestly, the mention of John James (and later Heston, to whom I did refer) was a non-sequitur. How can John James contradict my own assessment that the show was a colossal bad investment on the part of network and producers? That was how I saw it. But because some of you thought name-dropping had any weight on this, I also brought up two names.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

Would it have been better (as in: not a colossal bad investment) if it hadn't been such an expensive show?
One of the reasons I like TC is because it looks so lavish compared to Dynasty (at that time). I rather watch 2 great seasons that 5 low-quality seasons.

 

[Richard Channing]

Would it have been better (as in: not a colossal bad investment) if it hadn't been such an expensive show?
One of the reasons I like TC is because it looks so lavish compared to Dynasty (at that time). I rather watch 2 great seasons that 5 low-quality seasons.

I wonder what Heston and Stanwyck got paid. They are surely the two biggest Hollyood stars who were main characters in the Dynasty universe.

 

[Michael Torrance]

Would it have been better (as in: not a colossal bad investment) if it hadn't been such an expensive show?
One of the reasons I like TC is because it looks so lavish compared to Dynasty (at that time). I rather watch 2 great seasons that 5 low-quality seasons.

I wonder what Heston and Stanwyck got paid. They are surely the two biggest Hollyood stars who were main characters in the Dynasty universe.

That's the thing--everything on the show was SO big, it had to be a hit. Big names, big budgets, and so much hype (see the TV Guide article covering it for example). I couldn't believe ABC made the same mistake twice, only even bigger this time. DYNASTY was pushed as the answer to DALLAS in season 1, and while I think the show was actually better than early DALLAS when it premiered, it was programmed to be the next top 5 hit which DALLAS did not reach until two years later. That recipe almost killed DYNASTY early on because of the investment, and in the end budget (together with Iger's determination to kill the show and the Spelling ties) finally killed DYNASTY in season 9.

Maxwell Caulfield makes some great remarks about the style of THE COLBYS (for instance the James Dean angle to Miles), and I agree that the show looked rich and also had a clear sense of style which the parent show lacked at the time. But as for taste @Willie Oleson when it comes to shows, I have to say I go with story over lavish visuals. In that area I found THE COLBYS lackluster, and because DYNASTY was trying my patience at the time I had none to spare on it. I haven't seen the show in ages and I only saw the complete show once on SOAPNET (where I lived in Europe they only showed season one). The second season looked to be improving, mainly because Sable was really taking off as a character, Miles was untangled from Fallon and Monica had a decent story, but there were still so many things that needed fixing. When Philip showed up from the dead and Frankie was shown to be as jerky as her son I actually paid more attention, but come on--we can't hide the big flying UFO in the room.

 

[colbyco]

I wonder what Heston and Stanwyck got paid. They are surely the two biggest Hollyood stars who were main characters in the Dynasty universe.

- I read Heston got $ 80.000 / episode.

 

[tommie]

And I would say that being on THE THORN BIRDS was very much proof that even at an old age she had standards--after all her performance there put her on the radar for this role.

I'd say being a personal friend of Aaron Spelling's and Tori's godmother "put her on the radar" for the role and was probably the reason she ended up accepting the role despite rejecting the Angela Channing role on Falcon Crest years earlier.

 

[Werewillie Oleson]

Her role on the Thorn Birds was far more interesting, I don't think anyone is going to disagree with that, and it makes me wonder why they didn't create a similar character for Constance Colby.
Where were the hysterical outbursts that Stanwyck did so well?
I thought her role was similar to Dominique Deveraux i.e. supporting the patriarch, but without the power to be a real mover & shaker.
She created the first conflict when she gave Jeff her shares of CE and she lured Francesca back to California, but that wasn't a conflict until Sable disagreed with the situation.
But what if Constance had a hidden agenda?

Gosh, what if Phillip wasn't her brother but her son thus making Jeff her grandson (before it was revealed that Jason was the father). Of course Jason wouldn't be aware of the situation, I mean...what if Andrew Colby was the father. Good heavens! (and heavenly soap-y indeed).
And would that be reason enough to send Jeff with Cecil to Colorado?

 

[Michael Torrance]

Her role on the Thorn Birds was far more interesting, I don't think anyone is going to disagree with that, and it makes me wonder why they didn't create a similar character for Constance Colby.
Where were the hysterical outbursts that Stanwyck did so well?
I thought her role was similar to Dominique Deveraux i.e. supporting the patriarch, but without the power to be a real mover & shaker.

Because I think in both cases they cared more about luring the actress than about having a character that was going to bring a new dynamic. What both shows needed in the mid-80s was a showrunner with a vision, and the power to overrule the Shapiros' and Pollocks' misfires.