Forward or back?

[Willie Oleson]

I do however see Jon Hamm playing the role as he offers the right vibe to play the bastard we all love to hate.

Hmm, I don't think he's got enough comedic talent to pull it off in an entertaining way. There has to be a sense of vulnerability even if they never show it.
I've always liked the idea that JR was the greatest bluffer, and maybe that's what made his most despicable acts - when his evil side completely took over - so thrilling to watch.
I enjoyed Jon Hamm's stoic character in Mad Men but it takes a special kind of balance and a lot of responsibility to be a great soap villain.

 

[Taylor Bennett Jr.]

Over the years I've often heard Travolta's name mentioned as playing JR on the big screen however I just don't think it's the right fit. I do however see Jon Hamm playing the role as he offers the right vibe to play the bastard we all love to hate.

View attachment 59405​

straying a bit off-topic here, but the dark hair reminded me of a thought I had when doing some “retro show streaming” not all that long ago..

I don’t anyone could have caught lightning in the bottle like Larry, but it occurred to me watching the Rockford Files that James Garner as JR could have made Dallas a solid long-running series.

He had the Oklahoma roots and twang - not all that far from North Texas - and I bet he could have pulled off a pretty authentic Texan. He looked almost like a bridge between Jock and Bobby, face and build-wise. He’d been in Westerns ala Jim Davis and Morgan Anderson, played charming con men in the 70s big city, wasn’t above losing a fistfight or two…

he had his own show and was probably too big of a star at the time, and again no one’s Larry, but… a hell of a lot better fit than Foxworth, anyway!

 

[Michelle Stevens]

straying a bit off-topic here, but the dark hair reminded me of a thought I had when doing some “retro show streaming” not all that long ago..

I don’t anyone could have caught lightning in the bottle like Larry, but it occurred to me watching the Rockford Files that James Garner as JR could have made Dallas a solid long-running series.

He had the Oklahoma roots and twang - not all that far from North Texas - and I bet he could have pulled off a pretty authentic Texan. He looked almost like a bridge between Jock and Bobby, face and build-wise. He’d been in Westerns ala Jim Davis and Morgan Anderson, played charming con men in the 70s big city, wasn’t above losing a fistfight or two…

he had his own show and was probably too big of a star at the time, and again no one’s Larry, but… a hell of a lot better fit than Foxworth, anyway!

The Rockford Files episode "Forced Retirement" Larry Hagman played a character (Richard Lessing) who basically is what we got as JR Ewing when we first meet him a year later on Dallas. Great episode.

I agree James Garner could have been a great JR Ewing but in 1978 he was star of a successful show and he had a certain image that may have clashed in the character of JR. Larry Hagman I think played a scoundrel, someone with little to no scruples better.

As for the the topic of this thread, I voted continuation. I doubt it will ever happen and I think it is best to leave JR Ewing as Larry Hagman, now deceased, a part of the past. Dallas as we know it was a part of a certain time that can't be recaptured.

​

 

[CeeCee72]

I think if they were going to do reboot, they would have to find someone unknown to play JR. Not sure they should cast any stars. Start fresh.

Interestingly, I read a while back that when the TNT continuation was first being developed, they floated the idea of Kiefer Sutherland playing John Ross. What a disaster that would have been! I love Kiefer and he is a great actor but he was already either in his 40s (or at least pushing 40) at the time and there's no way audiences would have accepted Jack Bauer as John Ross Ewing.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Dallas as we know it was a part of a certain time that can't be recaptured.

And that's why Cynthia Cidre gaves us the DALLAS that we didn't know yet. It wasn't try-hard pastiche 1980s.
There's still oil, and tycoons and prosecutors and social climbers and femme fatales and broken marriages - soap opera is timeless.

And isn't it sad that all we have right now is the Beth Dutton shows? My goodness, how I hate, loathe and despise that character.

 

[CeeCee72]

And isn't it sad that all we have right now is the Beth Dutton shows? My goodness, how I hate, loathe and despise that character.

Tbh, I hate almost all female characters is Sheridan's shows. He really has issues with writing for women. I hope like hell he never takes it in his head to reboot Dallas. He would destroy Ellie, Sue Ellen, Pam, and Donna without even meaning to.

 

[Rove]

As for the the topic of this thread, I voted continuation

My heart says continuation but my head says no. As I continue to watch Dallas on Amazon Australia I'm just enthralled how the series went from strength to strength especially so after the death of Jock. I recently watched the memorial episode dedicated to the memory of Jock/Jim. Each of the characters/actors were offered an opportunity to grieve...on screen no less.

It would be great to see Bobby, Sue Ellen and others on the small screen again but I'm just not sure how it would proceed. What I loved about the original series was the blending of Ewing Oil and Southfork Ranch. Let's not kid ourselves how a continuation could work presenting life on the ranch when Southfork is slowly being swamped by new housing developments. There's suspending belief but its no longer 1978.

It's why I voted prequel. I'd love to see the rough and tumble early settlement of Dallas and how the Ewing family came to be.