What did you guys think of the Moldavia Massacre?

[lbf522]

I loved it myself. It was an amazing cliffhanger and looked forward to next season. Those who say they hated the violence of it, annoyed me though. This was when you had these people were complaining about violence on television which I found silly. There has always been violence on televsion from the very beginning starting with the slapstick comedies of Laural & Hardy, Abbot & Costello, and the Three Stoogies. When they add cartoons to their list, they lost cridibility. I don't need anyone deciding for me what I can and watch on televison. I had no problem with televison shows having a rating at the top of the page.

Back to the cliffhanger. It was very good. I agree that the aftermath was lackluster though with very few characters being killed.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Some people complained about the violence, yes, but that was silly. (Standards & Practices, the network censors for television, only existed to control sex and violence when there was little sex and violence on television to control. Once that sex and violence went out of control in the 21st century, naturally Standards & Practices was essentially disbanded).

What infuriated me at the time in May 1985 was a). the sheer physical competence of the scene in which they were killing all the actors (in contrast to the klunky dialogue scenes so dumb with idiotic dialogue delivered through S.A.D.) and b). my knowing they would sweep this huge, ominous cliffhanger under the rug in keeping with the way DYNASTY swept all their storylines under the rug. (Years later, Paulsen observed that "DYNASTY never paid off on their cliffhangers").

And we weren't wrong.

The problem wasn't the massacre; it was the painfully predictable fact that they'd do nothing with it in the fall, despite it being written up in the press for four months during the summer... Everybody got up, wiped their brows, and said, "Pheww! That was a close one!" Yes, yes, Lady Ashley technically died in the next room and Lick Feeler succumbed in a hushed, not-too-bad moment which led Steven at bedside to pass his usual kidney stone. But we otherwise were told little-to-nothing about why it happened, other than Theodore Bikel asking Krystle to help the guerillas and her wadding up a piece of paper unconvincingly.

And this lame follow-up is what caused the viewers to realize that DYNASTY was just a show about pretty clothes, stilted verbal face-offs, and melodramatic events, but didn't really tell an actual story. (Something some of us had been grumbling about sourly for two or three years). Having Krystle in an attic for 10 episodes didn't help. Nor did King Galen's boring exploitation of Alexis which seemed to be going nowhere.

Season 6 could have been DYNASTY's peak year, one which concluded with Alexis' triumphant takeover of Blake's company, mansion and estate. But it remained just a dull blur of the usual jealousy triangle non-plots highlighted by the occasional evening gown and facial slap.

So the massacre was a symptom, not a cause, of DYNASTY's downfall.

Camille Marchetta came up with the Moldavian massacre idea (and she probably came up with "Who Shot J.R.?" five years earlier -- although she's reluctant to take credit for the iconic DALLAS cliffhanger, and they're reluctant to give her credit as well). But, as Rita Lakin (a talented scripter who toiled unhappily on DYNASTY's Season 7) said about The Pollocks, "they weren't really proper writers," and Marchetta herself said they deliberately sabotaged narrative logic in order to make the show "surprising."

And everything was filtered through the Pollocks, regardless of which writers were on staff at any given time. (Which is why, more or less, Paulsen refused to join the show for Season 6 when originally asked). The Pollocks kept DYNASTY consistently dumb. And dumbness was never something Aaron "Nuns-in-a-stripclub" Spelling ever shied away from, much less superceded.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Those who say they hated the violence of it, annoyed me though. This was when you had these people were complaining about violence on television which I found silly.

I think this is the first time someone brings up the topic of "violence on TV" in connection with DYNASTY. It's never crossed my mind, to be honest.

The Massacre and the UFO and Bobby Ewing Dies are all the same thing: an ambitious What-If scenario, and these cliffhangers look amazing in isolation.
We can blame the lack of payoff on incompetent and careless plotting, but I think soaps were never meant to change too drastically because that can only happen at the expense of something good. And if it changes too much then it's going to look like the infamous revamp or "retooling" and then we'd need to have that discussion.
And yet, that's exactly what the Moldavia Massacre suggested: they ALL die except for Krystle & Alexis, the weeping widows of Scorpio Peak (to make a Dark Shadows allegory).

The best fanfic suggestion I've read on this forum is the death of Krystle played by Rita, but that means that Sammy Jo's scheme needed to happen in season 5, which places Rock Hudson's guest-star appearance in season 4. Because that's how it works: you change one thing you change everything.
I think it's possible to scrap some season 5 stuff and replace it with Rita & Joel.
I'm your half-sister and that's very interesting because I say so
Lady Ashley's not-so impressive attempt to shake up the status quo
Indiana Jeff
Wow, that was easy.

Alternatively, instead of building everything around the Massacre cliffhanger just to make that satisfying aftermath possible, they could have ended the season without the massacre cliffhanger.
But would you sacrifice this jaw-dropping cliffhanger in order to avoid the awkward, no-win aftermath? Would you like to UNSEE it?

Amanda's love affair with some vague European prince is fine

but it was a mistake to expand them to an outer-Denver reality. It's not real Dynasty, it's not relevant, nobody cares.
Unless it was the result of a Denver scheme, similar to the Asian revolution that was orchestrated in JR Ewing's office.
It goes without saying that the sappy love life of a new Dynasty character cannot be considered an "intriguing scheme" that crosses over to the Moldavia universe.

1. Target. The Bank of Moldavia? Yeah, that could work.
2. Who wants it, and why?

What if Matthew Blaisdel's mercenary gang (and he had experience dealing with rebellious people, as we saw in season 1) were hired to carry out the assassination, but with the ulterior double-crossing motive that the Royal chaos would make it easier for him and his gang to rob that "famous" bank, including the most precious Crown jewelry collection in the world? (Catwoman would love this!)
Police and military would be needed at the Palace to deal with the revolution and the possible death of many people.
To make it more "Denver" since Matthew Blaisdel had not been seen since the end of season 1, what if he had contacted Claudia and promised her to fix everything.
He and Claudia and Lindsay would be living in Blake's mansion the way it was always meant to be, "but I need your help to make it happen".
And so it's Claudia who has to do all the lobbying and manipulating to make Amanda accept the Prince's proposal - and then later come up with an excuse why she wouldn't join the Carringtons in Moldavia. That last part of the plan fails, and that would make her collateral damage death really fascinating.

Claudia's death has been suggested several times, but we'd only get a tear from Krystle and after that she'd never be mentioned again (as it happened after season 6!) it simply would not improve anything.
The massacre didn't need a higher kill count, it needed a REASON and that reason should not be Yuri.

Additonally, I'd introduce Dominique and Peter De Vilbis as the glamorous Euro-scammers who are planning to confront Blake Carrington with something-something.
Ironically, they survive the coup because they are banned from the wedding ceremony, which allows them to cross over to season 6 and assist Alexis in plotting the financial downfall of the Denver-Carrington tycoon.
Unbeknownst to Alexis, the wicked couple are going to be killed in a hit-and-run accident caused by Caress.
Et cetera, et cetera.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Krystle & Alexis, the weeping widows of Scorpio Peak (to make a Dark Shadows allegory).

I likey.

The massacre didn't need a higher kill count, it needed a REASON and that reason should not be Yuri.

Yes, more explanation, not more corpses. (Although jet-setting photojournalist Lady Ashley's demise might have had better value had she been better cast).

I don't mind Yuri being involved in the plot neceassarily. And The Duchess of HowNowBrownCow's complicity could always remain up in the air: was she a moll determined to prevent the destruction of the Moldavian royals as she so loved the prince, or was she a collaborator/whore who never removed her mask (my vote)? But we did need a more complex motive for the massacre -- I've always felt the peasants had been robbed since the '50s when ColbyCo and fledgling Denver-Carrington began extracting the tiny principality's natural resources in cahoots with Galen's father and the Moldavian monarchy. (And, of course, somebody hated Alexis in all this -- Queen Mother Ursula?? -- not wanting her offspring on the throne nor joining the European dynasty of The House of Whatever). And Matthew's later, silly siege of the Colorado mansion should have been conflated with, played out in, Moldavia, his involvement in the coup d'etat conspiracy his first appearance since Jock Ewing's helicopter collided with Matthew's jeep in South America.

And was Constance-Rubenstein funding the mess? She detested Alexis and Ursula so very desperately.

But because of the melee, liberal peaceniks Krystle and Steven coax Blake into divesting himself of his military hardware division, inviting the derision of Jason Colby and snarling Adam... And if Alexis' coronation midway through Season 6 hadn't been canceled, she'd be reverse-reverse couped within three episodes and sent packing back to Denver.

So many places to go with the plot. None of which appeared on-screen.

 

[Monzo]

I like the massacre too—or rather, the actual scene itself—though I didn't care for anything else about the Moldavian storyline, except perhaps Alexis's fascination with the idea that, if not she herself, then at least her daughter would marry into a royal family. What bothered me about Moldavia was that it was supposed to be like Monaco, yet did nothing to come across that way. Michael's mother should have been a famous singer from the fifties who married into the royal family and died in a yacht accident when Michael was young, though her body was never found. That mother could turn out to be Doris Day, who knows?

I think that given how easily everyone involved escaped the cabin fire in the season 3 cliffhanger—and the fact that viewers didn't seem to mind—the producers didn't anticipate any backlash regarding the relatively low death toll of the massacre. By the way, if you want to see which characters forum posters would have liked to see among the dead, take a look here: https://www.tellytalk.net/threads/who-should-have-died-in-the-moldavian-massacre.13410/

Looking back, I think the producers were simply too naive and focused more on how to build up the Rita plot or integrate the Colbys for a few episodes rather than delving further into the Moldavian storyline. They probably thought seeing Alexis dressed as a nun would amuse the viewers and that would be enough.

 

[Willie Oleson]

I've always felt the peasants had been robbed since the '50s when ColbyCo and fledgling Denver-Carrington began extracting the tiny principality's natural resources in cahoots with Galen's father and the Moldavian monarchy. (And, of course, somebody hated Alexis in all this -- Queen Mother Ursula?? -- not wanting her offspring on the throne nor joining the European dynasty of The House of Whatever).

Yes, Dynasty is that unstoppable force with plenty of potential origins stories, and then going even further back in history. But I'm not sure if all that fabulous history that looks so good on this forum would have worked for "live" Dynasty episodes. It's a lot of exposition that can't be played by the actors.

 

[Willie Oleson]

They probably thought seeing Alexis dressed as a nun would amuse the viewers and that would be enough.

Nun On The Run vs. Nun With A Gun
People who keep saying that Dynasty was very busy copying Dallas are just so naive.

The coup could have happened without instantly shooting all the guests who didn't really pose a threat. Just the Palace Guards and then maybe during a scuffle some of the guests.
Everything that happens afterwards would make much more sense, but again, it wouldn't be that spectacular cliffhanger. We can't have our cake and eat it.

 

[Rove]

I think this is the first time someone brings up the topic of "violence on TV" in connection with DYNASTY. It's never crossed my mind, to be honest.

Then perhaps someone should start a thread on this violent scene....

​

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Yes, Dynasty is that unstoppable force with plenty of potential origins stories, and then going even further back in history. But I'm not sure if all that fabulous history that looks so good on this forum would have worked for "live" Dynasty episodes. It's a lot of exposition that can't be played by the actors.

I'm just not sure about that. What they did do -- trashing their own narrative lazily -- caused the ratings to crash at a near record two-year rate for a former Number 1 show. So how much worse could it have been? Give the actors a chance, for goodness sake!

We can't have our cake and eat it.

Said Miss. Havisham. And look where that got her.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

I like the massacre too—or rather, the actual scene itself—though I didn't care for anything else about the Moldavian storyline, except perhaps Alexis's fascination with the idea that, if not she herself, then at least her daughter would marry into a royal family. What bothered me about Moldavia was that it was supposed to be like Monaco, yet did nothing to come across that way. Michael's mother should have been a famous singer from the fifties who married into the royal family and died in a yacht accident when Michael was young, though her body was never found. That mother could turn out to be Doris Day, who knows?

I think that given how easily everyone involved escaped the cabin fire in the season 3 cliffhanger—and the fact that viewers didn't seem to mind—the producers didn't anticipate any backlash regarding the relatively low death toll of the massacre. By the way, if you want to see which characters forum posters would have liked to see among the dead, take a look here: https://www.tellytalk.net/threads/who-should-have-died-in-the-moldavian-massacre.13410/

Looking back, I think the producers were simply too naive and focused more on how to build up the Rita plot or integrate the Colbys for a few episodes rather than delving further into the Moldavian storyline. They probably thought seeing Alexis dressed as a nun would amuse the viewers and that would be enough.

I think DYNASTY's "European phase" should have commenced slowly with Season 4 and Fallon's treacherous romance with either overtly smarmy Peter de Vilbus or (my preference) more-covertly smarmy Count Pierre du Chalon (an extended member of the Moldavian monarchy, as we'd eventually find out). Then, in the last half of Season 5, the Moldavian plotline begins for real. Climaxing with Alexis' coronation as queen and quick removal from the throne, the European stuff then ending, her returning her focus on "getting Blake" and his empire during the last half of Season 6.

 

[Chris2]

Why did they all fall asleep when most of them weren’t hit by bullets?

 

[Ked]

Why did they all fall asleep when most of them weren’t hit by bullets?

Well, it is possible that some had fainted from shock, while the rest were playing dead.