Discussion in 'Dynasty 2017 on The CW' started by Soapwriter12, Jan 9, 2017.
New characters, huh? I guess that makes sense, being a reboot and all. Right now I'm guessing we'll still see the iconic core cast of characters returning, but they'll have new antagonists/allies/love interests this time around. And that's a good thing, I suppose; new material and all that.
They´ll introduce a new family of aliens that scheme since the beginning to abduct Fallon...
"New Kids on the Block"...
"Pedowitz confirmed that the new series would retell the story of the Carringtons." Interesting? Sounds like it will have nothing in common with Dynasty 1.0 other than the Carrington name.
If the house is a new build then I'm out. lol
If the house is new. If the son is different. If they have drastically different characters for Blake, Krystal, Alexis, Steven, Fallon, Jeff and Cecil then I question why bother calling it Dynasty. The answer - just to use it to get people to start watching it.
You maybe right. Look at the response on Soapchat when Dynasty 2.0 was announced and I might add some media coverage around the world. I trust the new guys took a long hard look at the spectacular failure that was Dallas TNT and tread very carefully with there version. I can only conclude that Dynasty 2.0 is being produced with a much younger audience in mind, not the old fuddy duddy's like us. I can accept Dynasty 2.0 if it has a strong story arc and characters with depth, not the cartoonish characters that inevitably killed my interest in Dynasty 1.0.
With that in mind I wonder if will be set in Denver, Colorado?
Very true but it sounds like it won't be Dynasty - not really. That was the problem with Dallas - and if they think otherwise they are setting themseleves up to fail.
The goal is of course to tell a good story no matter what. Dallas failed at that imo - though not always.
It appears in both cases they are willing to use the legacy of a beloved show to get the attention of the world so they can tell their story. That sets them up for failure if they aren't true to the original because in essence they come off as hijacking a beloved story to use it and that leads to a lot of critism. Let's hope they don't start with "No I never watched the whole thing."
Now with a reboot they have a lot more leeway to getaway with changes. BUT they should tread with caution.
1st I'd suggest a story the does seasons 1-9 of Dallas in half of season 1 - and does it well so we get all the highlights and really feel a modern telling if the original story. Introduce the characters, the changes they made for diversity (not personality), the tweaks they make should be minimal and only serve to tell a better story (like talking about Adam before he shows up).
2nd they should use a mid season cliff hanger that leads into their own story - they can't just spend for ever retelling what's already on video. In their story telling they must be true to the orginal so the original doesn't seem used but high lighted, appreciated, built upon.
That was Dallas's problem btw. 1st they didn't need to introduce the characters as a continuation, but in their case they did because of all the changes they made to their personalities. They then focused solely on their own story, forgetting to be true to the original, so the original seemed used. The new story was a fine story at times but over all it wasn't Dallas - and only fine at times.
Over all if this is to work it has to "be" Dynasty, otherwise using the show while good for marketing will be it's doing in even if at times it's pretty good.
If they go that route I'd suggest changes across the board and start adding to the conversation "loosely" when they say "based on Dynasty." Otherwise they're setting it up for criticism; they're setting it up to fail.
I attempted to do some of this in my fan fiction. I'm certainly not saying it's a perfect story and that I have all the answers, but I'd appreciate some specific and constructive feedback because it gets at this very topic. Where does the story "reboot" and where does it "use?" Maybe in taking a look at it as an example we can provide some useful information for the team putting together the reboot. I've tried to be loyal to the original characters from recently watching season 1 - yet as I said condensing it and setting it up to move in and be its own story.
I am also guessing they want new character because the writers get paid for the characters they create and have to pay for the characters they use. I'd guess more difficult in a reboot than a continuation honestly - and to stay loyal to the original.
I was just thinking about this this morning - where are the teaser articles to tell us about this show? I then started to think - maybe this is all a scam to make us think one thing and do something else. Didn't La Shapiro say she often had to incinerate garbage from the writers rooms and would try to fake out the press so they wouldn't report storylines? Then I realized no one (John James, Beacham, Samms) has spoken out in congratulations or critique of this reboot. I follow Joan on twitter and unless I missed it, she's been in radio silence. But alas, here we are with news that it is moving forward. Sigh.
I was hoping Joan would be involved. Actually, expecting that she'd be involved. With the younger Blake, Krystle and Fallon, could Alexis be an elder character? Blake's mother, very powerful real ruler behind Denver Carrington and a force along with Fallon against unwelcome outsider Krystle? How else could we have Joan as Alexis: most critical to our show?
I used to write a fan fiction: "Dynasty: Blood and Oil" and have rebooted this story myself. Adam isn't long lost after all. The series opens on the eve of his gala announcing his candidacy for Senate. Father Blake is all smiles and young fiancé Krystle, a former geological engineer for Denver Carrington is thrilled. A young secretary has the hots for Blake and hits on him. He rejects her and she finds herself in wild sex with Adam. He's crazy, starved for his workaholic fathers affection pushes himself to be perfect and his one goal is to live up to his father. He's a brilliant lawyer and fights with his lawyer sister Fallon to get to the top alongside Blake at DC. He's dirty and ruthless. Accidentally kills the young girl during sex and Blake intervenes afterward and takes the fall saying he was with her when she accidentally died (drama with Krystle) - saving Adam and his future in the Senate. Blake on trial. Enter Alexis: the international film star, known around the world and loved by all. Fab and beautiful and wealthy and back to testify that Blake caught her in bed with Grimes and beat HER, not Grimes. She left on her own, struggled, starved, but hit it big and became a star before coming back for revenge on Blake. Conviction and the story unfolds. Fallon hates Krystle and bangs everyone, except lovelorn Jeff Colby, and Steven is away in NYC because he can't tolerate his father, but arrives home when the trial breaks.
So, not that I think this is worth anything, but unless there is a twist in the story instead of an entirely new one I think it'll stink. We need the mansion, maybe the St. Dennis and La Mirage and clothes and jewels and modern excessiveness. The Shapiro's wanted social commentary and current issues originally and I hope they can mix that with high drama and what made Dynasty such a hit. But how can it be without Joan as Alexis?
John James conducted an interview with Today Extra (Australia) late last year and was aware of the reboot. He is looking forward to seeing the Carrington and Colby families back on television.
My gut feeling tells me none of the original cast will be asked to star in Dynasty 2.0. I believe that is the whole point of a re-boot. A fresh cast, characters and stories.
To consider what the new Dynasty will feel like, ignore what the Shapiro's did in the past, and consider what the new creators have done in the past, who they have worked with, and the fact that it will be on the CW.
I like it and agree they need to do more than tell the old story and they should use Joan Collins.
Here's an idea. We get all of season 1 in 2 nights. At the end in the court room Fallon say, "That's my grandmother." It's Joan Collins.
Ep. 3 Lady Joan Maitland takes the stand. Often married, ruthless executive who runs BH Worcore - a gaint energy and commodities conglomerate in London (based on Glencore). Shes friends with Cecil Colby (founder of ColbyCo based on Chevron); his father (founder of Colby Enterprises based on Koch Industries) was one of her husbands. She describes Blake's attempted murder of her daughter Alexis who lives in fear of him to this day. She moves into Alexis's studio while in Denver to be there for her grieving grandson and mentor her granddaughter to take control of DC (based on Haliburton) when Blake goes to Prision. She gets a tip that Adam is alive. It's revealed she's raising Amanda, who's engaged to Prince Michael. Then at the end of the episode Alexis shows up and offers to testify on Blake's behalf - because she loves him.
It would weaken Alexis, boiling her down to the rejected, still in love x-wife, but it would make her mother all the other parts of Alexis's character and let Joan Collins play The part. At 83 it would also mean that Fallon would have to take on more of Alexis's role as femme fatle, business executive and fierce family matriarch out to ruin her father and mother and to control Jeff Colby (a female JR Ewing pissed at anyone is her way).
Just an idea anyway.
I think it would be a little odd for Joan Collins to be in it. She is iconic as Alexis and to have her play sometime else with someone else playing Alexis just feels a bit cheap and disappointing.If Joan Collins is in a Dynasty I want to see her as Alexis, not her mum or a friend or someone other weird relation.
Maybe it would be work a few seasons in but not from the get go
Same way i didn't like Jane Badler in the reboot for V. I was excited she was in it but ultimately disappointed!
I agree Joan Collins has to be Alexis and that doesn't fit with this reboot idea.
Oh how I wish they had done a prequel series instead but set from a backdrop where an older Alexis tells her grandchildren about her life when she was young. That way we could have had a new actress for a young Alexis and a new young Blake and yet used JC.
I don't mind a reboot. David Jacobs wanted the same for Dallas which would have worked better in my opinion in the right hands. Like Prisoner Cell Block H which intelligently rebooted the series but kept the inner filling intact but different with a lovely sprinkling of the original.
So I think this new Dynasty is all well and good as a reboot but just how the characters and setting would look in a contemporary setting. Blake like Donald Trump )
Judging by what the new producers have done in the past I think it's going to be awful. The OC and Gossip Girl and The Carrie Diaries and shit like that. And what's so annoying is that the first season of The OC was pretty decent. Then it was like they intentionally tried to ruin it in every imaginable way. Kind of like DYNASTY but much faster. So I guess it all makes sense.
Separate names with a comma.