Proposed Dynasty spinoff for Fallon and Jeff

[Pam's Twin Sister]

Spelling should have made a spin-off with Fallon alone and call it "Brothel", guest starring the Denver football team she had bedded previously to the series!!

[SnarkyOracle!]

Spelling should have made a spin-off with Fallon alone and call it "Brothel", guest starring the Denver football team she had bedded previously to the series!!

In fact, that's what Bette Davis said HOTEL should have been named (having appeared in the pilot episode).

[willie oleson]

[But when season two rolls along and Alexis is brought in, Fallon suffers most.

Yes, that's what I said before.

[SIZE=2]I don't think Fallon should have been a super-bitch necessarily. Potentially she was much more interesting than that. More a gray character who could be ruthless when needs be and deliver a bitchy line with panache yet have depth and a soul.

No, she wasn't out-and-out evil, but everytime the first season is being brought up in a discussion I realise how unrelated it feels to the rest of the show, it's such a stand-alone masterpiece (eventhough a lot of season 2 could be seen as a genuine sequel).
The characters of Downton Abbey remind of the original Dynasty cast: sometimes nasty and rotten but not totally evil.
Heck even Krystle wasn't the saint she was in later seasons.
However, it seemed to me they still hadn't figured out who would be the Main Antagonist, Dynasty's "JR", as it were.
For a while it looked it would be Cecil but somehow I don't think his character was strong (or interesting) enough.
Don't know why, there was something "gentleman" about him despite the nasty things he did.
Ironically enough, after the Logan Rhinewood storyline he was TOO bad/dangerous to stay on as the resident villain.

Fallon was still a possibility - but it would have had some major consquences, especially if Blake found out she fired the gun that day.
It could cause them to fall out permanently and he would throw her out and disinherit her.
But hold on, she turns out to be Cecil's daughter and she inherits Colbyco.
With no Carringtons (or any of Blake's favourites) at Colbyco, it would be a REAL rival company as it was in the first season.
Yes, basically she could have been The Alexis type.
This all sounds much soapier than the first season but apparently that's the way it was going to be anyway.

Alternatively, after falling out with Blake, Cecil could have sent her to California where she would continue to make trouble.
(sorry but I just so hate that fekking hotel idea).

[brooked]

Yes, that's what I said before.

Yeah, but whilst I agree she was probably the most negatively impacted by Alexis, I also think she remained one of Dynasty's best characters in season two. It's just her potential based on season one was huge. The seeds had been planted for her to develop into one of 80's soaps classic characters. So, in a way her role in season two is somewhat disappointing, yet at the same time I think she was still such a watchable, interesting multi-faceted character. With Dynasty starting to paint in broader strokes from season two onwards, I felt that year she played a very interesting and vital role. Not Good like Krystle, nor wicked like Alexis, she operated in between the two, leaning more towards Bad Girl. She was a character who gave Dynasty gray areas. I still think she was great.

No, she wasn't out-and-out evil, but everytime the first season is being brought up in a discussion I realise how unrelated it feels to the rest of the show, it's such a stand-alone masterpiece (eventhough a lot of season 2 could be seen as a genuine sequel).

Yes, I see that. Season One really was a different show to the rest of Dynasty. It was so much classier and richer with excellent acting and writing and it looked beautiful. A Dynasty with socio-political commentary, subtlety and texture is hard to reconcile with much of what comes next.

But yes, Season Two works as a sequel. I think we needed to see Alexis, it's just open to debate, how much of her we needed to see.

The characters of Downton Abbey remind of the original Dynasty cast: sometimes nasty and rotten but not totally evil.
Heck even Krystle wasn't the saint she was in later seasons.

However, it seemed to me they still hadn't figured out who would be the Main Antagonist, Dynasty's "JR", as it were.
For a while it looked it would be Cecil but somehow I don't think his character was strong (or interesting) enough.
Don't know why, there was something "gentleman" about him despite the nasty things he did.
Ironically enough, after the Logan Rhinewood storyline he was TOO bad/dangerous to stay on as the resident villain.

Fallon was still a possibility - but it would have had some major consquences, especially if Blake found out she fired the gun that day.
It could cause them to fall out permanently and he would throw her out and disinherit her.
But hold on, she turns out to be Cecil's daughter and she inherits Colbyco.
With no Carringtons (or any of Blake's favourites) at Colbyco, it would be a REAL rival company as it was in the first season.
Yes, basically she could have been The Alexis type.
This all sounds much soapier than the first season but apparently that's the way it was going to be anyway.

Yes, I think Season One was perfect the way it was, it didn't need a Main Antagonist in the classic soap mould ala JR, because it transcended the cliches of traditional soap structure.

In my opinion it was a better season in terms of quality than even the very best Dallas had to offer (no Dynasty fan bias here, I readily aknowledge Dallas had twice the amount of good seasons and therefore was overall superior) but to match Dallas in the ratings it had to become more blatantly soapy, and that required a more obvious antagonist/villain.

Certainly if they were looking to a character already there, rather than bringing in somebody new, Fallon was head and shoulders the obvious choice.

Blake is probably who they had seen as the closest thing to an antagonist but it would never have worked for the direction Dynasty was going in. Blake could be a bastard, and Blake could be charming, but never at the same time. For an 80's soap villain to reach that love-to-hate status rather than just strongly dislike he/she needed to go about their villiany with a certain type of charisma, with a charm that I'm not sure Blake could or would. He was too cold, too severe.

I liked Cecil a lot and I wished they'd used him more. Lloyd Bochner was great and I actually like that he had the charming, suave veneer of gentleman, yet was really quite brutal and violent (in season two anyway) but I see him more as part of a villainous duo (could be with Fallon, could be with Alexis) rather than lead villain.

Fallon, was the obvious choice. I strongly suspect it was their original intention. Especially knowing Alexis was at first only meant to appear in the first six episodes

In Season Two they made such a big deal out of Alexis' Secret; Fallon is not Blake's daughter, her real father is Cecil. It's the reason Blake wouldn't have Alexis cross examined in court (in case she revealed it), it weighed so heavily on Steven he drunkenly fell into the swimming pool, then we had an opportunistic Sammy Jo overhearing it, Alexis trying to have Steven back in the will (being Blake's only true heir), she discussed it with Cecil, and of course the final reveal to Fallon and her subsequent ar crash was one of season two's big dramatic moments.

Yet it turned out she was Blake's after all. In seasons 3-8 this wouldn't strike me as strange. In fact it's what I'd expect. A lot of talk about something that has no real meaning anyway. The lack of pay-off in season two is different though. Season two was mostly very well planned out, stories happened for a reason. Each story had an introduction, and a resolution. To make such a drama out of Fallon's paternity, only for it to go nowhere is quite unSeason Two like.

So I think, probably, the original idea and thinking behind Fallon's questioned paternity was to allow her to be the villain. As a Carrington, as Blake's Daughter maybe she couldn't be, but what if she wasn't? What if her glamorous mother portrayed by Sophia Loren sashayed into Denver, with her Game Changer of a sceret, dropped her bomb and then sashayed out again after six episodes leaving her family to deal with the fall-out?

Fallon would initially be devestated of course, but then what? With a manipulative charmer like Cecil whispering in her ear, couldn't she turn against the man she'd wrongly believed to be her father? How could this man whom she so adored have lied to her all her life? Alexis after all had already "told Blake the truth" some years before. Fallon would of course still love Blake deep down, but it's not impossible she'd also hate him and want to lash out at him. And then there's this man Cecil, her real father. Unlike Blake who blocked her path to power, Cecil believes in her. He wants her for his heir. He'll groom her to one day run ColbyCo. He could seduce her with the promise of power. He could make her see how Blake had not only been too selfish to accept she was never really his, depriving her of her true heritage and father, but also remind her of how much Blake had held her back, seeing her as his Trophy Princess and nothing more etc... Steven would find himself in the position Fallon was in, in season one, caught between sibling and father, but in a bigger, splashier, soapier way.

Fallon and Cecil could form a poweful Father-Daughter Colby Alliance, until eventually (maybe after two seasons?) Cecil could pass away leaving Fallon an incredibly wealthy, incredibly powerful young woman, still seeking revenge against the man she loved more than anybody, and yet so betrayed her...

(sorry but I just so hate that fekking hotel idea).

Is it because of La Mirage? I'd assume if the hotel was front and center the set would be significantly better, and perhaps they'd also film in and around a real hotel, rather than a country club. They'd have to try and create more of an atmosphere. Maybe one of decadence and debauchery with a dark and destructive undertone, with the young, wealthy, privileged elite coming together, living in the fast lane with a few getting burnt...

Is it because of HOTEL, the Spelling show? I never really watched it, although I'm sure it wasn't quite as ghastly as The Love Boat.


Like I said, I'm sort of indifferent to the idea without knowing any details.

Spelling should have made a spin-off with Fallon alone and call it "Brothel", guest starring the Denver football team she had bedded previously to the series!!

Yes! With guest appearances from those "Soccer Studs" she bedded across Europe on her travels

[willie oleson]

So, in a way her role in season two is somewhat disappointing, yet at the same time I think she was still such a watchable, interesting multi-faceted character. With Dynasty starting to paint in broader strokes from season two onwards, I felt that year she played a very interesting and vital role. Not Good like Krystle, nor wicked like Alexis, she operated in between the two, leaning more towards Bad Girl. She was a character who gave Dynasty gray areas. I still think she was great.

Oh yes she was still very much Krystle's enemy.
I remember something like "Pearls for the pregnancy and a car for the miscarriage".
So deliciously cruel...
Despite all the changes in her life she still wanted to do her own thing.
Alexis wasn't overpowering everything at that time and also had that sense of "mystique".
How far would she go...? We found out when she killed the unborn Carrington.
Was that a turning point, like "from now on, this is going to be our supervillain"?