A lot has been said and written over the decades about the camp factor on DYNASTY, whether it was a help or a hindrance. I'd argue that it was both. During the first season, the show was a straight drama -- no catfights, no bitchy barbs (except those delivered from Fallon) and no haute couture. And not yet a major hit. In Season 2, here comes Alexis, the show's pacing speeds up, and there are catfights, bitchier barbs and the entrance of high fashion. But, whether one considers the occasional slap or barb or bauble to be "camp" (and I don't, necessarily), the rest of the show was still not all that outrageous. Alexis was outrageous. But from Season 3 onward, the rest of the show around Alexis seemed determined to become as over-the-top as Alexis herself was. Was this a mistake? I always thought it was... It's not that you couldn't do the specific plotlines DYNASTY did from Season 3 thru Season 8 --- the issue seemed to be tone and detail: once the producers had settled on a "camp" paradigm for the show, they apparently decided that that meant that the show no longer needed to build a storyline and that the dialogue only had to be provocatively hyperbolic, but that really fleshing out any kind of complexity to the plot or the characters wasn't needed. At first, in Season 2, Alexis seemed outrageous because she was occurring in an environment of relative reality. But once the entire show went increasingly "camp" beginning with the third year, Alexis' outrageousness somehow seemed less effective because everyone else was acting just as bizarrely. When Alexis killed Krystle's baby early in Season 2, you not only felt Krystle was truly tortured by the miscarriage, you also felt Alexis was a jaw-dropping sociopath. The yin-yang dynamic between the two characters was palpable and almost believable: Krystle was a substantive, good person you genuinely liked who was being targeted by her husband's jealous ex-wife, Alexis, a mysterious, sophisticated, stunning-looking, criminal personality who must have God-knows-what in her shadowy background and for whom normal standards of moral behavior simply didn't apply -- at least in her own mind. That made Alexis slightly creepy. But after the show itself decided to go as campy as Alexis, she suddenly seemed like everybody else, because everybody else was suddenly like Alexis... Or kinda. Everybody was now a bit loopy and acted loopy, so Alexis was only different in that she was dressed a little more exotically and delivered the most insults. To me, this was deadly for the show. And, with the static acting directive added at around the same time, Krystle became a squealy, squeaky stock character you no longer felt anything about (much less sympathy). This eliminated the metaphoric, almost biblical, two-sides-of-everywoman aspect of Season 2 (even though the show seemed to still think it was doing this) and, afterward, nothing really quite worked, as if the series was about nothing anymore other than sequins literally. Should DYNASTY have kept its camp elements mostly constrained to Alexis, while not necessarily shying away from Adam's own original, wounded criminality and Fallon's original sarcastic bite (both of which were also lost in the series' quick slide into total camp)? And the trademark fashions, put-downs and feminine fisticuffs could have bloody-well continued. In the beginning, Krystle was kind of regal and poetic -- and the perfect counterbalance to Alexis' grasping sociopath. But before long, Krystle began shrieking and living out The Perils of Pauline to Alexis' Wicked Witch of The West. And everyone began acting as loopy as Alexis. So the whole thing soon become a tired cartoon. Certain characters and corners of the show should have remained grounded. That way, Alexis would have remained kind of creepy in contrast just as she should have, the viewer not quite knowing what she was capable of.