Dark Shadows: Resurrection - Afterword 4

Yay! You reached the end of my story! I hope you enjoyed it, and felt like you were reading some transcripts of a long lost year of Dark Shadows that sadly never made it into syndication!

Julia or Angelique?
Ah yes, the eternal quesion that faces all DS fans: "Who should Barnabas wind up with?" It seems that the answer tends to fall down gender lines - a majority of men say "Angelique" and a majority of women say "Julia." Well, your burly all he-man Troll must admit that I, too, see Barnabas more with Angelique. Now before you dismiss me as just another guy chasing a pretty young thing instead of a more mature yet totally devoted woman, I will make the argument that Angelique is NOT a pretty young thing in the vein (pardon the expression!) of Josette, who turns out to be quite a bland character when we finally meet her in 1795 despite the "great lady" build up - or Roxanne, who really has no personality when Barnabas falls for her - she's just laying there nearly dead! Angelique, on the other hand, might be a megababe and all, but she's very smart and challenges Barnabas constantly. In fact, perhaps the character that comes closest to her is the Julia we first meet who tries to control Barnabas through her science, keeping Vicky away from him while she jealously administers her treatments. But yes, men are all looking at Angelique and thinking "Yeah, but she'd never be that evil to ME since I'm just so wonderful and I'd know how to handle her! And I'd let her do all the witchcraft she wanted and get all the fun stuff that idiot Darren Stevens passed on!" What can I say? Men are saps.

But I think as far as the show was concerned, Barnabas was destined to wind up with Julia. (Ladies may cheer). By the end of the 1840 story arc, Josette was only a memory, and since they knew they weren't going to return to the "regular" DS plotline once Frid ruled out playing Barnabas anymore, they went ahead and resolved the Barnabas/Angelique story by killing her off, leaving Barnabas with Julia in the present. If we assume that Frid had NOT decided to give up playing Barnabas, I for one think that the 1840 plotline would have unfolded quite differently, perhaps more along the 1897 story lines of Angelique as helper to Barnabas, but without any romantic resolution.

So, I gave in and found a way for Barnabas to finally realize it's been Julia all along. But don't expect me to write any love scenes between Barnabas and Julia because in all honesty, the prospect makes me nauseous. (Ladies may throw rotten fruit at yours truly).

What else might have happened?
Assuming the show really did continue back in 1971, we can agree that many of my casting choices would not have been made. Obviously, Sharon Smythe would be too old to play Sarah and perhaps another little girl would've been cast in the role had they decided to bring the character back (though this was clearly not in their plans). I always regretted that that Sarah story was dropped, since she plays such an important role in the first Barnabas story and her affect on Barnabas' character is so strong that there's all sorts of possibilities there. I also don't think Mitch Ryan and Joel Crothers would come back for such brief roles as I gave them. And even though here in my little virtual world, I gave into Alexandra Moltke's desires (and there's a straight line) to make Vicky more intelligent, as well as give her the chance to play a villain in the 1897PT story, she was done with acting in 1971. BUT - if the show really did decide to bring back the character of Vicky Winters, the blatantly obvious casting choice is Kate Jackson, who had no 1971 character to play, had already been established as a love interest of characters played both by Selby and Frid, looks right for the part, and also played a governess! And if they brought Vicky back played by Jackson, a likely plot would have had Barnabas and Quentin fighting over her, no doubt with Angelique involved as well. Something tells me that Vicky's parentage, forgotten since 1966, would surface again. I inserted it (as well as lots of other stuff) to satisfy fans.

I also think that they would've pulled a "Ned Stuart" casting wise and given Chris Pennock a different character to play in 1971, had they returned to the present. Sebastian was too strange a character to keep around once the Roxanne story was over with, and most likely after his performance as Gabriel in 1840, they would have found some way to give him a more substantial role in the plot. The one thing I did (twice) that I think would've happened is casting James Storm as whoever the modern day villain of the plotline would be. He's got a great voice for evil, doesn't he?

If I Ran The Zoo....
If I could go back and alter elements of the show as it exists, there are a few things I'd do. Obviously there's the ironing out of conflicts in story definitions - think how many different versions of the Jeremiah/Josette story we hear before we actually see it in 1795! Imagine how much more interesting the whole introduction to Barnabas would be if there were little mentions of his origins as we know them... the character would have been even more fascinating, and his behavior towards Julia, another intelligent strong women with a power over him, would have had a lot more depth to it. There was also the problem of what to do with 1897 Quentin once he got back to 1969, but hopefully I made up for that with this story. But you have to wonder if he was so close to Jamison, why he doesn't return to Collinwood sometime earlier, to check on his favorite nephew...

... but why waste time nitpicking? I'll start to sound like the Comic Book Guy on "The Simpsons," unless of course I already do!

Thanks for reading! It's a wonderful thing to write for an appreciative audience.