'Buh--wha?
Jun. 8th, 2010 12:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shipperxhttp://popwatch.ew.com/2010/06/08/true-blood-stephen-moyer-big-valley-double/
Which begs the question of who in the hell are they going to cast to play Barbara effing Stanwyck's role?
One would assume (If they are keeping any physical similarities from the series) that Moyer would be either Nick or Jared (He might pull off Nick appearance-wise, but I'd think he'd fit a Jared-like personality. I could kind of see him as Jared). He looks nothing at all like blonde Lee Majors circa whatever 60s/70s years or whatever that The Big Valley was on (my only memories of the show are endless re-runs.)
Err... am somewhat embarrassed that I remember this much about The Big Valley.
ETA: Should've read the rest of the article. They don't give the name of the character but by description, yep. He's definitely cast as Jared.
And... yeah. Still embarrassed that I remember all of that. It was just that The Big Valley was in constant after school re-run rotation with Star Trek TOS, Little House on the Prairie, Bewitched, Brady Bunch, and Gilligan's Island when I was a kid. Hey, we only had 3 channels! Sooner or later you watched it all!
It was only a matter of time before the insane popularity of HBO’s True Blood earned its cast some big-screen love, and today news broke that Stephen Moyer — the show’s leading vamp, Bill, and real-life fiancé of co-star Anna Paquin — would grace the silver screen in not one, but two upcoming film projects: The adaptation of TV series The Big Valley ...
Buh-wha? The Big Valley is going to be a movie? Buh-wha? How's that going to work? The only real identifiable storyline that I can remember was Heath's and the hints of possible incest with Heath/Audra (funny what storylines stick with us from stuff we watched in our childhood.) And boy was Barbara Stanwyck's matriarch surprisingly okay with her dead, beloved husband's bastard showing up (at an age somewhere BETWEEN the ages of her own children!) and giving him 1/4 share of the family ranch...
Which begs the question of who in the hell are they going to cast to play Barbara effing Stanwyck's role?
One would assume (If they are keeping any physical similarities from the series) that Moyer would be either Nick or Jared (He might pull off Nick appearance-wise, but I'd think he'd fit a Jared-like personality. I could kind of see him as Jared). He looks nothing at all like blonde Lee Majors circa whatever 60s/70s years or whatever that The Big Valley was on (my only memories of the show are endless re-runs.)
Err... am somewhat embarrassed that I remember this much about The Big Valley.
ETA: Should've read the rest of the article. They don't give the name of the character but by description, yep. He's definitely cast as Jared.
When the actor begins filming Valley next month, he won’t be too far from his day job — he’ll be shooting in Louisiana just a stone’s throw away from the True Blood set. In the film, a remake of the 1960s ABC series, Moyer will play the attorney son in a family of ranchers in 19th century California. Jessica Lange, who steps into the series’ Barbara Stanwyck role, will play the matriarch of the Barkley family.
Strange that they would film this in Louisiana rather than California. (And Jessica Lange = Barbara Stanwyk??! WTF?!) And now I wonder who is playing Heath. Heath, the poor bastard angsty-orphaned son, was always my favorite. And... yeah. Still embarrassed that I remember all of that. It was just that The Big Valley was in constant after school re-run rotation with Star Trek TOS, Little House on the Prairie, Bewitched, Brady Bunch, and Gilligan's Island when I was a kid. Hey, we only had 3 channels! Sooner or later you watched it all!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-06-08 06:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-08 07:46 pm (UTC)Backstory was that Stanwyck's husband (never seen) had left her and their two sons in the East when he came West during the Gold Rush to make their fortune (leaving her raising their sons on her own). Patriarch made a crap ton of money, bought a sprawling ranch in California not too far from San Francisco, and eventually sent for his wife and sons (Nick and Jared) so that they could enjoy the fruits of his labor. They then had a daughter (Audra).
The series began not too long after the father's death when a young 20-something man (Heath) shows up during the dispensation of the patriarch's will, claiming to be the late patriarch's illegitimate son from the patriarch's years in the gold mining camps. The uber-wealthy family is stunned and goes into insta-denial as Heath's story was that not only had the dead patriarch gotten his mom pregnant but had also abandoned him as a child so as to return to his 'real' family. This pretty much shattered the myth of "the great father and husband" that the rest of the family had constructed around the (mostly absent) patriarch.
The children all fly into "He's an imposter!" rages, each trying to prove that Heath is lying. (The most memorable of these efforts being Audra (a young Linda Evans aka Krystal Carrington from Dynasty), who figured that she'd seduce Heath, thus proving that he wasn't her brother because he wouldn't dare have sex with his sister! Erm... yeah. She was kind of sheltered and didn't fully think that one through. Needless to say, it didn't work and Heath was kinda grossed out.) The two sons also took their chances at discrediting Heath's claims.
Meanwhile, the matriarch/Barbara Stanwyck was more adult and thoughtful and reluctantly lent more credence to Heath's tale than her children could tolerate. (She was less shocked --though still hurt -- by her husband's infidelity than horrified by the realization that her husband abandonned a -- much less his-- child in a mining camp (which were notoriously awful).
To her children's horror, Mom decided to consider that Heath's claim might be true.
Heath, who has long held a huge chip on his shoulder about his father's rich "real" family is taken aback by Stanwyck's character's reaction. Between her showing unexpected kindness and the three adult kids throwing hissyfits both individually and collectively, he decides to drop his claim, both out of compassion for the matriarch and anger at the siblings who he thought were complete snots. (Although really we're to think they're all the good guys).
Throw in some ranchers vs. railroad territory wars for some action/danger that causes Barkelys to band together and for Heath to display some heroics and it's eventually decided/revealed (I don't really remember how his claims were verified) that Heath had indeed been telling the truth about his past. Heath is then accepted into the family and it was pretty much "storyline of the week" after that.
I would figure that if they were doing a movie they'd probably have to do the original Heath plot because nothing else would really work or make sense. After that it's pretty much really wealthy Bonanza-like Western only this time there was a matriarch and a rebellious daughter included instead of a patriarch/three sons/and allthe women die (as was the case with Bonanza).
It pretty much boiled down to "Good Family Defends Good Things in the Old West" but it did have the advantage of having a strong matriarch. It broke down character-wise as Jared was the smart, level-headed one that made the law do just things, Nick was the kick-ass one, Heath was the
romanticwounded woobie that all the girls fell for (even though none of their fathers ever approved of him) and Audra the beautiful/good daughter who male characters lusted after with Mom basically being the Queen that ruled them all.no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 03:18 am (UTC)I remember being simultaneously grossed out by Audra's "half-brother" test and impressed by the cleverness of it...and shocked when Heath actually said the word "bastard" on television! (That was, what, 1966 or '67? Cussin' wasn't usually allowed on the air back then!) I'd also get tickled by the incorrect fashions of Victoria and Audra. They routinely wore 1960s clothes and hairdos that were wildly inappropriate for the 1870s setting and would have gotten them branded as whores or psychos in reality.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 04:01 am (UTC)And I did remember the disappearing baby brouther. Reminds me of the old Bobby Martin joke on "All My Children" where Bobby went on some ski trip ... and never came back!
I think there was an older brother on Happy Days that did the same thing.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 04:20 am (UTC)the old Bobby Martin joke on "All My Children" where Bobby went on some ski trip ... and never came back!
LMAO!
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 04:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 05:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-10 01:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-08 10:05 pm (UTC)2.They cast Jessica Lange in Barbara Stanwyk's role?
O_o
I just....
I mean....
Yeah, I got nothing.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 05:05 am (UTC)Why is Moyer getting all these movie jobs? I mean, he's OK, but really. Skarsgard and Trammel are much better actors.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 02:04 pm (UTC)I just ... whenever I think of Jessica Lange, I just cannot get away from the image of a barely dressed woman saying, "Did you ever meet anyone before whose life was saved by "Deep Throat"?
I have no issue with Moyer's portrayal of Bill Compton. I think he does a pretty decent Southern accent-much better than David Boreanaz' as Liam.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 02:24 pm (UTC)And Jessica Lange probably wouldn't be disastrous in the role or anything (I'm primarily boggled that Hollywood thinks this is a movie that needs to be made. On the other hand they just released Sex and the City II so I shouldn't be surprised). But it is a tad difficult for me to see Jessica Lange bring the same sort of energy to the role as Barbara Stanwyck did. The role could easily go quite soft and lady-like and Barbara Stanwyck being cast in it helped to undercut that. I doubt that Lange will. Her persona/energy is quite different.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 02:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 02:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-08 11:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 03:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 04:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 04:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 03:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 04:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-06-09 02:10 pm (UTC)