[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement:
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 18:18:21 05/22/13 Wed
Author: Jarrod
Subject: Possible thumbs down on 'Forever'
I have been mulling over what to write about this two-parter. I hadn't seen it since it was on the Family Channel in the late 80s. I remembered certain scenes-- mostly the gorgeous scenery and the house fire. But I had forgotten specific details about the courtship and marriage and then the death of Joe's wife. It does not work for me. It's too rushed, even with 100 minutes. She should have been introduced and the courtship and marriage should have been spread out over the first half of the season, with her eventual killing later on. The reason it doesn't work as it is now, is because we have not gotten attached to her enough for her death to really matter to us. It matters to Joe, and Joe matters to us, but we have no identification or empathy about her plight, because she's new and quickly written off. Also, I found it too obvious and cliched the way there was one scene after another showing us how in love they were with no real tension or conflict-- with the only realization being that this was just a set-up to have her pulled away and heartbreak, Joe's heartbreak shoved before us. That is not genuine drama to me, that is a master plot manipulation, at the expense of character. There is also quite a bit of violence in this episode, especially by Bonanza standards, done for shock value. And after Alice's death, I felt that Landon really overacted. It seemed strange that he was pounding on the burning house as the flames raged and we could see that he had protective mitts on his hands. Where did he find time to put something on his hands-- and then after the fire, he is wrapped as though he has been burned badly anyway. This did not make sense to me. The beard attached to his face seemed phony, even if it wasn't, to simulate that he had been grieving for awhile. And the scene where Joe and Ben cry in each other's arms seems out of character, at least for Ben. I just felt like the whole thing was some grand orchestration of Landon's imagination to make us feel love and feel rage and feel this great big powerful torrent of human emotion. But again, since we did not really have ample time to get to know Alice, and since her death is not referenced in later episodes, it all seems rather futile. And also, didn't it seem strange that besides the brother, there was no mention of her family-- why her parents were not included at the wedding or why she didn't tell Joe more about her family and her background? Again, she was not supposed to matter to us as much as Landon's plotting, and she was simply cardboard easily scorched in a fire and turned to ashes quickly forgotten.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Replies:
[>
Re: Michael Landon on critics... -- Rick, 00:54:24 05/23/13 Thu [1]
"What the hell do they do know anyway?"
R-
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: Michael Landon on critics... -- Jarrod, 11:02:35 05/23/13 Thu [1]
Well, some critics can provide understandings of what the artists attempted to do, but did not ultimately succeed at doing. And in many cases, a writer-director-performer like Landon may not have been fully conscious of what his efforts signified. Some critics can be critical and provide illumination and still be fans. That would be me. It distressed me when I looked at tv.com and saw that 'Forever' had the highest viewer ratings of any episode of S14. I think that is because this episode was highly publicized when it first aired and it has been discussed frequently over the years. I made a point of not including it my Top Five of S14, because I really do think it falls short of the mark in many areas. The story is too rushed, as I pointed out earlier, and its too manipulative to be taken casually for decent entertainment. Landon had better output on Bonanza in this writer's opinion, and better output on his later series. In my Top Five, I mentioned 'The Hunter.' But of course, that was a remake of the 1933 classic film THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME. So we cannot give Landon 100% credit for that one, though he demonstrates considerable skill reworking the concept for an hour-long western series.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: Michael Landon on critics... -- Richard L., 13:26:18 05/23/13 Thu [1]
In this case, "Forever" was the first episode after Dan Blocker's death, and Bonanza fans were somewhat in shock, as I recall. The episode was something of a catharsis for the fans. The emotional scene between Joe and Ben was probably meant to be about Hoss' (Dan's) death, given that the viewer had just "met" Alice Harper the week before.
Alice, Little Joe's girlfriend/wife, was a more independent, sensible woman, and a little less "glamorous" than his usual girlfriends on the show. Bonnie Bedelia would have made a very good ongoing character on the show.
"Forever" was probably the right time and place to expand Bonanza into a show about Little Joe's new wife and child. That may have been the preferred move after Hoss' death, rather than make the episode about death and leaving that large void in the show.
Joe's character became more serious after Hoss' death, and he was ready to become "part Little Joe, part Charles Ingalls." Evidently, Ingalls was the role that Michael Landon really wanted to play. Too bad they didn't do it right then and there.
I thought the 2 episodes were well done, but yes, the whole thing was rushed along. I suppose they could have done 4 or 5 parts as they did with Adam and Laura Dayton.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: Michael Landon on critics... -- Jarrod, 18:39:06 05/23/13 Thu [1]
It's hart to imagine 'Forever' with Hoss. Dan really didn't do romantic storylines much and I don't think it would have been very convincing. This does seem like a Joe story. If it had been made with Hoss, the leading actress would have to be someone else, because I do not think Dan and Bonnie Bedelia would have had much chemistry.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Hoss could be very romantic -- SWC, 20:34:06 05/23/13 Thu [1]
Check out "The Newcomers (9/26/59) and "The Tall Stranger" (1/7/62). There are probably others but those two stick out. Dan Blocker was a fine actor and surely could have done "Forever".
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: Hoss could be very romantic -- Richard, 09:48:33 05/24/13 Fri [1]
Hoss did a great job in "The Tall Stranger," especially when he went after con man who married his girlfriend (Kathie Browne).
[ Edit | View ]
[>
Re: Possible thumbs down on 'Forever' -- SWC, 11:59:35 05/23/13 Thu [1]
I just felt that after all these years of heartbreak, the Cartwright clan ought to have a little happiness. The family graveyard is too crowded as it is. Why not let Little Joe have a wife?
[ Edit | View ]
[>
Re: Possible thumbs down on 'Forever' -- C.J., 09:37:37 06/21/14 Sat [1]
I've seen Forever only once.....and once was quite enough. It was over the top, gruesomely violent and seemed to me like nothing more than a ML showcase. Totally unnecessary. Definite thumbs down on Forever. IMO the worst BZ ever. It was a mistake that none of the Cartwrights seemed not to be allowed to marry and live happily ever after.
[ Edit | View ]
