My Thoughts on Dallas TNT

I don't normally do this. I don't watch much TV apart from the news, as I am a total junkie. But I began watching the new incarnation of the much loved 80's soap Dallas and now that it's been cancelled I thought I would share my thoughts.

First let me start by saying that I think the cast did a great job. It was great to see our beloved Sue Ellen, Bobby and yes, JR before we lost Larry Hagman. The new cast held their own and some gave standout performances in the show's three season run. Josh Henderson, who played John Ross, JR and Sue Ellen's son, displayed quite a range and his scenes with Linda Gray were terrific. Equally talented Julie Gonzalo, who played Pamela Rebecca Barnes, daughter of Ewing rival Cliff Barnes, gave moving performances. Especially when Pamela lost her babies and Emmy winner Judith Light stole nearly every scene as Judith Ryland, Bobby's wife's ex-mother-in-law. Which bring me to Ann Ewing, played beautifully by Brenda Strong, of Desperate Housewives fame. Perhaps having the biggest shoes to fill given the popularity of Bobby and Pam in the original, Strong surpassed expectations. But as wonderful as the cast was, the writing was not.

Showrunner Cynthia Cidre was at the helm of this effort and unfortunately, judging by the ratings, she failed. In 2012 Dallas TNT premiered to 7 million viewers. By the end of season 3 it had 1.7 million. A successful show does not bleed seventy five percent of it's audience. Cidre's first mistake was not watching the entire original series. She ignored the reunion movies, either by choice or by command. This made the idea that Christopher, Bobby's son, could marry his cousin and not even know who she was. Christopher and Pamela Rebecca knew each other in one of the movies. This also made it obvious to hard core fans who she was. Another mistake was insisting that the Ramos family lived at Southfork during the time of the original. Fans didn't like her messing with the backstory or trying to shoehorn them in. It would have been just as effective if they had changed the timeline of their coming to Southfork to the mid 90s. She also failed to establish Christopher and Elena Ramos as the new Bobby and Pam. She didn't even let them stay together. She also had gold in pairing John Ross with Pamela once she divorced Christopher. But instead of capitalizing on them as a power couple she had John Ross immediately start cheating with Emma Ryland, long lost daughter of Ann Ewing. The fans hated that and her reasons? Henderson and Emma Bell had so much chemistry it would be crazy to keep them apart. They'd had one scene together and didn't even speak. But she ignored what worked for whatever reason. Bobby and Ann were supposed to be the backbone of the show. But by season 3 they were treated like garbage. Ann had lied again and Bobby acted like a hypocrite calling her out since he had secrets of his own. This is the couple who are the backbone of the show? She became nothing but a doormat and started making goo goo eyes at her ex-husband, Harris Ryland, all because he worked for the CIA (another absurd plot). Case in point, a scene at Southfork after Emma had come back when Ann had kicked her out. Harris tells Ann he had come there originally to get Emma to come home with him but decided against it saying she needs her mother now. What is Ann's response to the man who kidnapped her daughter and let her think she could be dead? I'll do my best. Instead of telling him to go to hell for and that "she's needed me for the past twenty years, Harris" and giving him a slap across the face. Total doormat. She doesn't stand her ground with Emma and just lets her come back. She takes Bobby's crap and cries for the umpteenth time in the mid season finale then goes whining to Harris and kisses him. Then comes the trashy threesome scene with John Ross, Emma and Pamela. Why on earth does Pamela go there to do this? So she can vomit on them and ruin sex for them. How stupid is that? Cidre has no idea how to write truly strong women. They may start out that way but they always regress. Fans don't want to see threesomes, people dressed up in dog suits or chopped off hands in a box. Dallas is supposed to be about family but there was little to no character development or meaningful interaction between characters. Just on to the next "delicious" plot twists that were just dumb. Did Bobby and Ann have a heart to heart after she and Emma were rescued? Of course not, they just said let's start fresh. Why did Ann lie about kissing Harris and why did she keep Emma and John Ross's affair a secret? We don't know because they didn't talk about it. What about her relationship with Emma? Well there really wasn't one. I was looking forward to meaningful mother/daughter moments but all we got was Emma becoming the whore of Southfork. She slept with Drew, Bo (most likely) and John Ross. A mother and daughter reunited after twenty years should have a lot to say. I really believe Cidre doesn't know how to write anything meaningful and apparently neither do any of her team of writers. They would rather use stupid plot twists than write anything of substance. The closest they came was Sue Ellen drinking again. Gray and Henderson were terrific. But fans didn't want Sue Ellen drinking again. They wanted her strong and in control.

There is a massive campaign to save the show and have another network pick it up. But with Cidre at the helm it would be just more of the same.  I have been so conflicted about the show. I wanted to love it and there were moments that were good. JR up to his old tricks in season 1. Ann standing up to Harris to protect her family. Sue Ellen in top form running for Governor but had to lose because Cidre suddently realized if she won she would have to be in Austin and couldn't be in Dallas. She didn't know that beforehand? Maybe another network will pick it up. But if it doesn't, I hope the cast moves on to great things. They certainly deserved better than what they got on Dallas.

The Hobby Lobby Fallacy

Yesterday The Supreme Court ruled that closely held corporations like Hobby Lobby cannot be forced to violate their religious freedom by providing contraceptives that they deem violate their conscience. Such as the morning after pill. To hear the mainstream liberal media tell it women everywhere are being denied the care they so desperately need. First off, it has been stated again and again that Hobby Lobby pays for sixteen different types of contraceptives out of the twenty available on the market. So if the women that work there can't find something acceptable I question exactly what they are doing. Yes there are other reasons than birth control that women use these contraceptives, such as to help prevent ovarian cysts. I happen to take the pill for hormone replacement. But that doesn't change the fact that you can get these free at Planned Parenthood or for about $9 at any pharmacy even without insurance. I happen to think women should take responsibility for their sex life and if you want to have sex, pay for your protection yourself. I don't expect my employer to pay for my decisions in that regard. Contrary to what liberals would have you think birth control is not healthcare not is it a right. Unless we're talking about the other above reasons mentioned why a woman might need it. I thought the feminist movement was all about women taking care of themselves. Now they want someone to pay for their birth control? Either the government or their employer. I find this ridiculous. This goes against everything these feminists claim to be for. Didn't they march for equal rights? Now they want to be taken care of by the government or their employer. This is not life sustaining medication. In most cases this is birth control women take in order to prevent pregnancy. That is not someone else's responsibility to pay for. I have yet to hear any woman who works at Hobby Lobby speak out and complain. This is another attempt to promulgate the War on Women narrative by democrats to paint conservatives as people who hate women. Well I wonder what the millions of conservative women like myself think about this. I happen to think women are more than their lady parts and it's time liberals stopped insulting them.

In Defense of Fathers

Since today is Father's Day I thought I would take this opportunity to write about fathers. My father died six years ago. I loved him and miss him. He wasn't perfect but he was my dad. I am fortunate to have an amazing stepdad in my life who I couldn't ask to be a better husband to my mom. But it seems increasingly in our post feminist/women's movement society that fathers and men in general are being marginalized. On Twitter staring on Friday there was a hashtag #EndFathersDay (there was also an end mothers day hashtag as well). This didn't necessarily surprise me but it did sadden me. Fathers are so important in their children's lives. Not just sons but daughters as well. Fathers have a responsibility to show their daughters how a man should treat them. A girl who grows up with a father who loves her and her mother is much less likely to end up in a bad relationship. Notice I didn't say it couldn't happen but she has a much healthier view of relationships and self respect. She will know that she deserves a man who will treat her like her father treats her mother and shouldn't that be positive? Now I know that not everyone has a good father. But this is not about how certain individuals behave. This is about a culture that doesn't seem to value the role of fathers and husbands for that matter. The feminist movement, which was supposed to be about empowering women, has become about devaluing men. This is a sad thing for our children and our society. I know some pretty great men from family to friends at my church and workplace. Hearing them talk about their kids you know how much they mean to them. God designed a certain role for men in the lives of their wives and children and it breaks my heart to see that mocked and devalued.

More Ramblings From A Contrary Girl

Have you every felt far from God? Have you ever felt that you can never live up to what you know God wants you to be?  Is this normal and how should you handle it? I really don't know the answer to that but I think most of us have been there. We try everyday to be hands and feet of Jesus so that people see Him and not us. I fail more than I succeed at that and I should not be ashamed to admit that. If we cannot admit our failings we will never get past them. I believe as women in the Body of Christ we should be able to lean on each other. We should be able to admit or fears, shortcomings and yes, sins, to one another without guilt and condemnation. But how often do we judge one another? Have you ever thought, well at least I haven't done what so and so has done. And we go on about our business feeling pretty good about ourselves. All the while God is screaming at us to stop with self righteous crap. We forget about the plank in our own eye and focus on the splinter in our sister's eye. Christian women come in all shapes and sizes. Some of us are single with no children (me) and others are married with young children, some with teens and others have grown children. There are also single moms, divorced women, widows, etc. In the secular there seems to be a divide between stay at home moms and those who work outside the home. We need to run as fast as we can from this in the church. Run from using the Bible as a way to bludgeon others because they made different choices than we did. Now, if we see a sister making some really bad choices that are leading her far from God and she's floundering, we should in love address it. But we need to stop the thinking that if someone makes a life choice we wouldn't make that they are wrong. God speaks to each of us individually as to what is the best decision we can make for ourselves or our family. Lavish love and grace on one another and remember no matter what our life circumstance, we are all running the race to win. Don't be a stumbling block to another. The prize is too great.

Ramblings from a Contrary Girl

So this is my blog. I decided to start this at the suggestion of my cousin. She thought my twitter handle 'Mary Quite Contrary' was clever and I should use it for a blog. I suppose she thought I had something to say. So here goes. I have a blog for politics so I really don't want to talk about that here. I would like this to be a place where women can come and talk about stuff we deal with. Whether we are single, married, kids or no kids. I only have a few stipulations: that discussions be respectful, no foul language but sarcasm is welcome :). For those of you who know me, you know I'm a Christian, so that will be a lot of what I write about and the perspective from which I write. I will probably just write what is on my mind at the time and I hope you will join in and tell me what you think. I want this to be a community of support, laughter and fun. So welcome aboard!