Pam Ewing is -sob- DEAD!

Ah Pam, if only!

Ah Pam, if only!

(Please note: spoilers follow) (This is a long one, so please bear with me)

After all the hype and the hope, the dream of having Pam Ewing (Mrs Bobby Ewing no.1) back on Dallas ended last night with the character’s, seemingly permanent, death confirmed.
Though admittedly just about anything can happen on a soap opera (Fallon’s abduction by aliens anyone?) it does seem that this time (rather unlike Bobby’s ‘death’ on the original Dallas) it’s for good.
In episode 14 we see Christopher go to the house in Zurich where he believes he will find his mother. Instead he finds Dr. David Gordon -the plastic surgeon who worked on Pam on Dallas 1.0 following her horrific car crash-Dr Gordon tells Chris that his mother isn’t home, but he hears a noise and barges in anyway, hastily followed by the doctor who really does almost nothing to stop him.
On entering the kitchen Chris finds an unknown woman doing a spot of washing up. ‘You’re not my mother!’ Chris exclaims (more for our benefit than his-just so there’s no confusion over a recast).
Dr. Gordon sits him down and proceeds to tell him a pack of lies (unethical surely?) saying that he and Pam fell in love and got married following his surgery on her (No way! I was thinking at this point). He also says that she never wants to see Christopher again (ouch!)
Anyway, Chris leaves very upset. He gets a telephone call the next day saying that his mother is clearing out her bank account. Racing to the bank he sees Dr Gordon leaving the premises with a woman in a 1920s style hat. Thinking she’s Pam he approaches saying ‘mom?’ and spins her round, but of course it’s not Pam but the same lady who was doing the washing up (cleaning, fraud, forgery, is there no end to her talents?)
Back at the house Dr Gordon lays the whole story on the line. Pam (and I still can’t quite believe it) died in July, 1989 of pancreatic cancer.
Dr Gordon told Chris that she did love him and Bobby and did want to get back to Dallas to see them. The reason she was in Abu Dhabi, he says, was so that she could try an experimental treatment which didn’t work.
The woman, who turns out to be a a nurse who helped Pam, Karina, then gives Christopher a copy of Pam’s will, in which she leaves him her third share of Barnes Global (wow! Pam was psychic, though Barnes Global NEVER existed in 1989 she knew she’d one day have a third share of it to leave her son. I’m impressed, I must get in touch for those Lottery numbers)
Cliff supposedly knew all along (Obviously nonsense, he would NEVER ever, ever do something like that to Bobby or Christopher especially in 1989 when he was close to both). He apparently (rubbish!) did it so that he could retain control of Pam’s shares of their mother’s fictional company Barnes -cough never existed cough- Global.
Christopher leaves and goes back to Dallas. When he arrives it’s hugs all round from Bobby and Ann (now out of Pam’s shadow).
Sue Ellen offers her condolences to Chris and Bobby to which Bobby replies ‘Thanks but I mourned Pam a long time ago’ Eh? No he didn’t! He’d accepted that she’d moved on with her life and didn’t want to see him or Christopher but he didn’t know she was dead, he had no reason to think she even could be and now he knows the truth, that she did love him all along, he still acts like a person with no feelings-sorry, I don’t buy it.
personally, and I know it isn’t popular with everybody, I would have liked to have seen a recast Pam rather than her being dead, (I actually thought the woman in the bank was Lesley Ann Warren-bizarre I know) but I can see why it’s been done and, for once, I think the producers have done the character justice and it makes sense. In a way the mistakes made by the production team on Dallas 1.0 have been reversed (Pam not dying in the car accident because they didn’t want to kill off the character, supposedly in case Victoria Principal decided to come back and they couldn’t afford to have two ‘dreams’).
So on the one hand it feels fitting that the character, though dead and I’m not sure any Pam fans really wanted that to be the outcome, did love Bobby and Christopher and would have returned to Dallas had she not died. On the other hand with Pam dead, Katherine dead and JR dead-what’s left to look forward to? When Larry Hagman died and I read some people saying they were going to stop watching, I thought ‘but there’s still a chance Pam could return!’ now that, it seems, that won’t be happening I can’t see any reason to continue to watch either, but in closing I would just like to say, RIP Pam Ewing, we’ll -choke- miss you!

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Pam Ewing is -sob- DEAD!

  1. Gary Warner says:

    I agree with you, it was nice to see at least one Dallas 1.0 Character given “character justice”. I truly believe the woman would turn out to be Katherine. Pam had to kill her off in order for Ann, as you said, to get out from under her shadow. The season finale was wonderfully written and there was some great acting. However, I kept thinking that they are preparing to either end Dallas all together or begin focusing entirely on the Dallas 2.0 characters in season 3. Let’s hope that the Dallas Executive producer Cynthia Cidre spends sometime watching more of the original Dallas before writing the story line for season 3.

    • theewing says:

      Hi Gary,

      Thanks for the comment. I thought too that if the woman wasn’t Pam then surely she’d be Katherine, it was a shame she wasn’t either. I agree, I also thought it felt like an ending, nothing really seemed to be set up for next season, if it happens, there was the Elena thing (and maybe it just felt like this to me, but I felt like it wasn’t the start of anything). I hope so too re: Cynthia Cidre and watching more original Dallas. It would be great if more characters are done proper justice as I believe Pam Ewing was. Though I’d still quite like her to return if it were only possible.

    • Mike says:

      Hell my friend…i just read an article on TV Guide about Cliff’s character in this new Dallas. TV Guide asked Cidre the following:

      TV Guide Magazine: Some feel Cliff Barnes, who was sympathetic on the original series, was the victim of character assassination over the past two seasons. He had his daughter marry Christopher as a way of infiltrating the Ewing family. He had a hand in killing his daughter’s babies. And he kept news of sister Pam’s death a secret. Why make a former underdog so vile?
      Cidre: I had a theory that in the years that had passed, Cliff had not gotten over the feud and it had gotten worse. He had become slightly Howard Hughes-ish; that he’d crossed into madness. There was a certain goofiness to him before. Once Larry passed, we needed a villain and Harris Ryland wasn’t involved in a blood feud. Ken Kercheval, by the way, has never been happier with his material. He’s been fabulous.

      • theewing says:

        Hi Mike,

        Good to hear from you. I read the interview the other day and found it v interesting, especially what she said about the portrait (I’ve put an update onto my Jock portrait post). But even if the heirs of Jim Davis, for whatever reason, don’t want the portrait used and personally I can’t understand why they wouldn’t, why can’t a new portrait of him just be painted? Surely they can’t own the rights to his image as he’s in that eyesore portrait in Dallas 2.0 in a sideways profile with Miss Ellie.
        There’s still couple of things I don’t agree with, one is that Ms. Cidre’s theory of Cliff is wrong. He wouldn’t go back to the feud, for what reason? It can’t be the whole Digger thing-he’d already admitted to Miss Eliie that Digger was wrong for starting the feud, he asked for forgiveness, he admitted he was wrong. I think more likely is something I read just before the new series started when, I think it was Cynthia but I could be wrong, said that when they asked people what they wanted to see supposedly the feud was top and so they brought it back. What’s most annoying is they could easily have come up with something else to explain why he’d gone back to the fued, but they simply chose to toss out established history and make Cliff into someone he never was & never would be. As I’ve said before, I could have accepted that he went back to the feud if there was agood reason (there wasn’t) I could understand it if he was still just feuding with JR (he wasn’t it was the whole Ewing family again), but greater and greater liberties have been taken with a well loved character and he’s been ruined. I’m sure Ken Kercheval is happy with his material, it must be an actor’s dream to get to play such a role. It doesn’t alter the fact though that it’s a betrayal to the fans to ask us to swallow something which patently isn’t true and believe a character has totally changed beyond all recognition. That’s what I think of it anyway.

  2. Mike says:

    I also just read in the interview something that will answer your question about the portrait of Jock:

    Apparently, Cidre confirmed with TV Guide that the children of Jim Davis won’t permit the show to use the portrait, so that answers that question.

  3. Michael Vander Kley says:

    Great article!! Thanks for writing this!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s