Remington Steele - General Discussion

[Aethera]

This topic replaces the old Remington Steele forum which has been vaulted at the location below:

http://forums.previously.tv/forum/539-remington-steele-v/

[WendyCR72]

I guess I'll be the first to break the new topic in. Hi, again! Gotta say, "Santa Claus Is Coming To Steele" is still a wonderful Christmas episode. Love Laura and Remington chatting about their disparate Christmas "celebrations" from their youths.

[BkWurm1]

And when she promises him a sled and he pulls her in for a kiss (while they are still being held hostage no less—such good multitaskers). Swoon.  

[WendyCR72]

On 1/2/2019 at 3:21 AM, BkWurm1 said:

And when she promises him a sled and he pulls her in for a kiss (while they are still being held hostage no less—such good multitaskers). Swoon.  

Swoon, indeed!

[Bastet]

I don't do swoon, but what I like best about that scene is how she just listens to his story.  She's starved for information about his past, but she doesn't ask any questions, just listens and then promises him a sled.

[WendyCR72]

By the way, if anyone here gets the channel, Efrem Zimbalist Jr. will appear in an old episode of Hunter, "Murder, He Wrote", at 9:00 p.m. ET on H&I. (Tonight, 01/05/2019)

[Calvada]

Decades is doing a weekend binge of Remington Steele.  Begins on Saturday July 6 at 1:00 pm eastern - 42 episodes of RS.  

[WendyCR72]

19 minutes ago, Calvada said:

Decades is doing a weekend binge of Remington Steele.  Begins on Saturday July 6 at 1:00 pm eastern - 42 episodes of RS.  

Yay!  🙂

[BettyHale]

I'm obviously late to the party, but if the conversation is still happening, I would be more than happy to join in. I'm rewatching episodes of Remington Steele a) because I've always loved the show and b) as a way of helping me cope with the pandemic. I'd forgotten just how young, and gorgeous both actors were in the 80's and what great chemistry those they had. I'm about half-way Season 3 and am taking my time re-watching the episodes, keeping in mind that I was not a fan of how they ended Season 3 and let's not even talk about how they ended Season 4. As far as I'm concerned, the last episode of Season 4 and all of Season 5 never happened. I don't know what the writers were thinking re-imagining or two favourite characters and then adding that ass Roselli. I hated, hated the character of Tony Roselli and don't want to see his character again. And I also hated what they did to RS and LH in those few episodes.  

Betty

 

[WendyCR72]

8 hours ago, BettyHale said:

I'm obviously late to the party, but if the conversation is still happening, I would be more than happy to join in. I'm rewatching episodes of Remington Steele a) because I've always loved the show and b) as a way of helping me cope with the pandemic. I'd forgotten just how young, and gorgeous both actors were in the 80's and what great chemistry those they had. I'm about half-way Season 3 and am taking my time re-watching the episodes, keeping in mind that I was not a fan of how they ended Season 3 and let's not even talk about how they ended Season 4. As far as I'm concerned, the last episode of Season 4 and all of Season 5 never happened. I don't know what the writers were thinking re-imagining or two favourite characters and then adding that ass Roselli. I hated, hated the character of Tony Roselli and don't want to see his character again. And I also hated what they did to RS and LH in those few episodes.  

Betty

 

Welcome to Primetimer, @BettyHale! 🙂 And I so hear you about Tony Roselli. UGH. No need for him whatsoever.

[BettyHale]

Hi WendyCR72: thank you for the welcome. I'm not sure if this is the section of the forum where I can comment/vent about the series, but I'll go ahead until someone tells me otherwise. As I said in my earlier post, I'm finding that re-watching Remington Steele is making me feel very nostalgic for the 80's and that's saying something. I mean I'm actually now thinking that the Reagan era wasn't too bad:) 

As I said, I'm about half-way through Season 3 of the series, and am falling in love all over again with Steele, Laura and Mildred. After reading some of the previous posts here, I went ahead and watched the Steele in the Chips episode now instead of when it was first broadcast and I have to say I wasn't overly fond of it. It felt like it was a 'filler' episode; it didn't really do anything to move the Steele/Holt relationship along and it wasn't really much of case either. In fact, it sort of felt that, in this episode, the relationship was pushed back somewhat. In any case, I've watched it, I'm forgetting it ever took place, and am now ready to concentrate on other episodes of Season 3.

By the way, you probably know this already, I'm watching the episodes on the dailymotion site even though I have all 4.5/5 seasons on dvd. I'm finding that by watching the series on dailymotion, I can more easily pick and choose which episode I'm watching. 

Betty

 

[WendyCR72]

8 hours ago, BettyHale said:

Hi WendyCR72: thank you for the welcome. I'm not sure if this is the section of the forum where I can comment/vent about the series, but I'll go ahead until someone tells me otherwise

This is indeed the spot, so you're fine. And just to let you know, there is no need to sign your posts as the username is next to every post. Have fun!  🙂

[BettyHale]

That's great, thanks. 🙂

[Thomas Crown]

On 8/11/2020 at 9:53 AM, BettyHale said:

I'm obviously late to the party, but if the conversation is still happening, I would be more than happy to join in. I'm rewatching episodes of Remington Steele a) because I've always loved the show and b) as a way of helping me cope with the pandemic. I'd forgotten just how young, and gorgeous both actors were in the 80's and what great chemistry those they had. I'm about half-way Season 3 and am taking my time re-watching the episodes, keeping in mind that I was not a fan of how they ended Season 3 and let's not even talk about how they ended Season 4. As far as I'm concerned, the last episode of Season 4 and all of Season 5 never happened. I don't know what the writers were thinking re-imagining or two favourite characters and then adding that ass Roselli. I hated, hated the character of Tony Roselli and don't want to see his character again. And I also hated what they did to RS and LH in those few episodes.  

Betty

 

Hi Betty 🙂

Although it's been a while since I've seen the show, I do remember enjoying very much Remington Steele along with its cousin Moonlighting.  1980s detective and P.I. shows were the best IMO.  Back then I thought it was great that RS would go around referencing classic movies in each episode when trying to solve a crime.  

I also remember reading a few years ago about a potential reboot/spinoff featuring the daughter of RS and LH becoming a detective.  I guess it never went anywhere past the discussion stage.  

 

[BettyHale]

Hi Thomas Crown: (love the reference:)

One of the things that first drew me to this series, outside of the fact that Brosnan and Zimbalist were both so good-looking, was the idea that Laura ran the agency and the fact that Steele was someone who loved old movies and referenced them whenever he could. Since I am a huge fan of classic movies, he had me at "Death Takes a Holiday, Evelyn Venable, Paramount, 1934." Don't get me wrong, I very much appreciated that Steele happened to be played by the very beautiful-looking Mr. Brosnan, but just based on the fact that the character loved movies, he could have looked like James Cagney, and I would have loved him.

I also remember reading that they were looking at rebooting the series and making it a 'comedy' with the lead being the daughter of Laura and Remington and am glad that it never took off. In case the people behind the idea of a reboot had forgotten, the whole 'hook' of the show was the two leads. The chemistry between Brosnan and Zimbalist was off the chart (not including that horror show of the fifth season), which was magic and something that doesn't happen every day. Besides, I appreciated that the show was acted by adults who played smart and witty adults. Adults who led a somewhat sophisticated life-style, which I appreciated then, as I do now.

At this point, I have watched the series up until almost the end of Season 3, but have gone back and forth between favourite episodes in Season 1, 2 and 4. I find episodes like "To Stop A Steele", in Season 1, or  "Have I got a Steele for You" in Season 3, funny and romantic. In both those episodes we have Laura and Steele actually acknowledging their feelings and acting on them, which is always fun to watch. Do you have any favourite episodes or seasons?

 

[Thomas Crown]

On 8/28/2020 at 2:24 PM, BettyHale said:

Hi Thomas Crown: (love the reference:)

One of the things that first drew me to this series, outside of the fact that Brosnan and Zimbalist were both so good-looking, was the idea that Laura ran the agency and the fact that Steele was someone who loved old movies and referenced them whenever he could. Since I am a huge fan of classic movies, he had me at "Death Takes a Holiday, Evelyn Venable, Paramount, 1934." Don't get me wrong, I very much appreciated that Steele happened to be played by the very beautiful-looking Mr. Brosnan, but just based on the fact that the character loved movies, he could have looked like James Cagney, and I would have loved him.

I also remember reading that they were looking at rebooting the series and making it a 'comedy' with the lead being the daughter of Laura and Remington and am glad that it never took off. In case the people behind the idea of a reboot had forgotten, the whole 'hook' of the show was the two leads. The chemistry between Brosnan and Zimbalist was off the chart (not including that horror show of the fifth season), which was magic and something that doesn't happen every day. Besides, I appreciated that the show was acted by adults who played smart and witty adults. Adults who led a somewhat sophisticated life-style, which I appreciated then, as I do now.

At this point, I have watched the series up until almost the end of Season 3, but have gone back and forth between favourite episodes in Season 1, 2 and 4. I find episodes like "To Stop A Steele", in Season 1, or  "Have I got a Steele for You" in Season 3, funny and romantic. In both those episodes we have Laura and Steele actually acknowledging their feelings and acting on them, which is always fun to watch. Do you have any favourite episodes or seasons?

 

It's been a while since I've watched RS so my memory is a bit hazy, but I do have recollections of a few episodes that stand out in my mind. I'd have to look them up on IMDB to see which season they aired but I do remember one where LH's car blows up and she spends the night at RS's place.  I remember that they had a few episodes taking place in Acapulco and those were fun. Then there's one episode that was featured in the opening credits where LH and RS break into a museum.  Those credits were wonderful along with the Henry Mancini theme. One thing the 80's had was great opening credits and RS was no different. 

The funny thing about RS quoting old movies is that he would often quote the plot and the ending. Viewers today would be yelling spoiler alert at the TV when watching the show 🙂  For some reason I remember RS not being very good at solving the mysteries in early seasons often guessing the wrong killer.  It was always Laura coming along for the rescue and solving the crime. 

Maybe it's time for a rewatch so that I can rediscover this classic.  

 

 

[BettyHale]

Until I started to re-watch the series, I hadn't thought about it for years; and then the pandemic hit and I thought that maybe re-watching older tv series might help me get through the never-ending days and the stress that is part of my Covid-19 experience. I remembered that a friend had bought me all the episodes/seasons of Remington Steele and I thought to myself, why not go back in time and experience the series again. And I'm glad that I did, as I'm having fun watching the interplay between the Holt and Steele, not to mention his linking his knowledge of old films to nearly every case they investigate. I'd forgotten just how much I liked the Steele and Holt characters and their version of Los Angeles. And you're right, in the beginning, he would get the wrong solution, based on a film, and Laura would come up with the right answer.

I also like the same episodes that you mentioned: the one where Laura's house is blown up and she ends up at Steele's place; where they steal the painting from the museum, and the episodes filmed in Acapulco. I just finished re-watching the episode, filmed in Ireland, where Steele loses his memory, and thinks he's either Orson Welles, Otto Preminger or Joseph Cotten, and which is tied to a 'crime' he's trying to remember seeing. I like it very much, as both Steele and Laura are working together to solve the case and I can't forget the lovely Irish scenery.

And I also love the Mancini theme and agree that the themes of series set in the 80s were good.

Just as a side note: during one of my trips to Los Angeles, we rented a car to drive to Century City and got to see the Century Plaza Towers as I wanted to see where Laura's 'offices' were located.  I had a great time checking out the building.

 

 

[Bastet]

I am re-watching several things right now, and I think when I’m caught up with those I’ll add this show into the mix; I haven’t done a re-watch in several years, I don't think.

As for favorite episodes, "Vintage Steele" (the monks at the winery) is my absolute favorite, but "Red Holt Steele" (when Laura’s house is blown up) is a close second.  I’m a Laura fangirl, so I like the episodes focused on her.  Especially if written by Susan Baskin, my favorite of the writers (and the only woman <sigh>) – which is why I also love “Steele Sweet On You” (with Donald, Frances, and the dental convention).

I also really like the Major Descoine episodes, "Beg, Borrow, or Steele" (when they’re “dead”), "Steele Trap" (the “And Then There Were None” episode), "A Good Night’s Steele" (undercover at the sleep clinic), and "Steele Your Heart Away" (amnesia in Ireland).

[Thomas Crown]

On 8/11/2020 at 6:47 PM, WendyCR72 said:

Welcome to Primetimer, @BettyHale! 🙂 And I so hear you about Tony Roselli. UGH. No need for him whatsoever.

I have vague recollections of season 5 so my memory is probably off about the following timeline.  At the time RS will still one of my favourite shows (along with Hunter 😉 of course) so I was anxiously awaiting its return after season 4.  I think that season 5 of RS started much later that other shows that fall season and probably in a different time slot too.  So I never saw the first few episodes of season 5 until I just  randomly found the show one night midway in season 5.  Then after seeing the character of Tony Roselli and his introduction as a romantic obstacle, I kept thinking to myself WTF have they done to this show? Gone was the charm of the previous seasons.  Since it was going to the last season anyway, not sure why they bothered to introduced him. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

21 minutes ago, Thomas Crown said:

I think that season 5 of RS started much later that other shows that fall season and probably in a different time slot too.  So I never saw the first few episodes of season 5 until I just  randomly found the show one night midway in season 5.  Then after seeing the character of Tony Roselli and his introduction as a romantic obstacle, I kept thinking to myself WTF have they done to this show? Gone was the charm of the previous seasons.  Since it was going to the last season anyway, not sure why they bothered to introduced him. 

Not quite. NBC cancelled the show after the fourth season--so that we were left with that INSULT of a series finale,🤬 where Steele doesn't tell Laura that Keys found out about his forged passports and that he needs to get married asap to remain in the States. Instead, he lies, and tries to get that call/escort woman to marry him.🤬🤬

THEN, Pierce Brosnan was one of the names being thrown out as the next James Bond. So what does NBC do? Says he can't try out for that role because he's got a 7-year contract with their asses for this show. And so they foist Tony on us with that horrid and horrible movie, where Laura and Steele are supposed to be on their honeymoon, but waste it with Tony and Laura playing games, for reasons. BOTH Steele and Laura were out of character. And they finally get their happy ever after in the last episode.

Why no, I don't remember what a shitshow NBC turned this into.

And I know that Pierce Brosnan has stated that he wasn't ready to take on the role in 1985, but I will never believe/accept that NBC screwed him over.

No, not bitter at all. Just ask @BkWurm1

[Bastet]

14 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

And so they foist Tony on us with that horrid and horrible movie, where Laura and Steele are supposed to be on their honeymoon, but waste it with Tony and Laura playing games, for reasons. BOTH Steele and Laura were out of character. And they finally get their happy ever after in the last episode.

What annoys me about the Tony Roselli character was that he (meaning a rival for Laura's affections who was the polar opposite of Steele <yawn, and didn't we already do this stupidity with Butch Beemis>) was planned for season five before the show got cancelled.  Once the show was cancelled and then dragged back with an order for only a two-hour premiere - in January, mind you - and four subsequent episodes (with the possibility of being continued depending on ratings), WHY stick with the tired love triangle plan?  It would have been bad enough in a regular season, but at least it would make sense in terms of the reality that this is what TV writers, especially in the '80s, did in order to go as long as possible before finally putting the characters together.  When you know six hours is almost certainly all you're going to get, spend them wisely!

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 minute ago, Bastet said:

What annoys me about the Tony Roselli character was that he (meaning a rival for Laura's affections who was the polar opposite of Steele <yawn, and didn't we already do this stupidity with Butch Beemis>) was planned for season five before the show got cancelled.  Once the show was cancelled and then dragged back with an order for only a two-hour premiere - in January, mind you - and four subsequent episodes (with the possibility of being continued depending on ratings), WHY stick with the tired love triangle plan?  It would have been bad enough in a regular season, but at least it would make sense in terms of the reality that this is what TV writers, especially in the '80s, did in order to go as long as possible before finally putting the characters together.  When you know six hours is almost certainly all you're going to get, spend them wisely!

I know!

A better plan would have been for Steele to earn Laura's forgiveness for the scheming and lying in the season four finale, and find the way back to each other--WITHOUT the likes of Tony butting his head in there. It was beyond lame and insulting what we ended up with.

I can't remember what Stephanie said in the interviews, but I know that Brosnan said he did it for the fans. It wasn't that he was angry at the fans, but the way they were pulled back in by the network or something like that.

[BettyHale]

 

14 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

What annoys me about the Tony Roselli character was that he (meaning a rival for Laura's affections who was the polar opposite of Steele <yawn, and didn't we already do this stupidity with Butch Beemis>) was planned for season five before the show got cancelled.  Once the show was cancelled and then dragged back with an order for only a two-hour premiere - in January, mind you - and four subsequent episodes (with the possibility of being continued depending on ratings), WHY stick with the tired love triangle plan?  It would have been bad enough in a regular season, but at least it would make sense in terms of the reality that this is what TV writers, especially in the '80s, did in order to go as long as possible before finally putting the characters together.  When you know six hours is almost certainly all you're going to get, spend them wisely!

I totally agree with you regarding the Roselli character; shnore is right. I mean why offer Laura 'hamburger' when she already had 'sirloin steak'?? The introduction of Roselli, was a non-starter as he really had nothing to offer Laura besides being sort of attractive (although not my type at all). Why make her/Steele 'work' for 4+ years to get to a point where they were actually in sync and not only loved, but liked each other, and then throw in that 'nothingburger' Roselli? I mean Roselli was never going to be Laura's intellectual or her emotional equal; that role was already taken by Steele, so why bother? Oh I know, it was to piss off the fans of the show .

My opinion was, and continues to be, that the writers were trying to get back at NBC for wanting to dump the series, and so decided to screw with the behaviours of the characters. I think I read somewhere that Michael Gleason stated that he was sorry about how the series ended, but that never cut any ice with me.  He was the show runner and he could have chosen to end the show with the characters being married and continuing to be the detectives/investigators we had grown to love, but he/Butler decided otherwise. 

And, colour me bitter, but I still don't understand why they had opted to have Steele not tell Laura about his immigration problems; that still sticks in my throat. In the episode Sensitive Steele, we watched him tell Laura that he was being framed for a robbery that he didn't commit and she believed him and helped him/them resolve the issue. But a couple of episodes later, I'm supposed to now believe that he can't tell her that the immigration department is after him and that he needs help if he wants to stay in the U.S.? Nope, not buying it, no way, now how.

And Bastet, I also love the episodes that you mentioned. 

[BettyHale]

Sorry the episode wasn't Sensitive Steele, but Forged Steele. I was so caught up in writing the response, that I got the episode titles mixed-up:)

[Bastet]

20 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

A better plan would have been for Steele to earn Laura's forgiveness for the scheming and lying in the season four finale, and find the way back to each other--WITHOUT the likes of Tony butting his head in there.

Right, because the wacky hijinks are already built in by virtue of Keys being bound and determined to prove to Immigration that the marriage is a sham, so they've got to keep up appearances while navigating a relationship that isn't remotely ready for marriage but is in fact real, albeit a bit fractured at the moment.  So you can still have the mystery to be solved that Keys turns up murdered, and of course Steele is a suspect.  And then still do the Daniel stuff, to resolve that storyline.

Steele having to earn back the trust he betrayed with all the lies and shenanigans surrounding the fake wedding to a prostitute is PLENTY to explain why it takes them until the finale to well and truly reconcile; there's no need for an illogical infatuation with a third party to drag things out!

5 hours ago, BettyHale said:

And, colour me bitter, but I still don't understand why they had opted to have Steele not tell Laura about his immigration problems; that still sticks in my throat. In the episode Sensitive Steele, we watched him tell Laura that he was being framed for a robbery that he didn't commit and she believed him and helped him/them resolve the issue. But a couple of episodes later, I'm supposed to now believe that he can't tell her that the immigration department is after him and that he needs help if he wants to stay in the U.S.? Nope, not buying it, no way, now how.

I know; it's so infuriating how he's written as if the first half of season four never happened.  They are so completely committed to each other after "Steele Searching" (when she gives him the Remington Steele passport and he comes home) and then "Forged Steele" cements the progress they've made.  But in the second half of season four, their dynamic is regressed to about season two, culminating in the nonsense that is "Bonds of Steele".

[BettyHale]

I totally agree with you on this, and I think that story line set out above would have definitely worked better. I also didn't understand why the writers wouldn't give the Steele character closure re: what is name was; details about his mother/childhood, etc. before having Daniel die. I mean what does that say about how the writers of that last season felt about the Steele character? I thought it was mean-spirited that they didn't give Steele the closure on this matter and another example of how the writers had basically given up on the show. They sat around their pools, with drinks, and phoned in their 'scripts' to NBC (at least that's how I picture the scene in my mind).

On a different subject/episode, did I imagine that Steele and Laura ended up in a stable/barn door, could have been raining, and they shut the door and the inference was that they were going to spend the night there, together? Or am I just remembering this happening in some great fanfic that I read? I want to say that it happened in Steele Spawning, but I'm not 100% sure as I haven't seen that episode in a while and haven't yet re-watched it. Would someone be able to confirm that this happened, or is this an early morning, pre-work, hallucination?  Any feedback would be very appreciated . I am getting a real kick out of being able to talk about the ins and outs of this series even after all these years.  It's liberating being able to talk about the series with people who care about the characters/show as much I apparently still do.:)

 

[Bastet]

5 hours ago, BettyHale said:

On a different subject/episode, did I imagine that Steele and Laura ended up in a stable/barn door, could have been raining, and they shut the door and the inference was that they were going to spend the night there, together?

Not your imagination; that's the end of "Steele At Your Service" (where Steele is undercover as the butler).

[BettyHale]

That's the episode. Thank you for letting me know, and I'll put it on my list to watch it this long weekend. So were we, as the audience, wrong in thinking that Steele and Laura were going to spend the night in the stable doing something else besides bunking up with the horses? If so, why then, let us infer that they're having a sexual relationship but not actually have the characters acknowledge it? 

[GHScorpiosRule]

7 minutes ago, BettyHale said:

That's the episode. Thank you for letting me know, and I'll put it on my list to watch it this long weekend. So were we, as the audience, wrong in thinking that Steele and Laura were going to spend the night in the stable doing something else besides bunking up with the horses? If so, why then, let us infer that they're having a sexual relationship but not actually have the characters acknowledge it? 

It was clear to me, at least, that they had begun a sexual relationship by the end of season one. However, writers, show runner, I don't know who, back tracked all of that. Each and every fade to black was just meant to imply foreplay and nothing more. And that they finally had sex in the series finale, final scene.

Which was an insult. And also we knew that Laura wasn't this virginal prude. That conversation with Bernice alone in season one, where Laura tells her that Steele made her feel..."itchy" or something like that and really wanted to do the horizontal mambo with him, but she didn't trust him. Or something. I loved that realism and maturity of that scene. Why they regressed, I'll never understand.

Hell, at least on my other favorite show at the time, Scarecrow & Mrs. King, we finally got a conversation that Lee and Amanda did have a sexual relationship after they got together, and that she didn't kiss him goodnight at the backdoor!

[Bastet]

The writers were (on the DVD special features) honest about the fact they wrote episode after episode with a final scene that would naturally lead to sex, and then continually wrote subsequent episodes confirming they hadn't in fact had sex because they wanted to draw it out.  They don't try to claim any logic, just "hey, that's television" (especially '80s will they or won't they television). 

For a while you can fanwank they keep getting interrupted, but four years of that?  There are only so many times Mildred and dead bodies can have such horrible timing.  Even for '80s TV, I can really only hang with it for about three seasons.

But some of those final scenes are pretty great, so on the other hand I guess I have to applaud them going there even if they weren't going to follow through logically.

[BettyHale]

Interestingly, I stumbled on another forum discussing this series, and one of the 'member's posted some interesting information about the ending of the series. The comments are a few years old, and probably not news to a lot of people here, but it's sort of new to me and iI find the information/opinion very interesting so I'm re-posting it here. The post/information was put forward by someone named FanCollector at: https://www.hometheaterforum.com/community/threads/remington-steele-on-dvd.

The phone ringing at the end shows that a) Laura has made her choice and b) MTM really wanted a full-season pickup or a sixth season renewal.

Michael Gleason had a whole plan for how the series would continue once they were married and really together. He proposed that Laura would say they could no longer work together because she didn't want to "mix business with pleasure," and Steele would open his own agency and then sneakily hire Laura to solve all his clients' cases. 

A few years ago, Gleason was trying to get a Remington Steele novel published. In order to reset the scenario as he wished, he went backward to say that when Steele and Laura went upstairs at the end of Steeled With a Kiss, they did get interrupted and never consummated their relationship. His novel would pick up after that night, although I believe he dropped the whole idea of Tony Roselli.

I just meant that having the phone ringing left a plot point open for them to pick up if the show were renewed. I would rather they hadn't done it that way, but they were definitely straddling the line between providing closure and trying to continue the show.

I agree that Steele secretly employing Laura would only work for a limited time, but Gleason was quite serious. He wrote a multi-page proposal about it for the executives at NBC when they were considering the show's fate.

The novel never came to fruition. I don't know if he couldn't make a satisfactory deal with a publisher or if Fox wouldn't let him use the characters.

Me: what do you think, about the above? Personally, I like the idea of the two of them being married and carrying on the detective agency; after all if it worked for Nick and Nora Charles, why wouldn't it work for Holt and Steele? I don't care for the idea that Gleason had about having the relationship remain unconsummated; really? Why would fans go along with that premise?

 

 

 

[Bastet]

2 hours ago, BettyHale said:

Michael Gleason had a whole plan for how the series would continue once they were married and really together. He proposed that Laura would say they could no longer work together because she didn't want to "mix business with pleasure," and Steele would open his own agency and then sneakily hire Laura to solve all his clients' cases. 

Yes, he talks about that in one of the DVD special features.  But Steele wouldn't be secretly employing Laura to solve the cases, he'd be surreptitiously working the things he couldn't figure out into supposed casual conversation when they were at home, and then use her responses to solve his case.

So, I don't like it, because he's using her, and I'd prefer them working together.  It also regresses him, because he had picked up investigative skills from her over the years, and would be able to solve at least some of his cases without her.

I either had forgotten or had repressed the idea about they got interrupted once again, and the show/novel would continue with them still not having consummated their relationship.  That's just ridiculous; even if they did get interrupted again, they'd simply get it on as soon as they resolved whatever it was.  Good gods, 15-year-olds with no homes of their own, no cars, and no credit cards with which to secure a hotel room can find ways to have sex.  Two mature adults with their own business can certainly figure out how to carve out some time for themselves.

[Bali]

Is Remington Steele available to stream, or are you all watching on dvds?

[BettyHale]

Hi Bali: while I have the dvd's, these days I'm opting to watch it for free on the dailymotion.com site. It's just easier for me to access specific episodes/seasons whenever I want and wherever I happen to be.

And Bastet, I also agree with you on the ridiculous notion that two adults who are so sexually attracted to each other would continue to be celibate . I used to have a good opinion of Michael Gleason's writing/thinking about this series,  but reading his proposal on how he wanted to continue the series is just so disappointing. He/Butler and other writers involved in this series wrote Holt and Steele as being smart, witty, sexy, sophisticated adults who were madly and wildly attracted to each other. And as it has been previously mentioned, on numerous occasions, while it sort of made sense to have them be apart in the first season, taking into account Laura's issues with people leaving her, it made no sense to continue to keep the characters apart. Which again doesn't make sense to me as Gleason and/or Butler appeared to be fans of classic movies; if that was the case, why couldn't they see that their lead characters could be emotionally and sexually involved and still be appealing to the fans? I've watched the Thin Man movies and love the idea that Nick and Nora, while being married, still have the 'hots' for each other and it doesn't take anything away from the case/cases they're investigating. I think that the writers/show runners missed the boat by not going this route;  they short-changed the characters and the fans by having it end in such a lacklustre and emotionally disappointing way. 

 

[Bastet]

Well, The Thin Man burst onto the screen as an anomaly - in 1934 (remember, the Hays Code had just recently actually been consistently and strenuously enforced despite having existed for several years already) noir or screwball, marriage was usually something the characters spent a film trying to get into or out of.  For The Thin Man to open a year into Nick and Nora's marriage and that relationship be this fun, flirty thing that just exists throughout but is not the plot was unusual.  Audiences went wild, leading to five sequels, because of the chemistry between Myrna Loy and Bill Powell; the case may have been the plot, but Nick and Nora were why people wanted to watch.

Gleason could have looked at that success and tried to make the TV version (to be fair, he didn't have the benefit MGM did with Loy and Powell - who'd already made a film together - of knowing his actors had great screen chemistry to which audiences responded), but instead he went with the traditional TV formula.  Maybe not wanting to be accused of making a Hart to Hart knock-off?

And I do give him credit for Laura being open to casual sex; she was such a "girl next door" character that it was lovely to see that be part of her.  Also for recognizing a female character being written almost exclusively by men is problematic.  Now, this didn't lead him to hire more women, so he was part of the problem, but he did at least listen to Stephanie when she said, "psst, this isn't how women think/talk/act", a simple thing far too many male executive producers still don't do.  So in general I appreciate what he did with this show, especially the humor.

There have been a lot of shows where audiences did lose interest after the characters got together, and certainly back in the mid-80s I can understand that being an even bigger fear for networks and executive producers than it is now, but I contend that's usually because of how they're written after getting together - as different personalities than what the audience had spent years falling in love with.  It would have been great if Gleason had bucked tradition by early season four at the latest and put them truly together - but judging by how he wanted to write them if he got more episodes, maybe him playing it safe wound up better. 

[BettyHale]

2 hours ago, Bastet said:

 

Gleason could have looked at that success and tried to make the TV version (to be fair, he didn't have the benefit MGM did with Loy and Powell - who'd already made a film together - of knowing his actors had great screen chemistry to which audiences responded), but instead he went with the traditional TV formula.  Maybe not wanting to be accused of making a Hart to Hart knock-off?

I understand what you're saying, and there's a part of me that can go along with that, but after the first few episodes he/Butler, et al must have seen how great Zimbalist and Brosnan were together. And he could have built on that going forward, and that's certainly the feeling I got during the first season. That is, that we were going to be shown two adults, who are going to be romantically involved with each other, and that aspect of their relationship wouldn't get in the way of their being able to work together. We sort of got some of that, but it really would have been a kick to see Holt and Steele in a fully evolved, fun adult relationship. Oh well, woulda, shoulda, coulda:)

And I agree, while I like/liked Robert Wagner and Stephanie Powers, I never really got the sense that their Hart characters really had anything to do during any specific episodes. Of course, I have a vague recollection of the series as I haven't seen it in years, but I do remember thinking that there was something missing there. And maybe it was the so-so writing, or the predictable action that was going to take place at any given time, who knows? In short, I don't believe that Holt/Steele were ever going to be as 'boring' (apologies to anyone who is a Hart to Hart fan) as that couple/show was for me. But, again, I'm biased towards really liking the Holt/Steele characters and the actors who played them.

[Bastet]

1 minute ago, BettyHale said:

And he could have built on that going forward, and that's certainly the feeling I got during the first season. That is, that we were going to be shown two adults, who are going to be romantically involved with each other, and that aspect of their relationship wouldn't get in the way of their being able to work together.

That's certainly how season one ends, as they're on their way home to have all the sex.  But in all the interviews with Gleason and other writers, I've never heard anyone say they actually intended to buck TV tradition and pick up in season two with them being an established couple who solve cases together.  To the contrary, they've just laughed that, yeah, they kept writing episodes that would logically end in sex, then kept writing the next episodes as though sex had not occurred because that's TV - you draw it out until the end. 

Most of the writers were pretty young, and Gleason's experience was almost all with traditional storytelling (Peyton Place being a bit envelope pushing).  So there's just no indication anyone ever gave any real consideration to dispensing with the TV conventions of the time in terms of if, when, and how you get the lead characters together romantically.

[Thomas Crown]

On 9/1/2020 at 8:21 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

Not quite. NBC cancelled the show after the fourth season--so that we were left with that INSULT of a series finale,🤬 where Steele doesn't tell Laura that Keys found out about his forged passports and that he needs to get married asap to remain in the States. Instead, he lies, and tries to get that call/escort woman to marry him.🤬🤬

THEN, Pierce Brosnan was one of the names being thrown out as the next James Bond. So what does NBC do? Says he can't try out for that role because he's got a 7-year contract with their asses for this show. And so they foist Tony on us with that horrid and horrible movie, where Laura and Steele are supposed to be on their honeymoon, but waste it with Tony and Laura playing games, for reasons. BOTH Steele and Laura were out of character. And they finally get their happy ever after in the last episode.

Why no, I don't remember what a shitshow NBC turned this into.

And I know that Pierce Brosnan has stated that he wasn't ready to take on the role in 1985, but I will never believe/accept that NBC screwed him over.

No, not bitter at all. Just ask @BkWurm1

You're right. I had completely forgotten about NBC bringing back RS and Pierce Brosnan having to pass up the James Bond role.  Not sure how accurate this is, but IMDB writes that SZ also lost out on a big part due to NBC bring back the show from cancellation.  Apparently she was cast as the female lead in Robocop and had to turn it down when she returned for the final season of RS. 

The first 3 seasons were fun so I wouldn't mind seeing Netflix give it a crack for a reunion season or movie. 

[Bastet]

5 hours ago, Thomas Crown said:

Not sure how accurate this is, but IMDB writes that SZ also lost out on a big part due to NBC bring back the show from cancellation.  Apparently she was cast as the female lead in Robocop and had to turn it down when she returned for the final season of RS. 

Yes, that is true.  It doesn't get anywhere near the attention as the Bond thing, but, yes - she was the first choice, had been cast, and then had to drop out because of the scheduling conflict.

[GHScorpiosRule]

3 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Yes, that is true.  It doesn't get anywhere near the attention as the Bond thing, but, yes - she was the first choice, had been cast, and then had to drop out because of the scheduling conflict.

I seriously need an 🤬🤬 reaction to express my feelings when I read the shitty way Stephanie and Pierce got shafted. Or heck, when I read things that piss me off. And not just in this thread.

[BettyHale]

14 hours ago, Bastet said:

Yes, that is true.  It doesn't get anywhere near the attention as the Bond thing, but, yes - she was the first choice, had been cast, and then had to drop out because of the scheduling conflict.

While I agree that it was far from being fair to Stephanie Zimbalist, I don't know that losing the role of the female lead in Robocop, was so terrible. Don't get me wrong, I think that Ms. Zimbalist is a very good actress, but to be honest, I never understood why she auditioned/was cast in that role as I actually thought it wasn't much of a role. I mean, Nancy Allen ended up in that role and what good did it do her career? And the director of Robocop is Paul Verhoeven, who's claim to fame was/is "Basic Instinct" and "Showgirls." I've always thought that she had a narrow escape not working with that director as over the years; he always gave off a 'creepy vibe.' Again, I'm not saying that she didn't get a raw deal by NBC deciding that they wanted them back to film that lousy '5th season', but I don't know if that film would have advanced her career. I do think that the role that she missed out on, and not her fault, was that of Marion in "Raiders of the Lost Ark." If I remember correctly, she wasn't given the role because George Lucas and/or Spielberg didn't think she was right for the part (am I right?). If that's the case, then Lucas/Spielberg were wrong, wrong, wrong. She would have been terrific in that role and Lucas and/or Spielberg were obviously out to lunch in not considering her for the part. I mean, Karen Allen did a really good job as Marion, but can't help thinking that Stephanie Zimbalist would have might have given it that extra 'oomph,'  And, of course, Raiders turned out to be a mega-hit, so being cast in that movie might have been big deal for her and might have given her access to other film roles. 

 

[Bastet]

Oh yeah, there's no way of knowing if that would have led to more feature film roles for her.  I was just confirming it happened.

Zimbalist has said, and I have much respect for this, that she realized her acting skills could use some beefing up; every time they had a guest star who was really good, it was someone with extensive theatre experience.  So after the show was over, she started doing a lot of stage work to hone her craft, and did the TV movies to further pad the nest egg this series had allowed her to sock away and maintain visibility.

I've seen her in several plays over the years, and she's really good on stage.  So I think it all worked out, as she found her niche as an actor plus wound up with a level of celebrity that better suits her private nature.

[BettyHale]

1 minute ago, Bastet said:

Zimbalist has said, and I have much respect for this, that she realized her acting skills could use some beefing up; every time they had a guest star who was really good, it was someone with extensive theatre experience.  So after the show was over, she started doing a lot of stage work to hone her craft, and did the TV movies to further pad the nest egg this series had allowed her to sock away and maintain visibility.

I agree, in that I think she's a very good actress. I also got to see her on stage when she was touring with Tommy Tune in "My One and Only" and thought she was terrific. I'm being selfish in wanting to see her in other roles. I've decided that this conversation has given me the chance to play casting director for Ms. Zimbalist as I would have loved to have seen her in a number of roles. For example, she could have been cast as the female lead in the 1988 NBC mini-series "Noble House." As it happens, I'm just starting to watch it and am enjoying the 80's version of Pierce Brosnan very much. Now, the lead in that series was Deborah Raffin, who in my humble opinion, was bland as butterscotch pudding. She plays the character, Casey Tcholok, who is the romantic lead for the Brosnan character. Ms. Raffin is sort of bland in the role, and as I'm watching it all I can think is, how much better would the series have been if they had re-teamed her with Brosnan? I'll tell you how much better; it would have been great! I saw this mini-series when it was first shown back in 1988, and had forgotten all about it until just recently. As an aside: I started watching Remington Steele, which has now given me an appetite for the 80's version of the world. So, now, when I'm not watching Steele, I'm watching Riptide/Magnum P.I., etc. And this is what led me to watch Noble House. 

In any case, I think that Zimbalist would have been terrific in that series and am only sorry that she didn't end up in the role of Casey. And that series is just right off the top of my head, as I think she would have been terrific in lots of other film/tv roles. What about you Bastet, are there any roles that you would have liked to see Stephanie play?

[Bastet]

On 9/21/2020 at 1:34 PM, BettyHale said:

For example, she could have been cast as the female lead in the 1988 NBC mini-series "Noble House."

I never saw that, but if Pierce was in it and it was 1988, I think it would have been too soon to pair them up again; it would be difficult not to see Laura and Steele rather than the characters they were playing.

On 9/21/2020 at 1:34 PM, BettyHale said:

What about you Bastet, are there any roles that you would have liked to see Stephanie play?

I can't think of anything specific, but it would have been nice to see her pop up as a guest star on more shows I watched.

[GHScorpiosRule]

2 hours ago, Bastet said:

I can't think of anything specific, but it would have been nice to see her pop up as a guest star on more shows I watched.

I know you’re not a fan, but for me, I loved when they cast Stephanie to voice the DA in Batman: The Animated Series, a recast, as the original was played by Loretta Switt.

While they didn’t have any scenes together, Efrem was a regular playing Alfred.

Yeah, I’m weird. But she was wonderful.

[BettyHale]

On 9/25/2020 at 5:32 PM, Bastet said:

On 9/21/2020 at 4:34 PM, BettyHale said:

For example, she could have been cast as the female lead in the 1988 NBC mini-series "Noble House."

I never saw that, but if Pierce was in it and it was 1988, I think it would have been too soon to pair them up again; it would be difficult not to see Laura and Steele rather than the characters they were playing.

Yes, you're right in that people tuning in to see Noble House would be seeing/expecting to see Steele and Holt and not the characters that Clavell wrote. Having said that, so far the character being played by Deborah Raffin is so Laura Holtish(?) that she may as well have played it. Except that I would have found Stephanie Zimbalist more believable in the role than  Ms. Raffin.

[BettyHale]

On 9/25/2020 at 7:42 PM, GHScorpiosRule said:

I know you’re not a fan, but for me, I loved when they cast Stephanie to voice the DA in Batman: The Animated Series, a recast, as the original was played by Loretta Switt.

I've never watched Batman: The Animated Series and I didn't know that Stephanie was the voice of the DA. I'm not surprised that she was good as she has a lovely speaking voice; one of the things that I really liked about watching her play the role of Laura Holt. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

1 hour ago, BettyHale said:

Yes, you're right in that people tuning in to see Noble House would be seeing/expecting to see Steele and Holt and not the characters that Clavell wrote. Having said that, so far the character being played by Deborah Raffin is so Laura Holtish(?) that she may as well have played it. Except that I would have found Stephanie Zimbalist more believable in the role than  Ms. Raffin.

No way. I watched that mini-series, and there's just no comparison between Raffin's character being like Laura. At least, not to me.

[BettyHale]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

No way. I watched that mini-series, and there's just no comparison between Raffin's character being like Laura. At least, not to me.

I'm still in the process of watching the series and so far, the Raffin character seems, at least to me, similar to Laura Holt. We may have to agree to disagree on this series as I see Raffin's character as Laura Holtish. What I've seen of the character so far, still looks and sounds like a Holtish character, now my opinion may change as I continue to watch the series, but not at this point (about 2 hours in). I saw the series when it was broadcast in 1988 and was then, and continue to be now, very disappointed that they had not chosen Ms. Zimbalist to play the role of Casey. I understand that, as Bastet as already noted, the powers that be may not have wanted people tuning in and expecting to see a re-match of the Steele and Holt characters. Nevertheless, I think that the series would have benefited from S.Z.'s participation. I'm sure that the main draw was, and still is, Pierce Brosnan, but he's always so much more interesting to watch when he's matched with actors that are just as good or better than he is. If you remember the series, Brosnan was interesting to watch when he was playing against Denholm Elliott or John Rhys-Davies; with Ms. Raffin, not so much. For one thing, there's nowhere near the chemistry with Raffin that he had with Zimbalist. I mean, being able to watch Brosnan, especially the younger version of the actor, is never hard work; it's just so much more fun to watch him act/react when he's working with really good actors. 

[Bastet]

On last night's episode of Pit Bulls & Parolees, the adopters were looking for a buddy for their puppy Remington.  I side eye people who name kids/pets Remington because I wonder if it's glorifying guns (and these folks lived in Texas), but I gave them props when they renamed the new puppy (who'd been called Bro) Steel and, in explaining the name change, referenced Remington Steele.  I wish they'd included the final E on his name, but it made me smile.