There were some things that I think the revival got right. Victoria as the Josette lookalike, and Jeremiah as Barnabas' brother instead of uncle, are two examples. Lysette Anthony's Angelique was creepily good. But I'm a Julia fan and I didn't care much for Barbara Steel's Julia. She was OK but lacked the charisma that Grayson Hall brought to the role. And she had no chemistry with Ben Cross's Barnabas. Even in Barnabas and Julia's early adversarial days, Grayson Hall and Jonathan Frid had a quirky chemistry that was very appealing. But Ben Cross was awful as Barnabas. Way too severe even in the 1790 flashback story.

There were a few things about the revival I liked. Jean Simmons was a fantastic Elizabeth. Lysette Anthony fit the part of Angelique like a glove. Ben Cross had none of the charm, brooding, moody, pathos of Jonathan Frid. Barbara Steele was OK as Julia, she had none of the likability of Grayson. There was no chemistry between them. Even in the early pre-1795 episodes of the original series, there was something about them two that made me want to see more. I also didn't like how they rushed through everything. It was completely rushed, not enough time to know the characters.

Me personally, I think Ben and Barbara were worthy sucsessors to Jonathan and Grayson.

Well, it was okay. I liked some of the changes they made, such as how they made Vicky Josette's look-alike. I've shipped Barnabas/Vicky since I was a kid (and I'm one of the rare few, it seems), so this made their relationship a little more romantic for me.

i liked it. i guess the original was good. i hated that in the original how they didnt show Josette jump. i guess that is 60's soap for ya.

Actually I liked it and tried my best not to compare the two (as hard as that was). I seen it as a "retelling". Let's face it no one is ever going to take the original casts place but I didn't think the 1991 was that bad. I remember watching it when it came on and then got crushed with the ending and never having it come back.