In what has now become a genre unto itself (deliberately campy/tacky "behind the scenes" TV movie on the making of a 70's or 80's hit series - see also the ones about "Three's Company" and "Charlie's Angels" to name a few), this one scrapes the bottom of the barrel. A disclaimer at the beginning mentions name changes and time compression in order to account for the less than factual film that follows. They needn't have bothered. Virtually every detail of the film is completely and totally inaccurate!!! Told from the point of view of Esther Shapiro (Reed), the show's conception to it's peak to it's demise is shown through snippets of recreations and backstage squabbles. Reed, though NOTHING physically has been done to make her resemble her character in the slightest, manages to turn in a compelling and interesting performance. She is the sole bright spot of the movie. Singer, as her husband Richard, is also amusing and they stir up a little chemistry together. Hammond, again looking NOTHING like his real life counterpart, does an energetic job of trying to convey Aaron Spelling. Every other actor playing a real-life performer is miscast and horrendously badly acted. John neither sounds nor looks like John Forsythe, airheaded Hardin has nothing whatsoever to do with Linda Evans and, while the hair and clothes occasionally suggest her character, Krige is just plain bad as Joan Collins. None of these actors is portrayed as a human being. They're just cartoon cutouts in dress up. The film was going for a light touch with an intentionally kooky script and tongue firmly in cheek. But when the facts of the real story vary this much from the supposed behind the scenes expose, the whole thing just turns into a mess. To name just a FEW of the inaccuracies: Forsythe would not have been recording "Once upon a time there were three little girls..." in 1980. That voice-over was in the can half a decade earlier. Linda Evans would not have been out in the parking lot as part of a cattle call to read for Krystle. Though hardly a major star, she had more clout than that! In fact, "Dallas" had been touted as "The Linda Evans Project" during preproduction! She was to play Pamela Ewing. Joan Collins was only absent from ONE EPISODE of "Dynasty" during her contract dispute, yet she's shown here watching the show on TV without her. The whole thing was said and done before any new shows aired. Heather Locklear wasn't even AT the Moldavian Wedding, so her scene there is ludicrous. Catherine Oxenberg didn't exit the show in a car crash. Actors are already in costume and on set before they find out their lines? Maybe every so often, but this is treated as commonplace here. The Shapiros were ousted by the last season. There isn't enough space to list everything. The clothes are mostly wrong, the hair is nearly always wrong (Linda NEVER had the golden blonde color that Hardin sports throughout the film, Joan's big wig look didn't kick in until a few years after her arrival) and the whole thing is just garbage. How can there be a movie about "Dynasty" that doesn't even MENTION Fallon, Jeff, Adam or Claudia? Worse than that, the REAL dramas behind the scenes are either ignored fully or glossed over. For example, George Peppard was the first Blake. What happened? Pamela Sue Martin was a major player on the show, but she quit. Why? Linda and Joan both went through at least one divorce during the run. Joan's daughter was nearly killed in an accident with a car. These are just a couple of points. What does this film offer up?? John Forsythe occasionally checked out Heather Locklear's ass? Linda Evans did yoga on set? Joan Collins was self-involved and money-hungry? Wow...... What an expose. A few goofy, funny moments do not make up for this turd of a movie which borders on slander to the real life actors involved. There was already an "E! True Hollywood Story" that revealed far more (even if not a lot) than this. And if anyone should play Joan Collins, it should be Lesley-Anne Down, though she should be glad she had no part in this disaster.
