Arts & Entertainment
Sue Ellen redux
‘Dallas’ actress on her former co-stars, life after Larry and the hit show’s gay following

Linda Gray as Sue Ellen on ‘Dallas.’ Gray says it’s been a joy to return to the show 20 years later. (Photo courtesy TNT)
“Dallas,” the reboot of the classic 1978-1991 nighttime soap, returns for its third season Monday night on TNT and promises plenty of fresh backstabbing and intrigue.
John Ross (Josh Henderson) is working to live up to his father’s reputation, Christopher (Jesse Metcalfe) is reeling from a failed engagement and Elena (Jordana Brewster) is consumed with finding the justice that eluded her brother Drew (Kuno Becker) and mother Carmen (Marlene Forte).
It’s a pivotal turning point for the show — this will be its first full season without J.R. as actor Larry Hagman died in November 2012. He was in seven of season two’s 15 episodes and his character’s death was a major storyline last year.
Linda Gray, whose iconic character Sue Ellen has been willing to help her son any way she can on the new show, caught up with the Blade during a break in filming in Dallas two weeks ago, where it was snowing.
WASHINGTON BLADE: Snow is somewhat unusual but not unheard of for Dallas, right?
LINDA GRAY: I know. I’m just in heaven. It’s beautiful.
BLADE: You live in Los Angeles?
GRAY: Yes. I’m in Dallas six months, then L.A. six months. That’s a nice combination.
BLADE: I understand more of the show is filmed on location than was true for the old “Dallas,” right?
GRAY: Yes. We used to come here in the ‘80s for two months and work six days a week, then we went home and did eight-and-a-half months in L.A. So here we do 15 shows and we live here which is really kind of nice. At first we were like, “Oh, we have to move to Dallas?” but it’s quite amazing because then we get to show the audience all the greatness of Dallas. It’s changed so much since the ‘80s.
BLADE: How aware have you been of the show’s gay following? Do you sense it’s any different now than it was on the old show?
GRAY: I’m very aware it has a gay following and I’m beyond thrilled. I have so many, many, many friends who are gay and I adore them. There’s a JR’s and a Sue Ellen’s here, gay bars.
BLADE: We have a JR.’s in D.C., too.
GRAY: Oh, do you really? It’s so fantastic to have the support and we’ve always had it and … it’s been great. We love you right back. Dallas itself has a huge gay community here and they’re very supportive as well.
BLADE: What similarities or differences do you see now in how the show is rebounding dramatically from Larry’s passing versus how the original series dealt with the death of Jim Davis (Ewing family patriarch Jock)? I know it’s not exactly the same thing, but both were huge losses to the shows just a few seasons in.
GRAY: The entire team has changed, the writers, everything has changed and it’s an evolution that is — well, I step back and I look at this 20-year hiatus and it’s very bizarre to come back and do it again, but in such a good way. So now I think the approach is kind of like we’re outsiders looking in and seeing how the Ewings have evolved. And now without Larry, that threw everybody a curve and those wonderful writers — I always applaud the writers because without them and their great brains and their minds that kind of go off in wonderful directions, there would be no show. They had last season already approved by the networks and when Larry passed, they had to scramble and again, I applaud them because they did a magical shuffling around to kind of piece this together and still be an interesting, entertaining show without the key, which was huge — J.R. Ewing and Larry Hagman, I mean you know that was a huge void for me personally and I’m sure for everybody in the audience, it’s huge. So I look at it as an observer and say, “Wow, what a great job they’ve done.” They have to handle everything as it comes, as we all do in life. You don’t expect this to happen, but it did and now what are you going to do with it? When Jim Davis died, the producers were great. They moved his dressing room right on the soundstage because just like Larry, he wanted to die doing what he loved. They didn’t say, “No, you’re going into hospice or something,” they moved his dressing room right on the soundstage so we would do a scene and come in and hang out with Jim. When you’re doing a series, you’re so bonded as a family. You step in there and you’re supportive and you send them love. I would say “Dallas” has been blessed with a little bit of fairy dust that has been scattered on us from day one. The cast was wonderful, the writers were great, et cetera, and now it’s happening again and since I was one of the originals, it’s amazing to see how similar it is.
BLADE: You worked with Barbara Bel Geddes (Miss Ellie) for many years. After she left before the last season, she never appeared in any final episode, TV movies, cast reunions or anything. What would she think of this new series? (Bel Geddes died in 2005.)
GRAY: She was a savvy, bawdy broad, is what I called her, and I would call it to her face. We were so close. I’d call her Mama, on and off camera. She was this crusty New England broad. She was feisty and fabulous and such a huge classy addition to the Ewing family. I really was so shocked when I knew she was doing a series because I thought Barbara Bel Geddes, you know she worked with Tennessee Williams and Alfred Hitchcock. She was so classy and so when I first walked into the room, I’ll never forget it. I saw Major Nelson — Larry Hagman. I saw Patrick Duffy — “Man From Atlantis.” And then I saw Barbara Bel Geddes and I thought, “What’s wrong with this picture? Is this a sitcom? What is this show?” Internally I started laughing because I thought what is this? … But I just watched this magical thing happen and, you know, the Ewings became bigger than life. So for me it was great to work with her. She was astounding, she was quiet, she would make great funny little remarks during the rehearsals and then when you had a scene with her, man, you better be on your toes. You better bring your A game because she could bury you with a look. She was to me the same caliber as my two favorites — Judi Dench and Maggie Smith. There was no nonsense with her. It was just, “I’m here to work, I know what I’m doing, I’m a professional, I’m Broadway trained, I’m theater trained, I’ve worked with the best so don’t mess around with me.”

The cast of ‘Dallas.’ The reboot of the classic series returns Monday night. (Photo courtesy TNT)
BLADE: But what would her reaction be to this new series?
GRAY: I think she’d probably sit down with a glass of Scotch in her condominium and probably just laugh her ass off. She’d probably roll her eyes, going “How are we back again” and “Look at that younger generation.” But she would be a hoot. I think she would love the new show, love the kids, complain about everything — she loved to complain. She’d complain it was too hot, or, “What the hell are we doing, it’s snowing today,” or “What am I doing in Dallas,” blah blah blah blah blah. Yet the bottom line, she would love it.
BLADE: Victoria Principal has been a little different — she’s said she’s against reviving Pam in any kind of dramatic way, yet has joined up a few times in a non-dramatic capacity like the Vanity Fair photo (1995) and the 2004 reunion special. Over the years do you feel the rest of the cast has respected her wishes not to revive Pam or do you think there’s been some arm twisting to have her join in more often?
GRAY: I think we all respect her. I don’t think she wanted to come back and I don’t even know if the producers went after her or tried really pursuing her, I really don’t know. When you’re asked to come back, your gears are in different motion. You’re in forward motion. You’re thinking, “OK, gotta get to Dallas,” and you don’t really say, “Why isn’t so-and-so here?” For each person, it’s their choice and her choice was not to be in it so you respect everybody’s choice. We don’t see her very often. She was never kind of with us, you know, she was never — Larry, Patrick (Duffy) and I were very close and I was very close with Barbara and she just chose not to be as inclusive. I don’t mean that to — she just didn’t hang out with us.
BLADE: Any chance we might be seeing more of Lucy (Charlene Tilton)?
GRAY: Those are great questions but I don’t know the answers. The producers and writers, they write the scripts and if Lucy comes back, great, Ray Krebbs comes back, Steve (Kanaly) it’s always great to see him and it’s always fun to see them all. I do see Charlene in Los Angeles. She lives near my children. You know, it’s this great family, but since they’ve added all the young new people, it’s crowded. How many people can you bring back? It is fun for the audience when you see Charlene (Lucy), Steve (Ray Krebbs) and Kenny (Cliff Barnes), but it’s more a question for the producers.
BLADE: Larry was so anti-smoking yet Barbara smoked a lot. Did they ever clash over that on set?
GRAY: No, she would just tell him to get lost or, you know, just dismiss him. I think she smoked more in private. I never saw her smoke on the set.
BLADE: Now that it’s so many years later, do you feel the dream season was a good idea? People seem divided on whether it was clever or a jump-the-shark moment.
GRAY: Well, I don’t think people know all the dealings of how it really came about. Larry called Patrick and said, “I want you back.” He felt J.R. needed that brother, the good guy-bad guy kind of thing. I remember he called Patrick and Patrick knew when he got that phone call, what Larry was going to propose. He knew that intuitively. So he went over to his house in Malibu and they had a glass of Champagne and they may have gotten in the Jacuzzi, I don’t really know what happened there, but he talked Patrick into coming back so it was up to the producers to bring Patrick back and that was not an easy task to come up with. You know up front, no matter what they did, they would be criticized. … That was one of the things about “Dallas” that was exciting was that people would talk about it the next day. Did you like this? Look at Sue Ellen’s hair. Did you hate this? What about Bobby? What about J.R. drinking? Whatever. He’d call it water cooler chat. Whether you liked it or not, we knew it was going to cause chaos. So they had the idea for him to do the fake Irish Spring soap commercial where they edited out everything but him saying, “Good morning.” … A lot of people hated it and just stopped watching the show, they said it was ridiculous. A lot of people thought it was funny. A lot of people went, “Wow, that was a great dream sequence.” So no matter how you felt, good, bad or indifferent, they needed him back and they accomplished that.
BLADE: You look great but still look like yourself. What’s your skin care regimen?
GRAY: You’re sweet, thanks. When my peers no longer look like themselves, it scares me. There’s not a secret, I swear. I have a great skin care regimen. I never sleep with makeup on, I drink a lot of water. Hydration is huge. I eat great. I cook most of my own meals. A lot of green stuff — we’re from California, remember. And that’s it. You know, a good attitude goes a long way. And I exercise. I do all the things we’re supposed to do. Sometimes I don’t want to. I don’t want to get up early and go to the gym, but I do. I think complexion is more important than pulling and cutting your face. I’d rather have a good glowy complexion, so I use good skin care products and I use them twice a day. It’s like brushing your teeth. There’s no big secret.
BLADE: Could you ever imagine a gay wedding at Southfork?
GRAY: Sure! Why not?
Books
In ‘The Lost Brontë,’ a complicated lie can lead to danger
New book features sweetly romantic girl-meets-girl twist
‘The Lost Brontë’
By Catherine Friend
c.2026, Bywater Books
$22.95/335 pages
Mom always said to tell the truth.
One lie leads to another and another and you have to remember them all until pretty soon, you’re caught. Fibs are hard, mistruths are messy, even little white social lies can destroy trust. Worst of all, as in the new novel, “The Lost Brontë” by Catherine Friend, a complicated lie can lead to danger.

Though Lilianne Loxley was very young when she lost her parents, she understood that her uncle didn’t really want her. As time passed, though, Lily made herself useful to Uncle, writing and signing letters for him and she became a good companion, helping him with his collection of Brontë memorabilia. Uncle was a keen enthusiast.
She had no idea that his obsession was out of control and he was deeply in arrears. The day Lily learned of his debt was the day she learned that he’d agreed to send her to his debtor’s home to work off the money owed.
It was so sudden. One minute, Lily was at Loxley House, happy and loved by Uncle’s staff … and five hours later, she was at Crag Thorn Manor, home of Lord Bexton, who informed her that she’d be working on his ledgers – work that seemed routine, but Lily tackled it.
Uncle always did say she was headstrong.
But would headstrong be enough to survive, when she was restricted from most of the Manor, when she was forced to dine with Brexton and his slimy friend, or – the worst! – when Brexton told Lily that her next task was to forge a letter from Emily Brontë? And then an entire manuscript?
Lily struggled to do what was right. She had to get Uncle out of debt but this last order horrified her. Did she dare refuse Brexton’s orders and commit a crime? It was unthinkable!
The only brightness in the whole situation was Wren, the ladies’ maid assigned to Lily’s room. Wren was adorable with freckles and the sweetest smile. But with everything else happening at Crag Thorn Manner, could Lily act upon her feelings?
This time of year, you may come to crave dark, spooky stories, and “The Last Brontë” fits those needs perfectly with its Gothic deliciousness. Think: Daphne du Maurier-type, stormy-night squirms with a dangerously chaste, sweetly romantic girl-meets-girl twist for fun.
If it’s been awhile since you’ve read a Gothic novel, you’re in for a nice reminder of why you love them here. You can almost tick off the must-haves: a novel like this is nothing without a foreboding stone manor with damp walls; stone steps to a dank basement; a mysterious portrait; and a nearby bog, and author Catherine Friend gives readers every one of them. You’d be disappointed if there was no ghost, wouldn’t you? Ha. You can practically feel the cold blow through the attic, right? Yeah, it’s that kind of book.
If you’re a fan of the Brontës, you’ll like this novel. If you love Gothic mysteries or Victorian romances, ditto. “The Lost Brontë” is good, no lie.
The Blade may receive commissions from qualifying purchases made via this post.
Out & About
CAMP Rehoboth Block Party returns Oct. 18
Expect performances, vendors and more at annual celebration
CAMP Rehoboth will host its annual Block Party celebration on Sunday, Oct.18 at 11 a.m. on the second block of Baltimore Avenue in downtown Rehoboth Beach.
CAMP Rehoboth invites all community members to join in the festivities and to expect magnificent performances and dozens of vendors, including artists, craftspeople, non-profits, businesses, and more.
The event started in 2015 in celebration of CAMP Rehoboth’s 25th anniversary. This year, attendees can expect to shop sea glass art, pottery, jewelry, Pride merch, body care, clothing, and learn more about local non-profit causes and businesses.
Attendance is free. For more details, visit CAMP Rehoboth’s website.
Movies
Essential queer horror classics for Halloween
‘Bride of Frankenstein,’ Bowie in ‘The Hunger,’ and more
Sure, this spooky season has blessed us with a lot of new horror on TV and at the movies, but when it comes to Halloween, you can never have too much horror to watch. With that in mind, we’ve put together a list of celebrated queer chillers that queer horror fans may know about but might not have seen, especially if you’re part of a younger generation of movie buffs looking to expand your experience with the genre beyond the contemporary crop that has turned the early 2000s into a renaissance of horror cinema.
Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
Yes, we know subtextualized queerness in horror feels like a cop-out in this day and age, but in the early days of Hollywood, it was the only way to sneak it past the censors – and that’s exactly what English expat director James Whale did as a defining force behind the success of Universal Studios’s classic horror “franchise” of the 1930s. More-or-less openly gay with a background in theater, he put those sensibilities to good use on film, and reached his queer pinnacle with “Bride of Frankenstein,” a sequel that expanded on the original with a wicked sense of humor and a “lavender” touch that was obvious to anyone who was in the know.
Skewering “monster movie” tropes and satirizing the conventional mentality of all those angry villagers, Whale also delivered a story of two men – Doctors Frankenstein and Pretorius (Colin Clive and Ernest Thesiger, respectively) – whose clandestine efforts to create a mate for Boris Karloff’s lonely monster read like a gay couple drawn together by “unnatural” obsessions. Thesiger’s unapologetically queer persona would likely dominate the entire film if not for Elsa Lanchester’s turn as the hissing, electrified title character, but the film’s true greatness lies in transforming Karloff’s “monster” into a full-fledged tragic hero, a primal avatar for “otherness” that emerges as the most sympathetic figure on the screen; and while it might not be that “scary” by modern standards, as one of the most boldly transgressive films of the Hollywood “golden era” it still packs a wickedly savage punch.
The Haunting (1963)
Based on Shirley Jackson’s novel of the same name and helmed by veteran director Robert Wise in the wake of his Oscar-winning screen adaptation of “West Side Story,” “The Haunting” is a film that looms large in the history of queer representation in American cinema, simply for the fact that it included an openly lesbian character during a time when anything beyond a subtle implication of non-heterosexual alignment was still very much considered taboo.
The character in question is a psychic named Theodora (Claire Bloom), one of a group of individuals invited by a paranormal researcher (Richard Johnson) to investigate an old New England house, which is reputed to be haunted in the wake of a long string of tragedies that have befallen the family that owns it. Although she’s something of a thorny personality, she’s framed as neither villain not victim, but her presence provides queer overtones that impact the rest of the story, particularly through the growing psychological agitation of its painfully repressed central character (Julie Harris) and the history of the house itself.
A classic “old, dark house” ghost story that deliberately avoids depicting anything definitively supernatural, it focuses instead on psychological tension and the power of suggestion to ramp up scares, which it does quite effectively, utilizing innovative camera and sound techniques to suggest, but never reveal, the dark forces that drive the story. Audiences of the time wanted more concrete thrills, so it was not a major hit; nevertheless, it has been consistently ranked as one of the best horror films of all time – and while it might not offer the blood-curdling terror modern viewers expect, its moody sense of dread and doom is enough to keep you on edge for the duration.
The Hunger (1983)
It’s hard to think of a horror film as openly sexy as this classic from director Tony Scott, which turns Whitley Streiber’s book about an ancient vampire (Catherine Deneuve) in modern New York, who grooms a scientist (Susan Sarandon) to be her new sexual companion for the ages as the old one (David Bowie) begins to rapidly age and decline. Dripping with 1980s cool (it opens with Bauhaus singing “Bela Lugosi’s Dead” in a nightclub) and leaning hard into the open eroticism of a more sexually permissive era, it doesn’t hide its sapphic supernatural love story in the subtext; instead, it gives us one of the steamiest love scenes between two women ever put on film. Critics of the time praised it for its style and its mood, but lamented what they perceived as an ultimately shallow story – but in retrospect, its pervading air of melancholy doom despite the glamorous elegance of its presentation serves as a fitting reminder that an eternal life of meaningless beauty and pleasure might not be as great an idea as we think it is.
Stranger by the Lake (2013)
French filmmaker Alan Giraudie delivers one of the sexiest – and scariest – gay thrillers – of all time – in this tale of a young man (Pierre Deladonchamps) who frequents a lakeside nude beach, which is a popular hook-up spot despite a recent series of unsolved killings in the area. He becomes infatuated with an attractive man (Christophe Paou) he meets there and they connect; later, he witnesses an incident that makes him suspect his new flame might be the murderer – but that doesn’t stop him from continuing to pursue their relationship, despite an increasing likelihood that he might end up as the next victim. It’s an obvious essay on the power of lust to pull us into danger, but it doesn’t moralize; instead it entices us deeper with scenes of graphic un-simulated sex and sparks nostalgic fantasies of a pre-Grindr era when the threat of encountering a serial killer was never enough to keep us away from our favorite cruising spot. Transgressive? Yes, and also terrifying.
We’re All Going to the World’s Fair (2021)
If you’re a horror fan in 2026, it’s likely you’ve already seen trans filmmaker Jane Schoenbrun’s critically lauded “I Saw the TV Glow,” as well as “Teenage Sex and Death and Camp Miasma,” which has emerged as one of the year’s most acclaimed movies so far. You might not, however, be familiar with their first feature film, in which a teenage girl (Anna Cobb), living an isolated life with an abusive single father, finds escape and connection on the internet; she participates in a “viral challenge” that requires her to post a video of herself performing a ritual chant, and then follow up with updates documenting the transformation she goes through as a result. Inspired by Schoenbrun’s own experience navigating the online world while struggling with gender dysphoria and other issues around their identity, it’s an unsettling and disorienting ride that keeps us wondering what will happen next – but the real horror comes from its observations about the way living our lives online can transform us all.
-
Movies4 days ago10 years later, we still can’t shake Barry Jenkins’s ‘Moonlight’
-
Federal Government5 days agoBessent says Trump chose him for his qualifications, not his sexuality
-
Theater4 days ago‘Some Like It Hot’ a wild ride at renovated Bernard Family Theatre
-
District of Columbia4 days agoD.C.’s LGBTQ homeless facilities face possible hit from Trump funding cuts
