Veteran actor John Pleshette has carved a unique niche in Hollywood by portraying characters you love to hate. From the unsettling Lee Harvey Oswald in The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald to the morally ambiguous movie executive Gary Blondo in Murder One, and even Larry David’s eccentric therapist in Curb Your Enthusiasm, John Pleshette excels at finding the humanity within the flawed and often unpleasant. However, for many, he is indelibly linked to Richard Avery, the unscrupulous lawyer he brought to life on Knots Landing from 1979 to 1983. Pleshette didn’t just play Richard Avery; he built him, contributing significantly to the storylines and laying the groundwork for the series’ enduring success. Speaking from his Los Angeles home, John Pleshette’s voice is as recognizable and his wit as sharp as they were during his Knots Landing days.
A Conversation with John Pleshette: From Knots Landing Beginnings to The Sopranos
It’s a pleasure to speak with you, Mr. Pleshette. Thank you for taking the time.
(John Pleshette, with a hint of pride): You know, you can add The Sopranos to my credits now. I recently filmed an episode.
That’s fantastic! The Sopranos is a favorite for many.
JP: Mine too. It’s slated to be the fourth or fifth episode of the season, but I believe it won’t air until January. They’re very secretive about details. At the table read, they cautioned us, “Please, keep your character details under wraps. It will come out eventually, but maintain the mystery of who you’re playing.”
Understood. We won’t pry. Congratulations on joining The Sopranos, and welcome to Knots Landing Net! The focus of our conversation today is anecdotes – stories, memories, and funny moments. Please, feel free to jump in anytime with your recollections.
JP: I wonder how much you know about the origins of Knots Landing?
Probably not as much as you do.
JP: My wife, Lynn Pleshette, runs a successful literary agency. She’s represented projects like The Truman Show, Memoirs of a Geisha, Cold Mountain, and The Shipping News. Her former husband is David Jacobs. Back in 1975, Lynn and I moved out to Los Angeles. David was in New York, writing architecture book reviews for The New York Times and young adult fiction. When we relocated, he missed his daughter Albyn and followed suit. David penned a story for Blue Knight, a police drama, and then wrote episodes of Family. Lynn became his agent and secured him the job of writing the pilot for Dallas.
So, his ex-wife became his agent? You and Lynn were married at the time.
JP: Yes, Lynn began representing David. Now, most people don’t realize Dallas‘s inspiration. It stemmed from Blood and Money, Tommy Thompson’s book. It was a lurid murder story, a very Texan narrative, incredibly successful. The network was seeking a big Texas story with similar elements. That’s where David’s concept became appealing.
Why not adapt Blood and Money directly into a show?
JP: I believe someone else held the rights. However, the idea of a Texas-based drama was so popular that they needed something quickly. David created Dallas, and then the network looked for a follow-up. David had actually conceived Knots Landing before Dallas, but Dallas was initially their priority. After Dallas gained traction, the network inquired, “What happened to Knots Landing, that suburban concept?”
At that point, I had a substantial film career. I had just completed Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald, a fascinating movie exploring the premise of what if Oswald hadn’t been killed by Ruby. David Greene directed it; he also directed Roots, Rich Man, Poor Man, among others. I portrayed Oswald. When David approached me about Knots Landing, I was doing quite well and wasn’t particularly interested in episodic television. Lynn often jokes that her ex-husband turned me into a “schmuck.” (Laughs)
But the role was intriguing. Initially, for the first year or so, David envisioned it akin to Family – issue-driven, self-contained episodes. Knots was loosely inspired by the movie No Down Payment starring Joanne Woodward and Tony Randall, a 1950s film about married couples in Southern California.
I started writing towards the end of the first season. The episode where Ted Shackelford’s character experiences a drunken downfall, a two-part episode (“Bottom of the Bottle”), was one of my early contributions. After that, I was given free rein to write, and I ended up penning nine episodes.
Why did they grant you such creative freedom?
JP: They were pleased with my writing and wanted more. The challenge with the show was finding ways for these characters to interact. The brilliance of Dallas was that these wealthy, powerful individuals were constantly intertwined because they all lived together. It was somewhat unbelievable that they all resided in the same vicinity, considering their vast wealth!
I argued that unless you connect them through business ventures, how do you maintain their interactions beyond superficial neighborhood issues? In a typical suburban setting, maybe a dog misbehaves or a kid breaks a window, but beyond that, daily interactions are limited. That’s how I conceived the idea of the car dealership, to create a central point of connection.
So, you played a very active role in the writing and even the conceptual development of the show quite early on.
JP: Yes, you could say that. Now, when did Don Murray leave the show?
After the second season.
JP: Right. He wanted to leave. He seemed to lose interest; I think he envisioned the show being more centered around him. There was considerable discussion about how to write him out. I suggested, “Let’s kill him off.” People were shocked, saying, “Oh, you can’t do that. It’s just not done.” I countered, “Yes, we can. If we actually kill him, every time a character is in danger, the audience will genuinely believe that character could be killed.”
So, I wrote two season openers, including the one where his character dies, and later in the season, I wrote “Night.” It’s every actor’s dream to write their own nervous breakdown, you know. I also wanted to direct, but actors weren’t allowed to direct in those days. That was a contributing factor to my departure from the show.
But actors were later permitted to direct. What prompted that shift?
JP: It coincided with David and Michael essentially stepping back from the show’s daily operations. David oversaw the writers, and Michael approved directors, the visual style, costumes, and sets. While these areas overlap, Michael had a strong stance against actors directing each other. However, when Lynn Latham and Bernie Lechowick became writers, David and Michael began to withdraw gradually. A season after the Lechowicks joined, David’s involvement lessened, and eventually, they took over the reins.
What was your opinion of the Lechowicks?
JP: I can’t stand them. I find them to be awful people. They were on the verge of returning to Texas, having struggled for so long in the industry. They contacted Lynn (Pleshette) and asked if she could find any opportunities for them. Lynn met with them, spoke to David, and they went from having no career to running the show.
Lynn was their agent and secured them a significant deal, but one day they declared, “We need a bigger deal” and switched representation. I had been writing for the show, and they made it difficult every time I contributed. That’s often the dynamic with husband-and-wife teams or partnerships; it can become challenging. They were also generally disliked by many on the show; the writers they hired seemed to like them, but not many others.
What was your impression of their creative approach?
JP: Initially, the show aimed to address substantial issues. Don Murray’s character faced rape accusations, Constance’s character was actually raped; there were many issue-driven storylines. By the time the Lechowicks took over, it had truly become a soap opera. Wealthy individuals in soap operas don’t grapple with real-world issues; the problems of everyday people aren’t sensational or lurid enough for that format. I think the Lechowicks introduced a certain playfulness, but the show became increasingly tawdry as it progressed.
You worked with them on one of my favorite Knots episodes, “Birds Do It, Bees Do It.”
JP: Yes, and that was my final episode. Bernie proudly told me he had written it in two days. That’s not something a writer wants to hear. (Laughs) For “Birds Do It,” every humorous idea I proposed was rejected. The only thing I managed to get through was the scene where Karen wears a trench coat over lingerie. I found a young woman who resembled Michele Lee and was the same height. We had her walk past Michele in the hallway, both in trench coats. That was one humorous element I managed to sneak in.
In that episode, Michael goes camping and intends to sleep with a girl. The Lechowicks, being very politically correct, felt it necessary to show him taking out contraceptives to demonstrate responsible behavior. So, I had Michael pull out a pack of about five condoms. I wanted him to take out four and put one back, but they wouldn’t allow it.
There’s a funny anecdote related to Michael in those scenes. Remember when the kids he’s with fantasize about their celebrity crushes? They mention Julia Roberts, and the girls say they’d want to be with Mel Gibson. It turned out Mel Gibson was filming on a neighboring stage. I contacted him and jokingly asked if he’d come over to surprise the actors during that scene. He agreed! We got Mel Gibson to come to our set. We disguised him in a backpack and hiking gear to blend in with the scene. The girls were completely unaware, even though word had leaked out, and we had triple the usual crew watching the shoot. When the moment came, there was a knock on the door, and they were absolutely stunned when he walked in. They were thrilled; he even had one of the girls sit on his lap. We filmed all of it. It was fantastic.
Why wasn’t it included in the broadcast?
JP: Legally, we couldn’t. We would have had to pay him, and it would have become a significant issue. I think it might exist on an actor’s reel somewhere. But that was my swan song.
Why did it end that way?
JP: They were furious that I criticized the script. They were infuriated by any attempts to inject humor. I genuinely believe that episode could have been funnier.
“I said, let’s kill him. And people said, oh you can’t do that. It just isn’t done.”
Let’s move on to some questions from our Knots Landing forum members.
Christine from Germany asks: Were you satisfied with how your character was written out, or would you have preferred a different exit for Richard? After all, we didn’t know what happened to him until he reappeared for Laura’s funeral five years later!
JP: I thought the ending was appropriate. He either leaves or dies; there weren’t many other options. This exit left the door open for a potential return.
And was your departure solely because you wanted to direct?
JP: I was simply ready to move on. I wanted to explore other opportunities, and directing was one of them. I genuinely enjoyed the cast. No temperamental actors, no on-set stress. I had a wonderful time with Michele, with Donna. It was a pleasant community, and I had a degree of creative control over the material. But there were limitations to what you could do with Richard Avery. The show evolved into a more glamorous format, and I’m not particularly glamorous. Richard was a jerk. If you’re not playing a villain, playing a jerk is the next best thing.
Shari from Clermont, Florida, asks: John, thank you for answering our questions! What was the best aspect of working with Constance McCashin? You both had excellent on-screen chemistry. I really enjoyed Richard on the show, and in later episodes, I missed your famous BBQs!! Take care, and thanks!!
JP: We developed a very positive working relationship. It took a few years to evolve, though. Her husband is a very successful film director, Sam Weisman, but at the time, he was an actor. I believe Constance initially wanted him to get the role I played. So, during the first season, Constance was a bit reserved. If I offered a suggestion, she would become slightly defensive. However, after that initial period, it was fantastic. In a show like this, there’s a creative synergy that develops, and it was evident with us, I believe. Back then, as I mentioned, actors directing each other was frowned upon.
When you directed, were casting decisions for smaller roles under your purview?
JP: For the most part, they deferred to me on casting. I was able to bring in many of my friends. Not that they weren’t talented actors (Laughs), but they were also my friends. In fact, I managed to cast Zane Lasky and… who was the other actor?
Mark Haining.
JP: Right, Zane Lasky and Mark Haining. Zane was in a play I was directing, and Mark, I believe, came from an acting class. They both ended up being recurring characters for a while. They became a running joke, those two characters, which was great. And people may not realize that Bill Devane and I are actually very good friends. We co-wrote scripts together, and Billy, Eugenie (Mrs. Devane), Lynn, and I socialized together frequently. He’s a very funny guy, and it’s amusing that we ended up sharing the same on-screen wife.
KissTheCook from West Hollywood, CA, asks: Hello John, first, let me say your portrayal of Richard Avery was simply amazing, and I want to thank you for your hard work. I’d like to know which storyline involving Richard was the most challenging for you as an actor and what inspired you?
JP: The most challenging was the “Night” episode. I thought that since I wrote the script, it would be easier to act, but it turned out to be more difficult for some reason. Perhaps the writer’s process makes acting it more complex. I did extensive research, though. I consulted a police psychologist and tried to base the story on their methods and approach to real hostage situations. When someone reaches that level of despair as a hostage-taker, how do they proceed?
Another aspect I drew on for Richard’s character was cooking. Personally, I’m a very good cook and handle all the cooking at home. The idea of a restaurant was my suggestion, and I thought it would be good to showcase that side of him. And the restaurant’s name, “Daniel,” was from Constance’s child, who was also on the show.
Along similar lines, lkc1 from Manchester, UK, asks: What was your favorite Knots storyline, and which storyline did you really dislike or would have liked to change?
JP: Different episodes draw upon different facets of you as an actor. Certainly, the storylines with Donna were enjoyable. There’s a funny story about that. We had a hot tub scene to film, and I had to remove her bathing suit straps. We had to navigate Standards and Practices for that one. On the day of filming, the hot tub wasn’t filled with hot water; it was freezing. The person responsible for filling it was, shall we say, someone who started drinking early in the morning and was subsequently fired. (Laughs) Anyway, they kept trying to add hot water, but it wasn’t really working. So, I started drinking champagne, and after three glasses, I was oblivious to the temperature. But Donna was still freezing, and every time I touched her, she shivered. When the network viewed it, they thought she was having orgasms. Every time I touched her, a new orgasm. They declared, “This is the hottest scene we’ve ever seen.”
I don’t really think in terms of favorite storylines, but more about the people you worked with. Let me think of another anecdote… There was an episode where we had a biker gang, filmed down in Torrance, bikes on the beach, quite a silly episode. Don Murray and Ted Shackelford show up on the beach to rescue the women. Ted declared, “I can run down the hill myself; I don’t need a stunt double.” Predictably, he tripped running down the hill and got scraped up. And during “Bottom of the Bottle,” Ted slipped in a fight scene and actually broke his arm. It wasn’t scripted, but his arm was in a cast in subsequent scenes in that episode.
And I suppose it healed over the summer, as it was the season finale.
JP: That’s right.
“If you’re not playing a villain, you might as well play a jerk.”
Chris from Winston-Salem, NC, asks: Hi John… I thought you did a great job as Richard Avery… so when I say… I didn’t like him; I am not talking about John Pleshette. With that said, did you LIKE Richard Avery? Was he really a jerk or just a good guy in a bad situation?
JP: I think both are true. You can’t play someone you dislike. Tyrone Guthrie, the renowned director, once said to Olivier, “If you don’t like a character, how can you play him?”
Bob Philips from the UK asks: Hi John, how did you feel when you were invited back to appear in the 2 Improvisation episodes after the Laura character had been “killed off”? Also, was it fun being part of the improvisation, or just plain hard work?
JP: I found it very enjoyable. It was at David’s house, near where Lynn and I live, close to the Hollywood sign. We had a catered party for two days. I wonder if anything was actually scripted from those days, or if anything was written at all. We essentially interacted in character, and 98% of it would be incredibly boring to watch. But the food was good, and we chatted and made up details about our characters’ pasts.
Did they incorporate any of this into the episodes?
JP: I’m not sure. They definitely had to create more content than what they got from the improvisation.
Were you pleased with the final product?
JP: I think there wasn’t enough drama to fill two hours of television. It could have been condensed into one hour and probably been more effective. You know, when a main character dies on a show like this, I think the actors’ reactions are disproportionate to the actual dramatic impact. I believe the people working on the show made a bigger deal of Laura’s death than the audience did.
Actually, from my estimates, Laura’s death is the number one most impactful event in the show’s history for our forum members. People reacted as if a close family member had died.
JP: Really? That’s interesting. I suppose because it was the last realistic tragedy on the show. From that point, the show became more sensational and less realistic. I mean, wasn’t there someone buried in cement at some point? Knots drifted further and further from the audience’s everyday experiences. Laura’s death from cancer was something relatable; people experience that kind of tragedy in their lives daily.
And Constance was unique on the show, very down-to-earth.
JP: I think Constance and Julie Harris were the two best actors on the show. But that highlights the problem. How does Lilimae fit into large corporate buyouts? That’s the kind of storyline Donna was involved in. Donna was the first real glamour character and was followed by Nicollette and more overtly glamorous types. That’s the direction the show shifted.
But why did this happen if those involved didn’t want it? Was there network pressure to make the show more glamorous? Was it ratings-driven? No one ever seems to know why these decisions were made.
JP: As a show progresses, the showrunners gain more influence, and the network’s direct control diminishes, but the network does still shape the show’s overall direction to some extent. Look, the show needed to expand its scope to sustain itself. It probably wouldn’t have lasted as long if it had remained exactly as it was in the beginning. What’s remarkable about The Sopranos is that the characters never lost their humanity. With Knots, it became more about the schemes, Enron-esque corporate connections, and complex personal business dealings.
Truly great shows never lose their humanity. The West Wing has maintained that, even on its grand scale.
Chris Sumner from San Antonio, Texas, asks: I was wondering about your experience on Curb Your Enthusiasm? That was the only episode I watched, specifically because you were in it, and I thought it was the funniest thing I’d ever seen! You deserved a Guest Starring Emmy or Golden Globe for that!
JP: (Laughs) Thank you. That was a lot of fun. It’s a different kind of improvisation that Larry David employs. It’s very structured, and he has specific plot points he wants you to hit in the scenes. But the actual lines are still improvised by the actors.
“The thong.” A comedy classic.
JP: Yes, the thong.
I can easily see you as a regular on an HBO series. You’ve done The Sopranos and Curb; it seems perfectly suited to your style.
JP: Yes, I’d love to, but as you get older, there are fewer roles available. It seems like every working actor now is between 20 and 40. I don’t work as frequently as I used to. I primarily focus on screenwriting now.
“Where does Lilimae fit into big corporate buyouts?”
Lotus Pointe from Philadelphia, PA, asks: Hi John! I recently visited the cul-de-sac in person, and I was struck by how secluded it is. How did shooting take place there – did you film all the exterior scenes in one or two weeks, then just do on-set filming, or did you go back and forth from set to the cul-de-sac? Thank you for your time! Love you!
JP: Lotus Point? Is that a person’s name?
No, it’s an internet screen name. All of these names are online handles, not real names.
JP: Oh, I see. We went back and forth to the cul-de-sac. It’s not far if you live in L.A., though I can see someone outside the city thinking it is. Here, we’re accustomed to long commutes for work. For me, I’d hop on the 405 freeway and be at the cul-de-sac in 15-20 minutes. Typically, they grouped exterior shots together over a few days. Interior scenes were usually filmed at the beginning of the week, and exteriors later in the week. I believe only one house on the cul-de-sac wasn’t occupied, so most filming was done outdoors.
The furthest location we used was Bill Devane’s ranch in Thousand Oaks. That’s quite a distance; I think it’s even beyond the Ventura County line.
How long did a typical episode take to film?
JP: I believe they were shot in seven days. Towards the end, they were completed in six and a half days. The Lechowicks wrote shorter scenes – one or two-page scenes at most, unlike the four-page scenes of the past. This meant moving to a different set for almost every scene. It made for a very demanding schedule as time went on.
James from London asks: When Knots first began, I expected it to be more of a Dallas-type show, with Richard and Laura as the JR and Sue Ellen of the cul-de-sac. Initially, I was disappointed that their relationship unfolded so slowly, although this approach ultimately proved far richer and more rewarding. What expectations did you have for your character when the show started, and what was your opinion when Knots adopted a more serialized format in Season 4?
JP: I didn’t have specific expectations for Richard. As an actor, you’re hired to play a role, and you don’t really consider where the character will go. As for the serialized format, once the audience becomes invested in the characters over time, it makes sense to have more ongoing storylines. So, I thought it was a positive development. What was excellent about Knots for a period in this format is that it didn’t devolve into a soap opera like Dallas or Falcon Crest.
Pam’s Twin Sister from Barcelona, Spain, asks: Can you share any memories of the late Katharine Hepburn, with whom you worked in the TV movie Mrs. Delafield Wants to Marry? Thanks a lot.
JP: She was wonderful. Such a pleasure to work with. Incredibly hardworking. We had four days of rehearsal before filming began, and I really got to know her during that time. One of the most remarkable things about her was that she was clearly suffering from Parkinson’s, but she made it work. She had an extraordinary ability to conceal her pain and fully embody the character, even when her discomfort was evident to everyone.
Tatianna from Virginia asks: Everyone’s life in Knots Landing was intertwined. If Richard had stayed on Knots Landing, do you think Richard would have eventually become involved in dealings with Greg? Also, could he have had a “love interest” in Paige, Jill, or Anne?
JP (jokingly): Well, I definitely would have enjoyed being with Nicollette Sheridan’s Paige Matheson! But if you wanted to develop Richard’s character further, you’d make him a powerful figure. Make him a Richard III type, an unlikely villain. No one would suspect Richard of having any real power, so it would have been intriguing to see him manipulate situations, pit characters against each other, and acquire power that way. In shows like NYPD Blue, Bochco created a genuine character journey for Sipowicz. With Gandolfini in The Sopranos, you have a character who routinely murders people but is also deeply devoted to his family. The concept of a wiseguy in therapy is brilliant because he genuinely evolves over time. In Knots, the problem was that everyone was essentially destined to play the same notes in their songs. They didn’t truly grow or change.
I would disagree with that somewhat. Devane’s Greg Sumner was one character on Knots who demonstrably evolved and grew over his ten years on the show. He endured a lot but maintained his humanity and remained compelling.
JP: Yes, Billy is a very forceful personality, and knowing Billy, I’m sure his character’s development was influenced by the forcefulness he brought to the role. I can see him shaping his character in a way he envisioned. He was excellent in that role and truly settled into it over time.
Last question, just for fun, were Ciji and Laura supposed to have a lesbian relationship?
JP: Yes, there was definitely a hinted lesbian possibility between them. Once, I walked in to film a scene with them, and they played a prank on me by turning around and facing me with mustaches drawn on their faces. So yes, it was discussed. I’d say it was implicit rather than explicit. I don’t think Laura and Ciji were actually sexually involved, but it could have potentially developed into something more.
It’s been a real pleasure, Mr. Pleshette. Please stay connected with Knots Landing Net.
JP: Thank you very much. I’ve really enjoyed our conversation.
