# Downton Abbey



## Albert7

Love it, hate it? Don't know about it? Downton Abbey is a great show although some of it is tough to figure out with the class structures.

Who else likes this show like I do?


----------



## Ingélou

I like it a lot, although I think it's losing momentum the more series it goes into. I also get very irritated by the dialogue, which often contains slang or word usage that I remember coming into vogue, and so it's totally anachronistic for the early twentieth century. The writer doesn't care about that - but I think he *should*.

But it's beautiful to watch - I love the clothes - and it's often very funny. My favourite is the Dowager, played by Maggie Smith. What wonderful timing she has!


----------



## Guest

Yep, it's flagging I think. 

Any fan of this should watch the film Gosford Park methinks.


----------



## elgar's ghost

One of the strengths of TV in the UK is well-produced costume drama but I share Ingelou's concern that it will drag on too long and become too soap opera-ish. Back in the 70s Upstairs Downstairs seemed to be heading the same way but the onset and aftermath of WWI seemed to rejuvenate the storylines.


----------



## Albert7

Anyone think it will be on for only one more season left?


----------



## Vesteralen

I saw yesterday that Maggie Smith will be leaving after one more season. The implication was that it will go on after that.

I'm also having problems with the dialogue being not time-relevant sometimes.

It also irritates me how they shift scenes so often. It's like they are saying the whole world has ADHD and can't take a scene that lasts more than a minute and a half.

I'm also excessively irritated by Lady Mary and her mother when it comes to their accents. Over-stuffy in one case and cloying in the other.

Daisy is the only reason I still watch. I hope they let her leave and become a successful businesswoman. Maybe she'll be able to rescue the family from poverty sometime..


----------



## Guest

It's about the only thing I watch on commercial TV and boy do the ads annoy me. It's like Ian Hislop said, he thought he was watching an hour long ad with occasional drama interludes.


----------



## Antiquarian

I enjoy it, but I'm not one of those rabid fans. Ingélou's observation of anachronistic language is interesting. I wonder if this phenomenon is due to rewrites that the principle screenwriter had no hand in... Julian Fellowes is ordinarily a perceptive writer; his novel Past Imperfect is an interesting and trenchant commentary on post war class migration (I was less impressed by his novel Snobs). 

I think it will continue for a while longer, but I can't see it having the same longevity as Upstairs, Downstairs.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Antiquarian said:


> I enjoy it, but I'm not one of those rabid fans. Ingélou's observation of anachronistic language is interesting. I wonder if this phenomenon is due to rewrites that the principle screenwriter had no hand in. Julian Fellowes is ordinarily a perceptive writer; his novel Past Imperfect is an interesting and trenchant commentary on post war class migration (I was less impressed by his novel Snobs).


I noticed something akin to this with the Spartacus series that was on recently - English dialogue but in a clipped way as if to suggest that Latin had less connective word tissue than English. Better than using 21st century dumbed down text-speak, I suppose.


----------



## Bulldog

Vesteralen said:


> It also irritates me how they shift scenes so often. It's like they are saying the whole world has ADHD and can't take a scene that lasts more than a minute and a half.


I feel the opposite. I like the pacing and am glad that there aren't any long monologues that would drag the flow.

Also, I don't think the show is becoming less appealing at all. Actually, I enjoyed this season more than the last.


----------



## aajj

I've watched the show on & off - off when the story lines and characters drive me batty. It has seemed to become progressively soapier. Having said that, in one of the earlier seasons someone had amnesia and that's a device of soap-osity if ever there was one. 

I generally prefer the "downstairs" characters. Upstairs, Mary and Lord Grantham with their air of entitlement get my goat. Lord Grantham strikes me as an example of a person who is by nature a mediocrity and without qualifications to hold his high position, other than the birthright bestowed upon him. Not to sound too harsh with him; he has often shown a big heart. But if not for his inheritance i picture him as a bumbling shopkeeper. 

I have highly enjoyed Edith's story line, going back to last season or earlier, as she has found her niche as a writer and the quandary of her pregnancy and the missing beau. 

Maggie Smith, if she does leave, will be sorely missed. The dowager is an absolute hoot.


----------



## Taggart

albertfallickwang said:


> Love it, hate it? Don't know about it? Downton Abbey is a great show although some of it is tough to figure out with the class structures.
> 
> Who else likes this show like I do?


Lovely show. Can't say the class structures gave me any problem, but then I'm an ex teacher. It'll probably ease up since the bolshy schoolmarm has left. 

The ads don't bother us too much as we use catch up. I suspect it'll keep on and on and on and on and get less and less interesting.


----------



## Kopachris

Love it. I thought the end of season three (series three, I suppose) was one of the most poignant season/series endings I'd ever seen. Spoiler alert: When we see Matthew die in a car wreck and then cut to end the season on Mary's smiling face looking over her newborn baby. Such a powerful juxtaposition.

Despite how much I hate him sometimes, I think my favorite character has to be Barrow. His struggles and ambitions are easy for me to identify with, and though his actions make him a wonderfully detestable character at times, his character has a spirit and a depth that's hard to match. He's clever and conniving, willing to hurt people a little to advance his ambitions, but he's not really malicious. Selfish, maybe, but not outright malicious.


----------



## aajj

I find it impossible not to sympathize with Thomas Barrow at times. His conundrum as a gay man at that time and place had a parallel to Edith's predicament as an unwed pregnant woman of societal standing. However, while i've found increased interest in Edith's story, Thomas' has too often been a rehash, in the way he connives in that underhanded way of his. His ongoing obsession against Anna and Bates - enough already. His character became stale for me some time ago.


----------



## Kopachris

I often forget Barrow is gay, and I'm glad the show doesn't shine a spotlight on that facet of his personality, making that all he is, the "token gay character." Rather, I tend to focus on his ambition. That underhanded way he has of conniving and scheming against others to further his own ends makes me love to hate him most of the time. But then there are the times when he's in trouble, especially by the backfiring of his own horrible scheme, and I see a darker part of myself in him and his motives.


----------



## Guest

I have read that Fellowes has no interest in taking the series into WWII, and given that we are now up to the end of 1924, I don't know how many more seasons they will do. I suppose eventually they will marry Mary off again, although it certainly isn't as critical now, as in her son they now have a male heir, but the end of series 5 hinted that there is a new romantic interest for her - one who seems a little more immune to her. 

There is also talk of a prequel addressing the courtship of Robert and Cora - Fellowes was going to just write a book, but it is now being explored for development into a TV series.

I agree that things have been lagging a bit - I did enjoy the finale of series 5 better than that of 4. I hope they finally leave Anna and Bates alone. Good Lord, Romeo and Juliet had nothing on them in terms of being star-crossed. Barrow is Barrow - you hate him all season, then he does one redeeming act, maybe two. In this case, he embarrassed Sindiby's butler into being nice to Branson, and he helped the temp footman being snookered by the Dowager's lady, Denkers.

And I agree - Maggie Smith is the star of the show. Her cutting wit absolutely makes the show.


----------



## aajj

Kopachris said:


> I often forget Barrow is gay, and I'm glad the show doesn't shine a spotlight on that facet of his personality, making that all he is, the "token gay character." Rather, I tend to focus on his ambition. That underhanded way he has of conniving and scheming against others to further his own ends makes me love to hate him most of the time. But then there are the times when he's in trouble, especially by the backfiring of his own horrible scheme, and I see a darker part of myself in him and his motives.


I agree, Thomas is not a "token gay character" and his struggles along these lines have not felt that way in the least. But as a troublemaker he is too often one-dimensional. He is mostly depicted as a jerk and is allowed the occasional act of decency in an attempt to flesh out his character.

I also agree about Anna & Bates being star-crossed. Each has been falsely accused of murder in separate incidents, very impressive! I imagine, if they ever had children, they would grow up and be falsely accused of murder as well.

As a "Yank," Mr. Carson fascinates me. All, or most, of the downstairs employees take for granted their position and respect the traditions, but Mr. Carson lends such an air of dignity and ceremony to his station. This is truly his calling in life and i find myself admiring his pride of place, even as it is completely alien to me.

Which reminds me of that Socialist character Tom was involved in for a while. Can't recall her name but she was a bit of fresh air as a character completely out of step with the Downton clan.


----------



## Guest

Can't bear it...overrated tosh !


----------



## Krummhorn

Downton Abbey is one of our favorite programs to watch. I truly believe that the UK puts together shows like this that are far more entertaining than any of its US counterparts.


----------



## Bulldog

aajj said:


> As a "Yank," Mr. Carson fascinates me. All, or most, of the downstairs employees take for granted their position and respect the traditions, but Mr. Carson lends such an air of dignity and ceremony to his station. This is truly his calling in life and i find myself admiring his pride of place, even as it is completely alien to me.


Yes, Carson is easily my favorite character from the show. As for Thomas, he's a major slime ball, and I haven't forgotten that he's also a coward as evidenced by his actions in war.


----------



## Guest

Advantage of watching it as a Yankee - it is on PBS, which means we get to watch it without commercial interruptions.

Disadvantage of watching it as a Yankee - we don't get to see episode one until you redcoats get to see the whole season through - I just watched the Christmas episode - in March.

I was skeptical that I would like it when my wife first turned it on. I had seen some British period dramas that bored me to tears. It is amazing, though, how engaging it is. Its expertise is the character development. You get to live inside the heads of these people.


----------



## Guest

Bulldog said:


> Yes, Carson is easily my favorite character from the show. As for Thomas, he's a major slime ball, and I haven't forgotten that he's also a coward as evidenced by his actions in war.


For all his faults, I don't count his actions in war against him. For all those faults, he joined up. He was one of those caught up in the previous romantic notions of war, who when confronted with the harsh reality of perhaps one of the most abominable forms of warfare - trench warfare, and the constant throwing of men into the meat grinder of no man's land - he cracked a bit. Just as with Mrs. Patmore's nephew - he didn't have to sign up, but he did.

What got me this season was how they could have given him just a little more of a hint of humanity - some kind of remorse at being one of those culpable in the false imprisonment of Anna. And yet they treated it like it didn't happen. His sending of the letter to the police, hinting that Baxter might know something helped keep the investigators interested in Bates and Anna. And yet that seems to have been forgotten, because he went through the agony of his attempted "cure." Never once did the camera catch him evincing even the slightest modicum of remorse for the part he played in Bates' and Anna's misery. Yes - he has done some despicable things in the past - but at most his motives were to get someone fired or made to look a fool. This action, though, brought no remorse from him. Even against Cora's former lady's maid, he wouldn't directly expose her role in Cora slipping on the soap and miscarrying, although she nearly did more damage to him than anyone else in the House. No such circumspection for how he helped to derail their lives, even though Bates had stood up for him in the past.


----------



## aajj

Now the news is that Maggie Smith may in fact stay on. I hope so: long live the dowager!


----------



## Albert7

MacLeod said:


> Can't bear it...overrated tosh !


Overrated in what way? I don't understand.


----------



## Couchie

Krummhorn said:


> Downton Abbey is one of our favorite programs to watch. I truly believe that the UK puts together shows like this that are far more entertaining than any of its US counterparts.


...American shows like The Good Wife or Breaking Bad are far more sophisticated entertainment than this soapy, brain-rotting period melodrama.


----------



## Guest

I have never watched the Good Wife, but have watched all of Breaking Bad, and I admit I really enjoyed it. Having watched Breaking Bad, and all of Downton Abbey, I am curious - in what way do you see Breaking Bad as more sophisticated? And what exactly is soapy about Downton Abbey?


----------



## Figleaf

Ingélou said:


> I like it a lot, although I think it's losing momentum the more series it goes into. I also get very irritated by the dialogue, which often contains slang or word usage that I remember coming into vogue, and so it's totally anachronistic for the early twentieth century. The writer doesn't care about that - but I think he *should*.
> 
> But it's beautiful to watch - I love the clothes - and it's often very funny. My favourite is the Dowager, played by Maggie Smith. What wonderful timing she has!


Great post. I think you posted something about Downton before, and I wanted to ask you about that dialogue- not that there's anything wrong with enjoying trashy writing when it's part of an otherwise entertaining and gorgeous looking TV show, I just find that it's hard to switch off one's critical faculties enough not to be bugged by the ineptitude of the dialogue. It's a weird mixture of cod-historical archness and present day soap opera banality- I totally agree that it should be possible to eliminate the anachronisms. All one has to do is to immerse oneself in the literature of the period and then run the script past some actual experts to take out any howlers- perhaps it's a lot of bother, but then there's been no effort or expense spared on costumes and sets, so why is the writing so slapdash?

I quit Downton after one or two episodes, so it's possible that it has improved, or that memory is exaggerating how bad it was in the first place. I'm very tempted to peek at the episode with 'Nellie Melba'!


----------



## Guest

albertfallickwang said:


> Overrated in what way? I don't understand.


It's a soap/melodrama in posh costumes set in an era of British history that is consistently romanticised. Yet the fact that it's regularly up for awards suggest that it is being taken more seriously than that.

I watched the first series and enjoyed it, mostly because of the playing of some of the actors (Logan, Bonneville, Smith and Wilton) but parted company midway through the second as it was clear that there was going to be little character development, only melodramatic plot movement. Every time I've dropped in since (my wife has more stamina, but she's given up too...I think) I've seen nothing to convince me that anything's changed.


----------



## Ingélou

Figleaf said:


> ...I just find that it's hard to switch off one's critical faculties enough not to be bugged by the ineptitude of the dialogue. It's a weird mixture of cod-historical archness and present day soap opera banality- I totally agree that it should be possible to eliminate the anachronisms. All one has to do is to immerse oneself in the literature of the period and then run the script past some actual experts to take out any howlers- perhaps it's a lot of bother, but then there's been no effort or expense spared on costumes and sets, *so why is the writing so slapdash*?
> 
> I quit Downton after one or two episodes, so it's possible that it has improved, or that memory is exaggerating how bad it was in the first place. I'm very tempted to peek at the episode with 'Nellie Melba'!


My italics - It really seems that Julian Fellowes doesn't care, because I recollect reading articles where he's asked about the anachronisms and just brushes them off. But since he's 65, he *must* remember some of these expressions coming in, the same as I do, so he obviously just wants to be popular at any cost.

Don't bother about the Nellie Melba episode - it was very disappointing and since a Shocking Event took place during the singing, it was impossible to appreciate it anyway.

Basically, I agree with the points that MacLeod makes - it has become 'soap/melodrama in posh costumes'. It was the first series of Downton that I really enjoyed, like him. But like any soap, it has an addictive power - I want to know what happens. Plus, it is still very 'good in parts', with excellent acting and plenty of bon-mots.

Also - shame on me  - I enjoy looking at the posh costumes.


----------



## TxllxT

Figleaf said:


> Great post. I think you posted something about Downton before, and I wanted to ask you about that dialogue- not that there's anything wrong with enjoying trashy writing when it's part of an otherwise entertaining and gorgeous looking TV show, I just find that it's hard to switch off one's critical faculties enough not to be bugged by the ineptitude of the dialogue. It's a weird mixture of cod-historical archness and present day soap opera banality- I totally agree that it should be possible to eliminate the anachronisms. All one has to do is to immerse oneself in the literature of the period and then run the script past some actual experts to take out any howlers- perhaps it's a lot of bother, but then there's been no effort or expense spared on costumes and sets, so why is the writing so slapdash?
> 
> I quit Downton after one or two episodes, so it's possible that it has improved, or that memory is exaggerating how bad it was in the first place. I'm very tempted to peek at the episode with 'Nellie Melba'!


With series like Downton Abbey I quickly get lost, because the costume drama is not only exterior (all the lavish details shown everywhere, making my attention waver everywhere) but also interior: the 'slapdash' writing & sloppy anachronisms turn the character play into a changeable costume set as well. 
Nowadays the making of television happens in HD quality or ultra HD quality, which results in a mind boggling, stupefying amount of detail & micro-detail. In order not to get lost in this paradise we need the strong hand of a well written script with well outlined characters that grab the attention of the beholder with unwavering conviction. Alas, Downton Abbey seems in comparison with Upstairs, Downstairs the easy winner when it comes to showing details & trivia in eye-popping beauty, but is the failing flunk when it comes to matters of the heart: no firmness, no persuasion, no belief, no idea.


----------



## Guest

Wow, who would have thought we would have an exchange over whether or not Downton Abbey is HIP or not. The same arguments over authenticity of speech could easily be exchanged for debates over whether a classical work is performed in an historically accurate way. Okay, some of the language may be anachronistic. Isn't performing Bach's Goldberg Variations on a modern concert grand piano also anachronistic?

I am no expert on British idioms and euphemisms - I have no clue whether the phrases employed in the series are typical of the time period or not. It does amuse me slightly - just because I watched a documentary this year regarding how exacting they are with all the visual details, down to what side a server would approach a diner, the proper spacing of everything on a properly set table, etc. Still, it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the show. For documentaries, I expect accuracy. For fictional programs, not so much. As a scientist, I laugh all the time at crime procedurals, where it seems that every experiment in the crime lab consists of dropping some piece of evidence in a vial, squirting in some non-descript blue liquid, centrifuging said vial, and then putting it all in some unidentified analyzer that can tell them anything from a person's exact genetic make-up, to their height, to what they had for dinner 3 weeks past. Does that impede my ability to enjoy the show? Nope.


----------



## Guest

DrMike said:


> Wow, who would have thought we would have an exchange over whether or not Downton Abbey is HIP or not. The same arguments over authenticity of speech could easily be exchanged for debates over whether a classical work is performed in an historically accurate way. Okay, some of the language may be anachronistic. Isn't performing Bach's Goldberg Variations on a modern concert grand piano also anachronistic?
> 
> I am no expert on British idioms and euphemisms - I have no clue whether the phrases employed in the series are typical of the time period or not. It does amuse me slightly - just because I watched a documentary this year regarding how exacting they are with all the visual details, down to what side a server would approach a diner, the proper spacing of everything on a properly set table, etc. Still, it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the show. For documentaries, I expect accuracy. For fictional programs, not so much. As a scientist, I laugh all the time at crime procedurals, where it seems that every experiment in the crime lab consists of dropping some piece of evidence in a vial, squirting in some non-descript blue liquid, centrifuging said vial, and then putting it all in some unidentified analyzer that can tell them anything from a person's exact genetic make-up, to their height, to what they had for dinner 3 weeks past. Does that impede my ability to enjoy the show? Nope.


If one wants to find anachronisms one will find them. I'm not looking for perfect detail when I watch a fictional drama. You may enjoy Wolf Hall, which is set to be broadcast on PBS in the US from April 5 to May 10. It is a masterclass of acting. However if one is concerned that it is set in a time before the invention of the lawnmower and yet there is a mown lawn to be seen, it maybe should be avoided!


----------



## Figleaf

DrMike said:


> Wow, who would have thought we would have an exchange over whether or not Downton Abbey is HIP or not. The same arguments over authenticity of speech could easily be exchanged for debates over whether a classical work is performed in an historically accurate way. Okay, some of the language may be anachronistic. Isn't performing Bach's Goldberg Variations on a modern concert grand piano also anachronistic?
> 
> I am no expert on British idioms and euphemisms - I have no clue whether the phrases employed in the series are typical of the time period or not. It does amuse me slightly - just because I watched a documentary this year regarding how exacting they are with all the visual details, down to what side a server would approach a diner, the proper spacing of everything on a properly set table, etc. Still, it doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the show. For documentaries, I expect accuracy. For fictional programs, not so much. As a scientist, I laugh all the time at crime procedurals, where it seems that every experiment in the crime lab consists of dropping some piece of evidence in a vial, squirting in some non-descript blue liquid, centrifuging said vial, and then putting it all in some unidentified analyzer that can tell them anything from a person's exact genetic make-up, to their height, to what they had for dinner 3 weeks past. Does that impede my ability to enjoy the show? Nope.


Of course period accuracy matters- because when it's wrong it's grating and makes suspension of disbelief impossible. In the case of baroque music it's a little harder to say what's 'right' and what's 'wrong', but that doesn't mean it's unworthy of consideration. Care over details is one of the key differences between artistry and hackwork, and the latter is depressing to behold.


----------



## Figleaf

dogen said:


> If one wants to find anachronisms one will find them. I'm not looking for perfect detail when I watch a fictional drama. You may enjoy Wolf Hall, which is set to be broadcast on PBS in the US from April 5 to May 10. It is a masterclass of acting. However if one is concerned that it is set in a time before the invention of the lawnmower and yet there is a mown lawn to be seen, it maybe should be avoided!


Interesting point. I've never noticed the lawn mowing techniques (!) used in period dramas, but from now on I'm going to. Would a grazed or scythed lawn look much rougher than a conventionally mown one?


----------



## Vesteralen

TxllxT said:


> Alas, Downton Abbey seems in comparison with Upstairs, Downstairs the easy winner when it comes to showing details & trivia in eye-popping beauty, but is the failing flunk when it comes to matters of the heart: no firmness, no persuasion, no belief, no idea.


There's a kind of paint-by-the-numbers feeling I get every time the family meets together for tea, or a meal, or whatever. One person will make a short statement, another will move it along with a brief remark, a third will ask a question, a fourth will respond. Hardly anyone will say more than one sentence at a time.

I'm also frustrated by the character development, because there really doesn't seem to be any. I get more of a sense that the powers that be all of a sudden get the feeling that a particular character is going too far in one direction, so they will next have an episode where they take that character the opposite way for a while. Case in point - Lord Grantham, who was so clearly pig-headed and mistaken in his views episode after episode, and then all of a sudden - presto-change - he's reasonable and judicious. I like him better the latter way for sure, but where and how did it all happen? It made me feel like the actor playing the role went to the writers and said, "I'm tired of always being stupid and grumpy. If you can't make me look better I'm going to quit."


----------



## Guest

Vesteralen said:


> There's a kind of paint-by-the-numbers feeling I get every time the family meets together for tea, or a meal, or whatever. One person will make a short statement, another will move it along with a brief remark, a third will ask a question, a fourth will respond. Hardly anyone will say more than one sentence at a time.
> 
> I'm also frustrated by the character development, because there really doesn't seem to be any. I get more of a sense that the powers that be all of a sudden get the feeling that a particular character is going too far in one direction, so they will next have an episode where they take that character the opposite way for a while. Case in point - Lord Grantham, who was so clearly pig-headed and mistaken in his views episode after episode, and then all of a sudden - presto-change - he's reasonable and judicious. I like him better the latter way for sure, but where and how did it all happen? It made me feel like the actor playing the role went to the writers and said, "I'm tired of always being stupid and grumpy. If you can't make me look better I'm going to quit."


I'm not certain of your criticism - do you believe it inaccurate to suggest that people are capable of change? They did set up the scenario by which Robert started to recognize that he was perhaps in the wrong in his thinking. When he witnessed Shrimpy losing all that he had, and recognizing that the reason for it was due to Shrimpy's inability to adapt the the changing times and circumstances, it finally led Robert to understand that simply doing things as they had always been done was no longer a tenable position. He is hopelessly conservative and averse to change - but he is not self-destructive, and through it all, above everything else, he feels himself also to be a servant to the larger good of the title and the land. He must keep it going, even if it means doing some things he does not like.


----------



## Guest

Figleaf said:


> Of course period accuracy matters- because when it's wrong it's grating and makes suspension of disbelief impossible. In the case of baroque music it's a little harder to say what's 'right' and what's 'wrong', but that doesn't mean it's unworthy of consideration. Care over details is one of the key differences between artistry and hackwork, and the latter is depressing to behold.


Some things with baroque music are harder to establish - but we at least know that Bach did not perform any of his works on a modern concert grand piano. That is absolutely, without doubt, anachronistic. And yet it can still be enjoyed.

No matter how much effort is put into making something as accurate as possible, there is always going to be something missed, and somebody there to point it out. There is a fine line between demanding accuracy and nitpicking. I didn't say that period accuracy doesn't matter. My contention is that of course it matters - and to claim that it doesn't matter in this show is just plain wrong - but how far must it be followed? Down to every last detail? The show isn't about what specific phrases people used in the early 20th century in England - the show is trying to show how the British aristocratic and working classes were in a state of upheaval and change in the early 20th century, and how their lives and society would be forever be changed. Are they getting those issues right? I'm not watching it as a museum set-piece, focusing on how accurate they get the minutiae.


----------



## Vesteralen

DrMike said:


> I'm not certain of your criticism - do you believe it inaccurate to suggest that people are capable of change? They did set up the scenario by which Robert started to recognize that he was perhaps in the wrong in his thinking. When he witnessed Shrimpy losing all that he had, and recognizing that the reason for it was due to Shrimpy's inability to adapt the the changing times and circumstances, it finally led Robert to understand that simply doing things as they had always been done was no longer a tenable position. He is hopelessly conservative and averse to change - but he is not self-destructive, and through it all, above everything else, he feels himself also to be a servant to the larger good of the title and the land. He must keep it going, even if it means doing some things he does not like.


Certainly people are capable of change. I did not feel the "set-up" for this change in the script as you point it out. Maybe watching the whole season over again would convince me. I just felt he went from pig-headed to reasonable in the blink of an episode and it didn't impress me as being particularly well set-up.


----------



## Guest

Figleaf said:


> Interesting point. I've never noticed the lawn mowing techniques (!) used in period dramas, but from now on I'm going to. Would a grazed or scythed lawn look much rougher than a conventionally mown one?


It was in a Guardian article discussing "accuracy" in Wolf Hall!!!


----------



## Vesteralen

DrMike said:


> I'm not watching it as a museum set-piece, focusing on how accurate they get the minutiae.


Well, I don't think that is a fair assessment of how other people who have mentioned this point in this thread are viewing matters. I appreciated Ingelou's mentioning this point because, though I got the same feeling myself, not being British, I wasn't sure whether my impression about things not being expressed rightly for the period of time in Britain was valid or not. But, I can assure you, though I appreciate the efforts they go to in order to get the props and everything else right, it's no fetish of mine. I don't watch shows for that kind of thing.

It's just when I hear something that doesn't sound fitting being said by someone in the context of the period in which the show is being set, it erodes the all-essential "suspension of disbelief" just a little bit. And, if it happens frequently, it erodes it to a greater degree.

Modern movies do this incessantly. It wouldn't surprise me if I heard one of Jane Austen's characters in a modern movie say something like "Let's go kick some butt" or something of that ilk. And, though there is nothing nearly that egregious in DA, I just expect a little more of a show that prides itself on its faithfulness to the setting.


----------



## Guest

My biggest concern is whether or not they are getting the attitudes of the period correct - not the words they are using to express the attitudes.


----------



## Figleaf

DrMike said:


> My biggest concern is whether or not they are getting the attitudes of the period correct - not the words they are using to express the attitudes.


How on earth can you express the correct attitudes in dialogue if you use glaringly inappropriate language? I'm guessing that one reason why the show is so popular in the US is that they are less familiar with the British English of the period and thus less inclined to be bothered by the anachronisms.


----------



## Guest

Figleaf said:


> How on earth can you express the correct attitudes in dialogue if you use glaringly inappropriate language? I'm guessing that one reason why the show is so popular in the US is that they are less familiar with the British English of the period and thus less inclined to be bothered by the anachronisms.


That's entirely possible. I thought it was very popular amongst the British as well, though.


----------



## Figleaf

DrMike said:


> That's entirely possible. I thought it was very popular amongst the British as well, though.


Yes it is, and I've always found that odd. It says something about the slavish mentality of the English at least, that we yearn for an age of deference, and do everything we can to return to it- yet so poorly educated are we and so deaf to the nuances of our own language that we cannot even tell when an idealized re-creation of that time is ineptly done.

Or maybe we just like looking at the decor and the lovely dresses!


----------



## Albert7

Figleaf said:


> Yes it is, and I've always found that odd. It says something about the slavish mentality of the English at least, that we yearn for an age of deference, and do everything we can to return to it- yet so poorly educated are we and so deaf to the nuances of our own language that we cannot even tell when an idealized re-creation of that time is ineptly done.
> 
> Or maybe we just like looking at the decor and the lovely dresses!


I still think that the Downton Abbey sets are what we are enamoured of and not the language. For example:

READ this 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/02/04/aaron-schock-plans-to-pay-decorator-for-his-downton-abbey-inspired-office/


----------



## Figleaf

albertfallickwang said:


> I still think that the Downton Abbey sets are what we are enamoured of and not the language. For example:
> 
> READ this
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/02/04/aaron-schock-plans-to-pay-decorator-for-his-downton-abbey-inspired-office/
> 
> View attachment 65687


That decor absolutely rocks- but you realise that red pigment comes from the spilled blood of the working classes?


----------



## Ingélou

DrMike said:


> My biggest concern is whether or not they are getting the attitudes of the period correct - not the words they are using to express the attitudes.


To be honest, I don't think they do always get the attitudes* right. All the 'good' characters tend to be on the side of the angels, as seen by modern audiences. It would be so easy for Julian Fellowes to get the speech right, so not to bother seems perverse and cavalier - saying that he won't make that extra effort for his audience. 
I still watch Downton, and I enjoy watching it, but every time one of these modernisms - in speech *or* attitude - crops up, I do feel the grating sensation that has been mentioned. 
And the usual thing is happening to the characters and storylines - too much is happening, too many melodramatic coincidences etc. 
But that isn't to say I won't continue to watch until the very last frou-frou of the last posh frock! :lol:

_*The main thing that is inaccurate is that there is not enough distance between upstairs & downstairs. In the time period when Downton Abbey began, maids were instructed to turn their faces to the wall as their employers passed. But the upstairs folk are always making concessions or appearing downstairs suddenly like fairy godmothers. Some of the most recent stories about attitudes to people of different backgrounds are particularly simplistic and unlikely - but I can't go into detail, as that would spoil it for Dr Mike! _


----------



## Vaneyes

'Cinderella has a dusting of Downton Abbey'

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/movies/cinderella-has-a-dusting-of-downton-abbey.html?_r=0


----------



## Figleaf

Vaneyes said:


> 'Cinderella has a dusting of Downton Abbey'
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/movies/cinderella-has-a-dusting-of-downton-abbey.html?_r=0


_"It's incredible, seeing your face three-stories high," Ms. McShera said. "That's when you really get a sense of the* enormity* of the film."_

AAAAARGH!!! Don't get me started on people who think 'enormity' means 'impressively large size'! :scold:
:lol:


----------



## Couchie

DrMike said:


> I have never watched the Good Wife, but have watched all of Breaking Bad, and I admit I really enjoyed it. Having watched Breaking Bad, and all of Downton Abbey, I am curious - in what way do you see Breaking Bad as more sophisticated? And what exactly is soapy about Downton Abbey?


Breaking Bad the material is just far more original, the drama organic, the acting without pretension, and the themes more challenging. I only watched the first 3 seasons of Downton but at the start of every episode you ask yourself, "and what new drama will they manufacture for these poor people?" And often killing off people was the (cheap) answer. I did enjoy it (until I got bored after Season 3), but it was the kind of guilty enjoyment I also get from watching reality TV.


----------



## Albert7

Couchie said:


> Breaking Bad the material is just far more original, the drama organic, the acting without pretension, and the themes more challenging. I only watched the first 3 seasons of Downton but at the start of every episode you ask yourself, "and what new drama will they manufacture for these poor people?" And often killing off people was the (cheap) answer. I did enjoy it (until I got bored after Season 3), but it was the kind of guilty enjoyment I also get from watching reality TV.


Undoubtably, The Wire remains my favorite TV show ever... killing off characters in gruesome and unexpected ways... for example, the death of Omar in Season 5 was just wow.


----------



## Taggart

Please remember the ToS:



> A special forum has been created for Political and/or Religious discussions that are related to Classical Music. If members wish to create topics for discussion regarding political and religious topics not related to Classical Music, such will be strictly limited to Social Groups only. As always, the same rules apply to Social Groups as they do on the open boards.


Please keep Political Discussion not related to Classical Music to the Social Groups. Some posts have been removed.


----------



## Albert7

My huge question is why Americans love the show from England so much? It's a fascinating phenomenon. Not even Absolutely Fabulous had that much crossover appeal over here.


----------



## manyene

Arguably it has become the victim of its own success. The first series was very good, with some of the limitations (anachronisms et cetera) mentioned by others. A second series was then commissioned, and the quality of the writing began to fall away. And so it went on-Julian Fellowes, a good writer, was obviously under a lot of pressure to produce; ITV, which has had some difficult years financially recently, needed to satisfy public demand, and inevitably the whole thing fell into the trap that soap operas have encountered, of main characters behaving inconsistently. Admittedly, it has some way to go yet, as the problem with soap operas is that they tend to have several writers not always kept under control by the main author. But there have been a growing number of improbabilities and I think the time has come to bring the whole thing to an end.


----------



## Bulldog

manyene said:


> Arguably it has become the victim of its own success. The first series was very good, with some of the limitations (anachronisms et cetera) mentioned by others. A second series was then commissioned, and the quality of the writing began to fall away. And so it went on-Julian Fellowes, a good writer, was obviously under a lot of pressure to produce; ITV, which has had some difficult years financially recently, needed to satisfy public demand, and inevitably the whole thing fell into the trap that soap operas have encountered, of main characters behaving inconsistently. Admittedly, it has some way to go yet, as the problem with soap operas is that they tend to have several writers not always kept under control by the main author. But there have been a growing number of improbabilities and I think the time has come to bring the whole thing to an end.


No way. The show will last longer than I do.


----------



## Ingélou

Julian Fellowes has indicated that it will go on for a while yet. But even though I still watch it and enjoy it, I agree with you, manyene - it's gone on long enough.


----------



## Bulldog

Not long enough. I need to know if Carson and his new bride will have a baby, or if Carson will be searching for viagra. And what about Mary? Will someone knock that smirk off her face? The list goes on.


----------



## Ingélou

I like Mary! She models the posh frocks so exquisitely.


----------



## manyene

It has been reported that Maggie Smith will be leaving the series and for many viewers, at least in the UK, this will remove the main reason why most of us continue to watch it. On the other hand this story has been around for some time, so we will have to await developments.

Bulldog is of course quite right - if the market is there, the series will continue: as we know, viewing figures determine the fate of television series. But I will not regret its disappearance. In any case there are some better series appearing, including Channel 4's Indian Summer, which is currently underway.


----------



## aajj

Bulldog said:


> Not long enough. I need to know if Carson and his new bride will have a baby, or if Carson will be searching for viagra. And what about Mary? Will someone knock that smirk off her face? The list goes on.


I often forget that Mary is in fact a mother. She spends so little time with her child, too busy puttering over her next beaux and prepping for her future as her father's replacement as Lord of the Manor.


----------



## Figleaf

A short opinion piece by the Telegraph's opera critic, who was unimpressed by the portrayal of Dame Nellie:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Downton-Abbey-got-Nellie-Melba-all-wrong.html


----------



## Vaneyes

aajj said:


> I often forget that Mary is in fact a mother. She spends so little time with her child, too busy puttering over her next beaux and prepping for her future as her father's replacement as Lord of the Manor.


I know Tom and daughter are off to Boston...but I wonder if Tom and Mary will eventually marry.


----------



## aajj

Vaneyes said:


> I know Tom and daughter are off to Boston...but I wonder if Tom and Mary will eventually marry.


Nose-in-the-air Mary respects Tom but she would never lower herself by marrying someone with working class roots. I say, Mary is destined to sit on her Downton throne an unmarried woman.


----------



## Bulldog

aajj said:


> Nose-in-the-air Mary respects Tom but she would never lower herself by marrying someone with working class roots. I say, Mary is destined to sit on her Downton throne an unmarried woman.


And that's one of the reasons why the show needs to go on for at least a few more years. Personally, I'm confident Mary will marry again and it will be the guy she was hanging on in the last episode of the most recent season.


----------



## Albert7

Bulldog said:


> And that's one of the reasons why the show needs to go on for at least a few more years. Personally, I'm confident Mary will marry again and it will be the guy she was hanging on in the last episode of the most recent season.


Looks like the way for sure going into the sixth season. I look forward to all of the underpinnings for next year that's for sure .


----------



## aajj

Bulldog said:


> And that's one of the reasons why the show needs to go on for at least a few more years. Personally, I'm confident Mary will marry again and it will be the guy she was hanging on in the last episode of the most recent season.


I hope the show past the 1929 economic collapse, to see how hard times effect the Downton gang.


----------



## Guest

Just read that Exec. Producer Gareth Neame said that the 6th series - the next one - will be the last. So only ~10 more episodes of Downton.


----------



## Bulldog

DrMike said:


> Just read that Exec. Producer Gareth Neame said that the 6th series - the next one - will be the last. So only ~10 more episodes of Downton.


I also read that news, but I'm not convinced. Three or so years ago, similar news was made.


----------



## SimonNZ

I've never seen the program, but I've been told by a number of people that I look like a younger Mr Carson, and told I also have his personality or some such. With only a google images search to go on I find this a little mortifying.


----------



## Pyotr

DrMike said:


> Just read that Exec. Producer Gareth Neame said that the 6th series - the next one - will be the last. So only ~10 more episodes of Downton.


I hope so. I think the story has run its course and needs to be put to bed. I thought the past season was pretty dull and nothing really happened until the last few episodes.


----------



## elgar's ghost

SimonNZ said:


> I've never seen the program, but I've been told by a number of people that I look like a younger Mr Carson, and told I also have his personality or some such. With only a google images search to go on I find this a little mortifying.


Good actor, Jim Carter (that's the butler, not Sam Eagle). I remember him playing Whig politician Charles James Fox in The Madness of King George.


----------



## Vaneyes

Ingélou said:


> I like Mary! She models the posh frocks so exquisitely.


Mary seemed more cold and uppity this past season. Slight change in character, I thought. Contract troubles maybe.


----------



## Vaneyes

Bulldog said:


> Not long enough. I need to know if Carson and his new bride will have a baby, or if Carson will be searching for viagra. And what about Mary? Will someone knock that smirk off her face? The list goes on.


Mr. Carson is a practical man, it'll be the longer lasting Cialis dosage. "All in good time, Mrs. Hughes. All in good time."


----------



## Vaneyes

Figleaf said:


> A short opinion piece by the Telegraph's opera critic, who was unimpressed by the portrayal of Dame Nellie:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Downton-Abbey-got-Nellie-Melba-all-wrong.html


Yes indeed, Figleaf, that topic was dealt with on an opera thread. She stunk in my view, also.:tiphat:


----------



## Taggart

It's coming to an end. That's going to be a bit awkward over Christmas when we've seen it and the Americans haven't. Maybe we'll have to split the thread and have a British only version to avoid spoiling it for others.


----------



## Ingélou

Vaneyes said:


> Mary seemed more cold and uppity this past season. Slight change in character, I thought. Contract troubles maybe.


I agree.
What I like about the character - as well as her style & gaiety - is her frankness & her wit - no wonder she is so close to her grandmother. She does also have feelings and a conscience, but like the dowager tends to hide them from embarrassment most of the time. 
She is also, in my opinion, the best looking woman on the show, though she had stiff competition from Lady Sybil and Lady Rose.


----------



## Guest

Mary the best looking? Heavens no. Anna is so much prettier. Mary looks like she needs to eat some Twinkies.

As for her frankness and wit - she doesn't have a fraction of her grandmother's wit. Her grandmother comes off as wise and experienced, and she knows when to speak and when not to. Mary simply has no filter. She is horribly cruel, and the only guarantee is that, if there is a mean, rude, or improper thing that can be said, you can be sure she will say it. Her grandmother even had to check her cruelty this last season. I honestly don't understand why everybody tolerates her cruelty. That makes her marriage to Matthew in the first place one of the most improbably things to have occurred. He was engaged to Lavinia - by all accounts a kind and caring person who put the concerns of others before her own. And then Matthew goes to Mary? Why? Didn't make any sense. 

The way she strings men along shows she is nothing but a petulant child who has always been indulged - everybody still always indulges her. I am never quite sure which character I like less - her, or sniveling Edith, or annoying Rose. Maybe with Rose married off, we won't have to see her very much at all in the final season.


----------



## Ingélou

DrMike said:


> Mary the best looking? Heavens no. Anna is so much prettier. Mary looks like she needs to eat some Twinkies.
> 
> As for her frankness and wit - she doesn't have a fraction of her grandmother's wit. Her grandmother comes off as wise and experienced, and she knows when to speak and when not to. Mary simply has no filter. She is horribly cruel, and the only guarantee is that, if there is a mean, rude, or improper thing that can be said, you can be sure she will say it. Her grandmother even had to check her cruelty this last season. I honestly don't understand why everybody tolerates her cruelty. That makes her marriage to Matthew in the first place one of the most improbably things to have occurred. He was engaged to Lavinia - by all accounts a kind and caring person who put the concerns of others before her own. And then Matthew goes to Mary? Why? Didn't make any sense.
> 
> The way she strings men along shows she is nothing but a petulant child who has always been indulged - everybody still always indulges her. I am never quite sure which character I like less - her, or sniveling Edith, or annoying Rose. Maybe with Rose married off, we won't have to see her very much at all in the final season.


We'll agree to differ, then. I see her as a subtler character (and a subtler actress) than this - but hey, at least she's got your interest! 

PS Anna *is *pretty - she has the disadvantage, as a below-stairs character, of not having the lovely clothes to set it off. But I still think that Mary is the beauty - apart from her slinky figure, good facial structure and peachy skin, she has lovely dark eyes too.


----------



## Vaneyes

"Anna" got the Golden Globe, so she's prettier. 

Apparently, "Mary" was none too happy about "Mary" not getting *that* Golden Globe. :devil:


----------



## Vaneyes

Ingélou said:


> We'll agree to differ, then. I see her as a subtler character (and a subtler actress) than this - but hey, at least she's got your interest!
> 
> PS Anna *is *pretty - she has the disadvantage, as a below-stairs character, of not having the lovely clothes to set it off. But I still think that Mary is the beauty - apart from her slinky figure, good facial structure and peachy skin, she has lovely dark eyes too.


Most, except "Mary" look quite different off set. Particularly, Mrs. Patmore and Lady Edith.


----------



## Ingélou

Yes, Lady Edith has a raw deal - cast and costumed to be the plain one, when off set, she's very good-looking. The only good thing about it is that she doesn't get recognised in the street, and so can live her own life without being mobbed. (I'm remembering an interview I read.)

Presumably the Golden Globe is about acting, not looks?

They're all Lookers, but Lady Mary is the real stunner for my money. 

She has a patrician grandeur and is snobbish and bitchy - but that makes for a better story than if these aristos of the 1920s had improbably right-on attitudes and were friendly and completely uncondescending. Remember how nice she is to Anna, though, and how she helped Lord Whatever save the pigs, and we're obviously meant to think that her heart is in the right place. 

And if all else fails, there's the posh frocks...


----------



## Guest

That's the thing - Anna STILL looks good even in the minimal makeup and frumpy lady's maid attire. I don't know - Mary just has never struck me as gorgeous. The person who, for me, looks most different offset is Mrs. Hughes. Incidentally, they also get Maggie Smith looking so much older than she actually is.

So will they wrap it all up with a happy ending? Will Mary finally marry for good? Will her son die in some horrible fashion, throwing the whole issue of inheritance for another loop? Will Cora get pregnant again? Will they know throw both Anna AND Bates into prison at the same time and have them both get shivved and die? Will Thomas finally do something truly good and then die immediately afterwards? Will Edith's hopes of happiness get dashed once again? Will Tom and little Sibby die crossing the Atlantic? Oh, the possibilities are endless.


----------



## Guest

They could wrap things up very tidily by having Downton Abbey get bombed in the Blitz while everybody is there for Christmas, thus putting an end to the entire Crawley/Grantham line. And maybe the only survivors are Anna and Bates, for once being the only people to NOT have tragedy strike them.


----------



## Vaneyes

Maybe "Anna's" dirty blonde hair sways the debate for some. Geez, I'm almost ready to cast her in a Bus Stop remake. 

I think the most beautiful nod...drumroll...must go to "Mary". Imagine a switch of hair color, if one must. 

That is, of the currently "living". Lady Cybil was the hottest of hotties for me. Nurse me,please, Lady Cybil. I'm a TC wounded warrior. :devil:


----------

