Brooding Victorians and Moody Costume Dramas

Brooding Victorians and Moody Costume Dramas

by Kristin Battestella

Well, the title pretty much says it all. If you're looking for angst, frocks, pathos, or British accents, settle in for these windswept period pieces and literary flavorings.

Jane Eyre – Lace, candles, bonnets, frills, and waist coasts open this eleven episode 1983 adaptation starring Zelah Clarke (Dombey & Son) and Timothy Dalton (The Living Daylights). The print is flat now and the production values hampered, however the attention to detail accents the gloomy manor house and its cruel family, abusive isolation, and rare comfort in books. Supposed problem child Jane is passed along to a terrible school where the punishment only increases because of her defiance in the face of starvation, illness, fatal friends, and instruments of correction. Often excised scenes are here word for word, and the very British glum and decorum may be boring for some before the warmth and comfort found in the governess position at Thornfield Hall. Kindly housekeepers and friendly chats let Jane express herself, but locked rooms, ghostly echoes, and whispers of the peculiar master build ominous before an enigmatic roadside encounter with a handsome stranger. Aren't all Jane Eyres identified by their Rochesters? Dalton's brooding suave is very much what we think of in a Rochester – smoldering and easily flustered by Jane in debates over tea where dialogue and performance are primary. He's used to having his way but this lowly governess won't buckle despite the unresolved sexual tension before there was even UST. Jane isn't exceptional but won't yield on her convictions, earning a begrudging respect from the melancholy Rochester, who can confide in her about reluctant gentry matches and superiority versus equality. He admires Jane's purity and would seek to reform through her, wearing his heart on his sleeve even as his secrets would corrupt her. Sinister violence and mysterious accidents make happiness too good to be true alongside beds set on fire, fascinating dualities on character and wickedness, and wild versus saintly symbolism. Jealous resentments dampen pleasant outdoor scenes, turning charming one on one banter into angry, looming, and yearning repression. Rochester is not the silent type, and the scene chewing in many ways has to speak for both characters and draw out do gooder Jane. In spite of the deathbed confessions, age differences, be on your guard warnings, and symbolic white veils torn in two – talk about red flags, girl – we're here for it hook, line, and sinker, swept up in the impediments at the altar, scary attic scenes, bitter revelations, and fleeing into the moors to forgo love and be true to oneself. Seriously though, what is St. John's problem anyway? While this is a wonderful story, the finale does rely on sudden relatives and coincidental fortunes, and I for one was always disappointing something more spooky wasn't afoot. Late episodes away from Thornfield drag thanks to odd scenes without first person narrator Jane and this is a little too long to marathon all at once, but this unabashedly takes its time to assure a complete adaptation. I love the 2011 version for its compact, more gothic spirit; however this is delightful for fans of the cast, period piece audiences, classroom comparisons, and Bronte lovers.

The Man Who Invented Christmas – Dan Stevens (Downton Abbey) stars as Charles Dickens alongside Christopher Plummer (Somewhere in Time) and Jonathan Pryce (Hysteria) in this whimsical 2017 account on what really happened during the 1843 writing of A Christmas Carol. Our successful author has toured America to much fanfare, but Dickens is ready to get back to work despite unforthcoming publishers thanks to the poor sales of Barnaby Rudge, negative Martin Chuzzlewit reviews, and gasp – writer's block. It's expensive being a London gentleman when the wife is redecorating, bills are mounting, and everyone wants a donation from the exhausted Dickens, who has no creativity and a deadline to meet. Fancy garb, carriages, quills, candles, and humorous crescendos create charm alongside entertaining children with fairy tales and holiday mentions of veils being lifted as spirits roam between worlds. Grim alleys, dark cemeteries, bitter mourners, snobby friends wishing the poor would die, and humbug revelations inspire Dickens to write about a vile money maker learning the err of his ways thanks to sprites and spiritual intervention. Unfortunately, there wasn't a market for Christmas books back then and no profit in such a minor holiday. Going it alone, Dickens bounces about his bower mimicking voices – because if your find the character's name, he will appear. Similar to Miss Potter, Dickens transcribes Carol quotes from bemusing encounters with the famous characters entering his chamber. Scenes we know and love are acted out before him until an abrupt “That's as far as I've gotten” halt while the players add their opinions on the tale whether he wants them to or not. After starting well, begging for money and mooching relatives slow the spirited possibilities, and we shouldn't leave Dickens' breakthrough once the wonderful frenzy happens. There are hints of darker Dickens aspects, but his debtors fears and realistic problems feel shoehorned in once the fanciful comes to life. It's tough to have the author mirror Scrooge with contrived overnight changes and revelations about Dickens' terrible childhood when we know his life story and anything truly heavy is off limits. Problems are created just for a third act resolution, and one on one confrontations with his father regarding Dickens' lingering shame and brokenness are more powerful. The source here is a non-fiction book, but the film is obviously fiction, and viewers know Dickens had success before and will again. Maybe the real world Victorian issues are meant to parallel the Carol constructs, however the narrative can be uneven, interrupting arguments about killing off characters while they wait about his room or repeating his struggle over what of himself to put on the page before wondering what the point of a story is if there is no hope. After all the forgiveness discourse, a quick postscript with newfangled Christmas trees says everything turned out just fine – although writers today seeing Dickens' need to self publish and inability to get a $300 loan know circumstances haven't really changed amirite? This isn't necessarily a Christmas movie, and the family friendly fantasy may be too much for those seeking a hardcore Dickens biography. Some audiences may be sly to the author within his own story gimmick, too. Fortunately, there's enough charm in the wholesome nuggets and inventive twists on the familiar tale, and I'd also here for Plummer playing Scrooge en masse yes please.

The Turn of the Screw – Downton Abbey alum Michelle Dockery joins Dan Stevens (again) and Nicola Walker (MI-5) in this ninety minute 2009 BBC adaptation of the Henry James askew moving the repressed ambiguity to 1921 institutions with post war doctors analyzing our governess' infatuation with her employer, the topsy turvy male shortage, and of kilter Bly Manor. Fashions, hats, sweet automobiles, fine woodwork, and hefty antiques sell the refreshing setting, however the nonsensical strobe flashes look amateur on top of the time wasting, disjointed doctoring add-ons and unnecessary narration. Visions of dalliances that initially upgrade the Victorian scandalous soon hit the viewer over the head one too many times as the governess imagines her master and his saucy approval. She insists she's not the nervous type, but the dark interiors, maze like staircases, and distorted camera angles add to the strange noises and creepy country manor unease. She's in charge, above housekeepers and maids, but there are too many flighty women doing all the work in this house. Parasols and summer white contrast eerie fog and trains as her boy charge is expelled from school without explanation. The cheeky children whisper about their previous, pretty governess – unbothered by screams, accidents, or dying maids. Melancholy piano music, graveyard echoes, dark figures amid the trees, and faces in the window build on the female isolation, yet all insist there are no ghosts – surely she's just hysterical, overwrought, and obsessed with men. Rumors of suicide and a woman ruined by her lover seem proved by hidden pictures of the master's up to no good valet, and tales of his violence among the unprotected women are better than seeing suspect flashbacks. The prim style degrades to loose hair and nightgowns as our governess jumps to dire conclusions and possessive delirium, but the shouting about it afterward with her doctor interruptions break the tainted picnics and frantic tension. We don't need his sounding board to deduce her fears, just let us see the abusive violence and water perils. Crazy laughter and disembodied voices escalate as the phantoms, repression, and projection possibilities culminate in a one on one battle for the truth. The deviations here are flawed, and while the horror lite is fine for gothic period piece fans, some viewers will expect more than the have it both ways attempt at the ghosts and crazy ambiguity. This isn't the best version but thanks to the cast and unique setting, it can be a good introduction for audiences who haven't seen The Innocents.

A Disappointment

Under Capricorn – Ingrid Bergman (Anastasia) and Joseph Cotten (Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte) star in this overlong 1949 mystery from director Alfred Hitchcock (The Birds) with an opening narration filling in the Colonial Australia history and past Ireland secrets before 1831 governors, stiff upper lip politicking, and wooden exposition. Who has money, who's related to whom, who's doing the land deals – it's all clunky and yawn worthy on top of a period setting perhaps obscure for American audiences then and now. Colorful waistcoats, cravats, and frocks alongside muddy frontier streets and carriages attempt an early Victorian meets Wild West tone, but the shrunken heads rolling at their feet is more awkward then shocking. Hitchcock attempts new techniques here in his second Technicolor film – long takes, zooms, and tracking cameras following the players in scene. Unfortunately, the direction is stilted, moving from men talking to other men talking about what the other men just said. The first fifteen minutes of convicts turned businessmen and conversations while bathing in a barrel could have been excised, opening instead with the newly arrived scoundrel eavesdropping on a suspect dinner at the creepy manor house. Iron-fisted housekeepers, beaten staff, and disobedient convicts add to the drinks, whispers, social shunnings, and an intriguingly absent wife – who has some history with the new man in town. So much time is spent talking about the past at the expense of the present, yet people readily drop all their secrets and explain their life stories to folks they've just met. A few sentimental winks and smiles bolster the love story elements, however it's awkward to see Bergman both lighting up the room as well as playing the drunken barefoot and wobbling sickly. Uncharismatic, strong chinned men, swelling crescendos, and fainting women combine for all the things audiences bemoan about period pieces, and the supposedly scandalous love triangles remain undynamic. A stable boy eloping with the master's daughter and killing her brother in the process while the maid secretly poisons the wife would make for an interesting tale, but most of that action is told after the fact rather than shown. The tiara ensemble and divine ball make for the one exceptional, uninterrupted sequence capturing all the guilt and performance lacking in the rest of the film. Despite horse chases, who really shot whom revelations, and deportation threats; the drama never seems to happen before the abrupt happy ending. One can see what Hitchcock is trying to attempt with characters bound to the visual frame as well as their inescapable history. Unfortunately, calling attention to the drama with the camera only shows how thin the story is. Even if viewers leave any Master of Suspense expectations aside and like romantic period yarns, this is really only for the Hitchcock and Bergman completists.

Good, Bad, & Ugly Period Pieces

Recent Good, Bad, and Ugly Period Pieces

by Kristin Battestella

Some of these contemporary Victorian movies and period series are impressive with literary oomph and costumed flair. However others are unfortunately disappointing, polarizing, or unwatchable humbug.

Black Field – Lanterns, rifles, and two pioneer sisters doing what they have to do make for an upsetting opening to this 2010 eighty minute Canadian parable from writer and director Danishka Esterhazy. Bleak music, isolated vistas, and empty savannahs befitting the title set off the bare home, primitive details, and Grace said over such a paltry meal. This is a desperate, bitter existence with little dialogue beyond sad lullabies as these two girls fend for themselves. The accents, immigrants, and distant French towns mix – but the nearest farm is eighteen miles away and a handsome stranger wants to earn his keep at our isolated, all female station. Backstories are shared at the table, where this shirtless charmer admits he needs the Lord's mercy and forgiveness often and there's a certain attractive scandal at holding hands for prayer. The audience creates more saucy as several scenes imply each girl orchestrates a solo encounter with their would be protector – the camera doesn't reveal if something happened, however the household balance tips with jealousy and suspicion. Are these girls in over their heads with their farm and in need of a man to help? One has been forced to mother, but the younger is infatuated and ready to rebel despite wearing almost medieval clothes perhaps fashioned from her lone book of juvenile fairy tales. There are no “decent” jobs for women in town, and sans horse, this man is their only ticket to freedom. When one sister inevitably leaves, is it willingly or an abduction? The journey on foot is bleak with storms and an all natural palette mirroring their colorless lives, and the conflict increases without the unnecessary gory dream flashes and brief viewpoint breaks. Unable to help distant neighbors have too much work and too many mouths to feed, and nearby Mounties are in pursuit of a murderer as prejudice, injuries, and wilderness dangers build fear. The chess games moves to an even smaller, meager cabin with nothing but a sheet between rooms as the tables turn. Which sister do we believe as the division makes once good girls do bad things? Although some of the acting is slightly modern, the rivalry is similar to Far North and overall this first feature is well done. Did each girl get what she wanted and will they move on from this – or will the rift change them forever? While certain elements may be obvious, all the audience suspects is revealed in good time with well paced drama and a few unexpected twists. 

 

To Walk Invisible: The Bronte Sisters – This Masterpiece television movie shines the light on sisters Charlotte, Emily, and Anne as they escape into fiction away from the tolling bells, muddy streets, and embarrassing affairs ruining the family reputation. The ladies must keep up the mid-nineteenth century appearances with capes, bonnets, and frumpy frocks alongside the crestfallen parsonage, Yorkshire cold, and drafty period poor of the on location prairies and authentic settings. In an era when they are trapped by their womanhood and dependent on their hopeless male kin's hypocrisy, these sisters prefer dogs to people – tiptoeing over fears of publishing their poems and hidden creative passions burning fast and bright. Fiery readings of their explosive text contrast their plain, crappy circumstances, but the plot erroneously deviates in favor of the sniveling and tormented at being mediocre brother Branwell, meandering from the more interesting sisters destined for glory. The ladies want to publish and express themselves freely rather than bow their heads, not make eye contact, and sell themselves as mere governesses. However they argue over whether their writings are a private pursuit or something extraordinary worthy of publication – for men write and what they pen is judged, but a woman writing is herself judged. The sisters toil under pen names with panoramic seasonal transitions as they wait for acceptance, but childhood fantasy scenes and drunken dreams are unnecessary. On the go recountings of stories within stories walking faster with speed talking to match also become nonsensical, trying to create tension on top of the stilted brotherly angst when there is enough human interest in the literary struggle. The awkwardness of snatching a letter addressed to Currer Bell is fine drama – especially when it is an acceptance for two of the girls' works, but not the third and unscrupulous publication deals follow. At times the sisters can be cliché, with bossy Charlotte, fiery Emily, and a just sort of there Anne; but the personal insights deepen with rejection letters, buying more paper, old fashioned manuscript packages, first writings of their famous novels, and sitting by the fire for silent sustained writing time. Yes please! A proud father learning of his daughters' achievements make for delightful moments, and this is downright excellent when the ladies must stand up for their publication rights by revealing their identities – after being judged for their accents, stature, and gender. Of course the finale is bittersweet, but this is a charming companion piece to reading the Brontes or for inspiring budding young writers.

An Unfortunate Skip

The Invisible Woman – Ralph Fiennes (Coriolanus) directs and stars in this 2013 Charles Dickens biopic from Bafta winning writer Abi Morgan (Shame) focusing on the forty-five year old married author's affair with Felicity Jones' (Rogue One) eighteen year old actress Nelly Ternan. English coasts, Victorian silhouettes, lanterns, and carriages create a grand atmosphere with period decorum for the fine acting, but one needs to be familiar with the people or the Claire Tomalin source book to understand this slow two hours with an unnecessary flashback frame and more relationship awkwardness. When our lovers first meet, she is smiling at his son and he is socializing with her mother amid busy theater preparations and silly rehearsals restarts signaled with overly serious crescendos. The marital rifts, groupies catching his eye, well delivered dialogue, sense of Victorian protocol, and certain British properness can't completely build thanks to all the back and forth interruptions. While the filming nicely reflects the mood as she looks up to Dickens, he stares at her neck, and they turn away at their conflicted feelings; the unfortunately accurate twenty year age difference between the actors is too weird with unromantic fireside close ups and girly giggles too young to be sensuous. It is neat to see some early mass hysteria over a feisty, charismatic author commanding the crowds, even though this biopic may be trying too much with talk of debtor's prison, voiceover quotes on poverty and charity, and Dickens the social reformer intermixed with his side piece counting the donations. If he doesn't love his uncreative wife, what does he see in a talentless girl playing actress? There's no reason to love the troubled melodrama when the objective camera shows the creepy – she's hunched at the door as he is at her shoulder whispering to be let inside for a silent first touch. The eerily done up Fiennes is a fire and brimstone minister over his tempting flock, but the conflict between literary master and dirty old man is too disjointed with some chaste patty cake in the final fifteen minutes before an abrupt ending and a Victorian sense of shame confusing modern audiences. Tom Hollander (The Night Manager) as fellow libertine Wilkie Collins and concerned mother Kristin Scott Thomas (An English Patient reunion, hello!) are also totally underused, and more time may have been better spent on the terribly mistreated wife Joanna Scanlan (Getting On) – who seems like the real hidden lady. It's tough to look at this difficult subject matter objectively, and this unfocused, close to vest structure where not much happens doesn't help. Is this the tormented Dickens, Nelly's present reflecting on him, his wife's pain? Though interesting for biographers and sociology viewers or Fiennes fans and period propriety, this is simply frustratingly plain to watch.

Didn't Finish 'em!

Downton Abbey: Seasons 4 and 5 – Year Three of this Masterpiece series jumped the shark, and I quit watching then. The 2013 Fourth Season, however, is not a good place to join the show, as names and references from prior seasons are dropped or forgotten as needed, interesting personal developments below are pushed aside for the same above toil, and regardless of the Interwar happenings and historical opportunities, everything always come back to who Michelle Dockery's Mary will marry. Numerous maids, nannies, footmen, relatives, suitors, and royals come and go – wasting time before a typical and totally unnecessary rape as plot device trapping The Bateses (Joanne Froggatt and Brendan Coyle) with murder again. Each hour also has Allen Leech's Branson asking if he is truly upstairs or down, treading tires as said to be a writer who's never seen actually writing anything Edith (Laura Carmichael) literally has her romance disappear while she's kidnapping her baby from not one, but two adoptions. Past dalliances and present companionships for Granny Violet Maggie Smith, Penelope Wilton's Isobel, and Doctor David Robb are more interesting. All the supposedly progressive plots with Lily James' superfluous Rose meant to introduce the changing times, and it is the elder cast's reflections that better capture the aristocratic upheavals. More loud mouth recurring characters take up screen time in Series Five, which frustratingly repeats itself despite it being 1924. Are people who call this the Greatest British Drama Ever watching the same show I am? I bailed with a few episodes left as reading the summaries to see how Season Six ends was easier than the poorly paced and uneven storylines onscreen. Most scenes only last a minute or two, and intercut whimsical moments disrupt serious conversations – plots on homosexuality are cut short in favor of suspected gardeners stealing letter openers and secret heists over absconded royal love letters. The location, costuming, and period looks are the best part of the show, and such frocks, jewelry, tiaras, and dressing for dinner decorum wrapped in posh accents is what appeals to international audiences most. This era has an embarrassment of riches – I still believe they should have never left World War I – but everything here is really just like every other soap opera. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

War and Peace – 1805 St. Petersburg locales, Moscow estates, and lavish aristocratic balls set the scene for this 2016 adaptation anchored by the likes of Gillian Anderson (The X-Files), Stephen Rea (The Crying Game), Rebecca Front (Up the Women), and many, many more. There are numerous introductions, comings and goings from place to place, and explanations of who is who and how they are all related while arguing at the count's deathbed over his will. Similar names and a dash of foreign words will be confusing – viewers need to know the book and the history amid the marrying cousins, matchmaking, creepy siblings, and two faced nobility. The Regency costumes may not always be accurate, the younger ladies look like little girls playing dress up, the military uniforms are too big on the modern boys, and their tricorns look downright silly. Though the tiaras, furs, and feather fascinators are fun, they don't distract audiences from all the British accents overtaking this decidedly Russian epic. Weren't there any continental actors available? Despite the small television scale, ominous music, fog, canons, horses, and gunfire lift the battle action amid a fine religious undercurrent with church blessings and everyone crossing themselves. Unfortunately, it's tough to care about all these lookalike solider boys when they are so gung ho about the revolution yet can't see how they are being played. They run their mouths off and drum up their cowardly wounds – Sharpe was much more soldier-esque in comparison, and Brian Cox seems like he's in a different battle theater than the overly millennial princes, tsars, and REMFs looking for glory. The heady, flashy dreams, drunken saucy, shadowed nudity, whispered seduction, and male butts are unnecessary Tudors knockoffs as the bitchy little girls at home plot for love or money, and the back and forth editing between war action and at home intrigue creates uneven weight – maybe a more linear plot per episode would have helped balance the younger, weaker cast. I feel like I should like this more, but the atmosphere doesn't have that extra period timelessness. I got half way through, but there's no attachment to the numerous characters bottlenecking for the spotlight between all the try hard narrations. One might find it easier to just tackle the Tolstoy direct instead.

The Hollow Crown

The Hollow Crown a Delightful Shakespeare Presentation

by Kristin Battestella

In 2012, the BBC Two and later PBS presented this ambitious four part television adaptation of William Shakespeare's histories Richard II, Henry IV Part I, Henry IV Part II, and Henry V collectively called The Hollow Crown. Though seemingly overwhelming, these telemovies help make The Bard more accessible and relatable to the masses with fine characters, charming performances, and classic storytelling. 
 

Richard II – BAFTA winner Ben Whishaw (Skyfall), Patrick Stewart (X-Men), Rory Kinnear (Penny Dreadful), David Morrissey (The Walking Dead), David Suchet (Poirot), James Purefoy (The Following) and more impressive players anchor this first telefilm alongside colorful draped fabrics, regal armor, and medieval chorales setting the 14^th century mood. Despite great historical locations, coastal scenery, horses, and jousts, the design still feels somewhat stage-like or fittingly small scale – our ensemble sits ready to speak in open stone halls rightfully situated not for royal splendor but rather what's being said. Fortunately, the delivery here is smooth and dramatic without hefty, preachy dictation. This court tension just happens to be in old speaketh, and we're not merely watching a play being read aloud the way so many stateside high schoolers erroneously experience Shakespeare. Of course, it does help to know the history at work – Gloucester, Bolingbroke, Plantagenets, ambiguous effemininity. Subtitles are necessary, and scholars may enjoy having a hand held copy handy to compare text. At two and a half hours, there are perhaps some unnecessary to and fro scenes where folks only move to go and talk somewhere different. Arty, overly fancy transition shots; incredibly dark, difficult to see scenes; and distorted, up close camerawork symbolizing the askew mentalities at work make for some tough visuals on top of already difficult and often confusing Shakespearean dialogue. Ironically, thanks to the sophisticated accents and pretty pentameter, this treasonous spearhead is quite pleasant just listening to it! Richard is petty, unlikable, pretentious, out of touch, juvenile, and, well, Kardashian. Understandably the audience expects his downfall yet we can't look away as he questions his kingship, grows conflicted by his actions, and realizes mistakes made in a messianic fall from grace. This is not an easy part to play, but Whishaw embodies the misunderstood boy and undiagnosed but somehow poetic madness. We don't want to choose sides in this comeuppance even as we look for the neutral historical end – after all, both Richard and the future Henry IV do some despicable stuff. There's sympathy, humanity, and a perfectly bittersweet glory in this usurp. 

 

Henry IV Part I – Jeremy Irons (Reversal of Fortune), Simon Russell Beale (Penny Dreadful), Tom Hiddleston (The Avengers), Michelle Dockery (Downton Abbey), Julie Walters (Billy Elliot), and Maxine Peake (Silk) get Episode 2 of The Hollow Crown off to a bustling, ye olde start with medieval markets, lively music, crowded pubs, and drunken good times. Though candlelit charming with wooden sets and a rustic mood, the interiors can be somewhat dark to see. Fortunately, those impoverished designs fittingly contrast the cold, bleak, echoing, stone court full of depressing somber and arguments – a higher up but not as fun place. Again it helps to know the history in the interim from Richard II – Hotspur, Northumberland, Scottish rifts – and the intercut but separate storylines may seem confusing or uneven if one is unfamiliar with the mix of serious court intrigue and cheeky Boar's Head Inn. It takes half the two hour time for the plots to come together, however its dynamite when they do. While Joe Armstrong's (Robin Hood) Percy revolts and Harry Lloyd's (Game of Thrones) pretentiousness aren't as exciting as they should be, Dockery keeps their dilemma interesting. Ironically, although everything is set in motion because of him, we don't see Irons as the titular king very much. He mumbles somewhat as well but his voice carries the proper weight on the king's shoulders low gravitas– uneasy lies the head that wears the crown and all that. Hiddleston's longer blonde hair isn't my favorite look, either, but he is distractingly pretty as the red leather bound, rakish about town Prince Hal. This is an indulgent viewing for fans just as much as scholars can delight in his rolling off the tongue delivery. He's relishing the role and why not? We so often treat Shakespeare with dread, but these are happy drunken antics well balanced with bawdy fun, serious voiceover soliloquies, and proving one's worth. Hiddleston also does a great impression of Irons, and BAFTA winner Beale is a wonderful Falstaff – a fool not quite ready to leave his selfish ways but lovable even when crude or up to no good. With so many multi-layered characters arcs and performances to follow into Part II, this definitely takes more than one viewing. As fine as we expect Bill's words to be, the between the lines are delightful alongside the small scale but cinematic filming and action-centric Shrewsbury finale.

Henry IV Part II – Unlike the cashing in of unnecessarily divided blockbusters, this historical second half was filmed by returning director Richard Eyre (Notes on a Scandal) back to back with its predecessor, utilizing the same locales and cast with choice additions such as Ian Glen (Game of Thrones). Unfortunately, other new and seemingly unimportant secondary characters aren't properly introduced alongside the thin and increasingly somber source material. The pace drags in the middle, growing boring or feeling overlong when the interesting journeys and people we care about are offscreen. The music still creates a quaint atmosphere, however congested arguing on top of the jigs can be frustrating to discern for the non Bard versed. Thankfully, the melancholy court, Latin prayers, and whispering political asides accent the medieval mood. This is a darker picture, with blue hues for castle ills and a tainted yellow patina for Eastcheap before uplifting music, pomp ceremony, and fresh reds and golds reset the tone for Henry V. Jeremy Irons looks increasingly sickly with bleak soliloquies and tender, wise dimension for his sons adding reflection amid his failing health. It's depressing how the separate storylines all sink low despite battle victory and would be elevations, but nonetheless, the intertwined and reversed fates beautifully reveal themselves. Though raised up, Falstaff sticks to his old tricks, using his chance for a clean start for more foolish thinking – like presuming he would be the right hand man for fun and games under King Hal. We can't hate Falstaff thanks to bittersweet ponderings and tender scenes with Maxine Peake as Doll Tearsheet, but he's both too old to right himself and too set in his crooked ways. Prince Hal's so called friends all tail him for their own best interests, but he has to make the big decision to grow up and put away his trouble making pals. We know the history and strife, yet it's still wonderful to see Hal pondering with Henry IV, realizing Falstaff for what he really is, and accepting the right path between his two flawed father figures. Hiddleston appears a half hour in to Part II as the shirtless and charming Hal, however, he seems to have less screen time until his confrontation with Falstaff halfway through – his red leather jacket appears briefly in Hal's only Boar's Head scene before gradual outfit changes suggest the regal velvets to come for the brilliant finale. This final act forgives any sagging with its fathers and sons, deathbed vigils, and tearful men becoming noble kings. There's no time to mourn when the torch is passed, nor is it any easier when the crown goes from one head to the next instead of being built on battlefield legacies. There's a nice behind the scenes feature on this disc discussing both Henry IV parts, and though uneven, this episode does what it sets out to do in making us eager to see what happens to its successor. 

Henry V – These final two hours plus of The Hollow Crown make some eponymous changes – from a subdued St. Crispin's Day moment and skipped battlefield carnage to omitted side plots and excised humor. While the music, costuming, Latin funerary, blue for France flair, and red for England palette are charming, the saturated screen is often too dark to see. Up close, congested, slow motion fighting also intentionally hides the small scale production, and at times oft theatre director Thea Sharrock seems to play it safe by not fully utilizing the camera or making any political or warfare statements as this material is ripe to do. The action is also slow to start, with almost twenty minutes of courtiers chirping the pros and cons in each king's ears about Edward the Black Prince and claims upon France before the build to Agincourt and a final romantic but short lived French alliance. The ensemble does well, but the new players aren't properly introduced, creating little endearment beyond the Harry we know and love. The now top billed Tom Hiddleston looks different as Henry V, aged with a goatee, darker hair, and in the field grit. Although he's not an over the top big battle commander, Hiddleston has a gravitas both with words and on horseback. Harry can be personal, soft spoken, and religious whilst also not backing down from leading from the front despite internal fears, lovely prayers, and serious soliloquies. This king is humble and in arms with his men, honest and full of grace but certainly capable of the bombastic and unmerciful. The private battle speeches fit this characterization and keep the focus on the individual before the spectacle as a good play should. Shakespeare perhaps glorified the past but this Henry is a man first and a hero second. This episode wisely stays with Henry most of the time, reducing Pistol, Nym, Bardolph and unnecessary humor. Lambert Wilson (Timeline) is comparatively somber as the King of France, and despite only a few scenes, Melanie Thierry (Babylon A.D.) is immediately enchanting in what could be an awkward courtship. The French lessons are not translated on screen, which may annoy some, however this softened, continental appeal adds to the stage-like mood where Sharrock directs best. I hate to say it as it would be inaccurate to not have the imaginative, descriptive Chorus as narrated by John Hurt (Alien), but if you can see the ships and scenery, you don't need the voiceover, and the characters could have just said the transitions themselves. Fortunately, the script is the thing here, with famous lines and history turned drama discussed in several behind the scenes bonus features. Granted there are production flaws and questionable direction at times. However, this is a great, easy to get behind story, and the condensed plots and reduce battle focus make for a classroom friendly viewing or scholarly discussion.

Downton Abbey Season 3

Downton Abbey Series 3 is Kind of a Hot Mess

By Kristin Battestella

It’s Spring 1920 and Lord and Lady Grantham (Hugh Bonneville and Elizabeth McGovern) welcome the Countess’ mother Martha Levinson (Shirley MacLaine) from America while the family awaits the birth of youngest daughter Sybil’s (Jessica Brown Findlay) baby with her political motivated Irish husband Tom Branson (Allen Leech) – formerly the Crawley’s chauffer. Family heir Matthew (Dan Stevens) and eldest daughter Mary (Michelle Dockery) support Branson’s new role at Downton Abbey as well as middle daughter Edith’s (Laura Carmichael) new writing career – even if the couple disagrees on how Matthew wants to handle the financially in disarray estate. Unfortunately, sorrow looms upstairs and scandal brews downstairs between valet Thomas (Rob James-Collier) and ladies’ maid O’Brien (Siobhan Finneran) as positions high and low are shaken to their core.

The Downton Abbey PBS premiere wastes no time in getting to the long awaited wedding of Mary and Matthew and Downton’s dangerous financial rumblings, but there are a lot of unlikable, on the nose developments to start Series 3. These rich people who can’t handle their money, the wrongfully imprisoned valet – it seems heavy but not much is actually happening. It’s all too dry, and the pacing this year is uneven, slow, even wasteful. Previously, it was almost blink and you miss World War I speed, but now, plots unnecessarily linger on unimportant soap opera moments. These internal timing issues become a serious problem when the meat of the drama feels skipped entirely. After almost a decade of onscreen waiting, the culmination of Downton Abbey’s biggest storyline is cut away at the altar. There’s almost enough wrong with Year 3 for me to not bother continuing. Thankfully, the downstairs character focus is much more pleasant – although the below storylines are also too uneven. Their goods struggle with mismatched upstairs plots across the middle episodes and become stretched too thin, and it all magically ends up tidy for the rushed cricket finale.  The so-called Christmas Special further puts everything under the carpet by being set a year post hence. In effect, this tacked on holiday makes it appear as thought the traumas of Year 3 never happened – they are fresh in the viewer’s mind, but long done for the characters onscreen. We zoom through the earlier seasons two or three years at a time, yet now we dawdle month to month per episode only to end up fast-forwarding again. You wouldn’t write a book with this kind of piss poor timing and skipped juicy – why is it okay on Downton Abbey?

Now, about that long awaited Mary and Matthew wedding. Matthew has really taken a serious downturn this season with all over the place character motivations and attitudes. How does this one supposedly golly shucks guy get the girl, come in to Downton’s entail, and get in line for another possible fortune? The bad dialogue between Mary and Matthew doesn’t help his unbelievability – more often then not I just want to skip over their WTF scenes. I’m surprised by the audience shock in his exit, as Dan Stevens really looked ready to depart Downton Abbey thanks to obvious foreshadowing and phoned-in scenes. Matthew is a bit better as the family go between for Branson – brothers- in-law sticking together!  Unfortunately, even that relationship is run into the ground by these uninteresting tenant subdivision saving Downton legalese library scenes. Naturally, it is Mary who really suffers thanks to this default, uneven, ham-fisted writing.  Once one who rallied against marrying for an heir, Mary the expectant bride and rushed mom falls completely flat in Series 3 – where is the mention of her Turk scandal? Bad jokes, supposedly tense financial talks, and guilt trip conversations won’t do for the players that were the cornerstone of Downton Abbey.  

           

Likewise, always on the verge of ruin Robert Crawley has become somewhat of a fool. He puts their fortune into a bad venture, cries over it, and gets more upset by what the county thinks about their business. Lord Grantham gives information on the estate to Mary, but objects to Matthew’s sweeping changes whilst also wanting his son-in-law to accept his new inheritance to save Downton. He claims they must keep the estate running for the community jobs, but if the nobles can’t handle the money, then maybe they shouldn’t have it!  The Earl gains points when he helps the folks downstairs, but that’s just as much about avoiding scandal as it is kindness. Countess Cora unfortunately takes a backseat for most of the season, but she is correct in making Robert accountable on all his bull and his asinine preference for nobility over honest doctoring. Of course, all their troubles are too easily resolved in one or two episodes, and the Christmas Special plays them as a darling couple against this out of left field Scottish cousin Shrimpie angst. Didn’t we just see these same marital troubles and financial ruins?

Thankfully, Dowager Countess Maggie Smith is again wonderful at holding onto the old school class and wit, and the sassy honesty of guest Shirley MacLaine is refreshing. Though she dresses jazzy and correctly calls the Granthams as shallow, Martha Levinson is not as over the top as I expected, and MacLaine might be playing herself in some of the shakeup for the sake of it. However, I wish we had more of her and Penelope Wilton’s formerly get your heads out of your butts Isobel Crawley.  Mrs. Crawley seems too detached from the main family thanks to her unspeakable work in helping prostitutes, but her sincere moments with the Dowager are very touching. Her scenes with David Robb’s Doctor Clarkson in the Christmas Special are also more appealing then the forced introduction of Lily James as young and wild Cousin Rose, and Samantha Bond deserves more as Lady Rosamund. Series 3 leaves so many better family relationships unexplored – these older statesmen reflecting on the past and the decade’s changes seems more interesting then these in your face or merry go round plots.

In fact, the Sybil and Branson storyline is better than the Mary and Matthew over the top mooneyes. Branson’s political views are certainly understandable, and this unwelcomed, raised up son-in-law is relevant and realistic. The hot bed class and culture issues create both honest problems and quality principles for the couple, and though difficult, Branson’s legitimate societal points make things like dressing for dinner seem unimportant. Not surprisingly, the family is flippant and rude to the couple, their high up friends are downright cruel, and the uneven season long writing ruins the good in Jessica Brown Findlay’s departure.  Her exit is stupidly handled onscreen, and it makes me wish there were just episodic upstairs events or weekly downstairs dealings on Downton Abbey instead of ongoing series plots. The intercutting of Brendan Coyle as imprisoned valet Bates and his legalities with Sybil’s arrangements is a mistake; the Christmas Special’s timeline changes and home alone Branson plot is another ridiculously awkward above and below misconstruction.  Haven’t we done this maid seduction crap three times already?  

  Downton Abbey creator Julian Fellowes complained that he was regrettably stuck with World War I, but at least there was real action to be had there. Now, in the hollow of 1920, Fellowes has backed himself into a corner with repetitive weddings and a yawn worthy Detective Anna on the case. I’m so, so tired of the Bates’ shuffling in a prison yard circle storyline, and Joanne Froggatt’s new lady’s maid Anna deserves more than boring jail visits. Much of Series 3 is too preposterous at this point, the jilting of Laura Carmichael’s Edith Crawley included. Her writerly aspirations and daring career woman potential can be done without unnecessary romance revisits. However, Edith’s plots should not be strung along via a mention or trip here and there, and certainly, she doesn’t warrant yet another time wasting heartbreak in the Christmas Special.  Jim Carter’s butler Carson also feels unnecessarily snotty in his heavy-handed wanting of the previous decade’s grandeur, but he’s still warmer than the Earl somehow. His wedding moment with Mary is better than with Lord Grantham, and Carson has a much more understandable resentment to the changing of the running of a household and the shaking down of old divisions. His unmoving style has a reserve and grace, and his babysitting in the Christmas Special matches the humanity of Phyllis Logan as Mrs. Hughes. I would almost rather Downton Abbey be entirely about the low instead of high if we received the housekeeper’s touching illness worries; Sophie McShera’s pouting Daisy on a cooking strike; or Leslie Nicol as Mrs. Patmore dishing romance, wit, and loss with her dinners from week to week every week.

Indeed, the unexpected alliances and turned on their ear downstairs roles make for great stuff thanks to serious shade between Siobhan Finneran as O’Brien and Rob James-Collier as Thomas. Slick sabotage, innuendo, love triangles, scandal, and angst with new footmen Alfred (Matt Milne) and Jimmy (Edward Speleers) and kitchen maid Ivy (Cara Theobold) are far more interesting than the seemingly preferred Bates plots. I almost feel sorry for Thomas because of cruel period thinking on homosexuality, and his storyline might be the best one this season.  Likewise, Kevin Doyle as Molesley always seems to be made fun of, too, but I’d like to see a romance between him and O’Brien. The downstairs at play Christmas Special shenanigans are just much more fun then the bitching in Scotland.  The up top on Downton Abbey is just becoming too high up, even inhumane compared to how previous seasons presented up and down as one family united in crisis, an undivided household.  Now it feels posh for the sake of posh – burning coat tails and wearing black tie at the wrong dinner!  Oh my, no, anything but that! The topside Crawleys just don’t seem worthwhile anymore thanks to these increasingly lofty rehashings and the superior characters downstairs.

Where Downton Abbey began as a unique series, it has given way to increasingly relying on its period flash and Brit appeal. The costumes are great – a mix of the Edwardian classy and upcoming modern. There’s cars, bobbed hair, jazz, and yet, even my husband commented on how uber British and progressively over the top Downton Abbey is becoming. This bend toward the American appeal and British expectation is compromising the show – they make like we’ve never seen a cricket match before. Well, okay, we don’t get cricket every day. However, we do have soaps. I don’t mind soaps, I like a lot of the classic nighttime soap operas. However, I’m surprised folks pretend Downton Abbey isn’t an English telenovela. I feel harsh in saying it, but Downton Abbey being a soap isn’t the problem. It’s the fact that it has become an unevenly written and poorly timed episodic soap opera. You can have cast changes and big shocker moments without causing internal decline so long as your foundation is sound, but I’m no longer sure Downton Abbey has its storytelling at its core. I don’t see this series going on much longer so long as these obvious and tedious plots interfere with the period potential.  What ever happened to the pretender Patrick? Imagine if he was the real heir, the Canadian railroad investor who ruined Robert, and the mysterious Pulbrook in Swire’s will? I thought this was such an obvious Dickensian interconnected and ironic way to go, but instead, we get prostitute Ethel burning bread and meeting with her baby’s daddy’s parents again and again. Sigh.

Die-hard fans of Downton Abbey will eat up all the scandal and tragedy upstairs and down in Series 3. Despite poor pacing, writing flaws, and character movements, there is indeed still a lot of juicy entertainment to be had here thanks to downstairs heavies, period drama potential, love to hate players, and genuinely likeable characters. It’s a hot mess, but audiences can still enjoy the over the top panache in Downton Abbey Series 3.

Downton Abbey: Season 1, 2, and The Christmas Special

Downton Abbey Series 1, Series 2, and the Christmas Special

(Because I’ve had That Kind of Marathon!)

By Kristin Battestella

Robert Crawley, Earl of Grantham (Hugh Bonneville) and his American wife Cora (Elizabeth McGovern) are distraught to hear their cousin and heir presumptive to the family title has died in the sinking of the Titanic.  Eldest daughter Mary (Michelle Dockery) was engaged to the late Patrick to ensure the fortune and Downton Abbey estate remained within the family, but now middle class solicitor Matthew Crawley (Dan Stevens)- a third cousin once removed- stands to inherit all.  Matthew comes to Downton with his mother Isobel (Penelope Wilton) -who butts heads with Robert’s mother Violet, the Dowager Countess (Maggie Smith).  Middle daughter Edith (Laura Carmichael) schemes to displace Mary in the social circles while looking for romance of her own, and youngest daughter Sybil (Jessica Brown Findlay) spends more time downstairs with the servants as World War I shortly and irrevocably changes Downton Abbey.  Embroiled in their own personal highs and lows, valet Mr. Bates (Brendan Coyle), butler Carson (Jim Carter), housekeeper Mrs. Hughes (Phyllis Logan), and maid Anna (Joanne Froggatt) must also deal with embittered lady’s maid O’Brien (Siobhan Finneran) and conniving footman Thomas (Rob James-Collier) as the Great War leaves marriages, positions, and social classes in turmoil. After becoming a soldier’s convalescence home during the war, Downton Abbey faces more change and upheavals as 1920 dawns.

Whew! I must admit, I was a little reluctant to catch on with the recent Downton Abbey hype.  After all, those of us who’ve been in the British period piece know all along shouldn’t be surprised that Oscar winning creator Julian Fellowes (Gosford Park) has a hit on both sides of the pond.  The good folks and evil characters here are not necessarily synonymous with either high or low stations, and this fine balance amid the personal drama is Downton Abbey’s glue. Yes, snots exist above and below, but the higher ups are quite kind and respectable enough to consider far-flung family as well as those on the wrong side of the class divide.  Somehow I suspect Americans must have thought these aristocrats would be cruel and nasty the likes of HBO juice.  However, the fact that all the servants and nobles are essentially one big family at Downton Abbey makes the budding soap drama easier to accept for viewers who wouldn’t normally tune in for the expected stuffy English tale. Honestly, all this acclaim and success for a show that is essentially about a chick trying to find a husband!  One could boil Downton Abbey down to that simplicity, yes; but the period heavy and personal angst upstairs and down (wink) becomes so much more.  Of course, with such a large cast, it is tough to tell who is who at the start, and a revolving door of guests might even make it difficult to tell who’s actually a regular player!  Fortunately, Fellowes and his writing team smartly focus on those characters instead of relying on saucy elements. Again, I think stateside audiences expected debauchery like The Tudors and are surprisingly pleased by the proper period strata and changing societal storytelling at the forefront of Downton Abbey.  Okay, there is one critical and scandalous indiscretion, but if Downton Abbey did fall into those sex, drugs, and rock and roll trappings, it wouldn’t be any good.  This show goes its own way, and the opposites attract approach is a refreshing treat.

 It’s ironic, however, because there are some unlikable people and scenarios that keep Downton Abbey’s word turning.  At first, I disliked Michelle Dockery’s (Red Riding) Mary- her love life indecision is damn nerve racking! Then again, she and Laura Carmichael’s (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) meddling Edith grow, or at the very least, ebb and flow with the audience’s attachment.  There’s an early sympathy for Edith, but she becomes increasing cruel and mishandled by time we get to the Christmas Special.  Sybil (Jessica Brown Findlay, Albatross) also doesn’t have much to do at the start, and her involvement with chauffer Branson (Allen Leech, Rome) is also somewhat uneven, ranging from endearing to possessive. Fortunately, the veteran players Hugh Bonneville (Iris) and Elizabeth McGovern (Once Upon a Time in America) are great; a loving yet proper couple who understand the formal but know how to be warm to all in their household. Of course, Maggie Smith (you must kidding if you need a Dame Maggie reference!) is playing, well, somewhat of the same character she always plays- but Dowager Violet is a hoot.  Its great fun to see her and Penelope Wilton’s (Doctor Who) upper middle class Isobel go toe to toe. However, I must say I do find Dan Stevens (Vamps) as heir and romantic foil presumptive a bit dry.  The back and forth romancing, crushes, proposals, and possibilities just gets laid on too thick at times and it can be kind of obvious to say the least. Even so, the entail structure and class situations keep the Crawley family intriguing throughout the First Series. The family loves and hates as needed, with the performances well done all around.

But let’s not stop there! The downstairs of Downton Abbey might just outdo their ‘proper’ counterparts.  While we can get tired of aristocratic technicalities now and again as they go round and round, seeing good servants rise above while ne’er do well ones get their do is always quality television. I can’t wait to see Siobhan Finneran’s (Benidorm) O’Brien and Rob James-Collier’s (Coronation Street) Thomas get theirs!  Their plotting, moments of regret and humanity, and continuing scams are love to hate fun.  With them causing trouble, the servants become a dysfunctional family themselves. Jim Carter (Shakespeare in Love) is delightful as the dutiful butler trying to keep Downton Abbey a smooth machine along with Phyllis Logan (Lovejoy) as strict but sensitive housekeeper Mrs. Hughes. It’s a beautiful irony the way these dang fine people have rather tame pasts that they consider a black mark- when in fact all the dirt and blackmail is upstairs.  Though they’re obviously on the relationship merry go round, too, Brendan Coyle (True Dare Kiss) and Joanne Froggatt (Robin Hood) as Bates and Anna are charming. Really, servants are expected to live like monks and nuns with only Downton Abbey in their souls? I think not. Junior maid Gwen (Rose Leslie, Game of Thrones) and cook Mrs. Patmore (Lesley Nicol, The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe) are also somewhat stock or less developed early on, and likewise Sophie McShera’s (Waterloo Road) kitchen maid Daisy and Thomas Howe (United) as happy footman William are typically annoying but shy and sweet. Fortunately, the dreams, contentment, and taking pride in what one does even if you are supposed to be ‘low’ add a lovely charm and wit. Everyone does indeed have a part to play at Downton Abbey, just as World War I comes along for Season 2.

 Sure, the warfare is somewhat subdued and small scale despite Downton Abbey’s enormous budget, but the trench conversations and no man’s land action is still damn well done stuff for television today. Survivor and reality shows my arse- we simply don’t see enough Great War material that often anymore. It’s much more interesting than the heir and love speculation of Series 1, but the uneven presentation this season is a tough balance indeed.  We had to see the highlife drama before the war in order appreciate the changes, and it is indeed great how the high, low, good, and bad has all gone topsy turvy.  Unfortunately, the war years are dang rushed- the entire show could have simply taken place from 1914 to 1918 with more than enough material.  There’s no need to create storylines that don’t ring true for Year 2. I must say, all these soldiers going off to battle and heavy hospital changes do get me choked up, but it is much too hasty!  With the passing of last WWI veteran, an entire generation is now gone. It’s a past that is no longer garnering respect, and it saddens me that this will happen to World War II veterans- perhaps in my lifetime. Already, we look on the latter war with far-gone period piece nostalgia, rather than seeing the heroes of the 20^th century as the living elders with which we grew up.  It’s a shame that The Great War didn’t receive true focus and finite looks for Downton Abbey’s sophomore year.  More effort was spent on the aspects of change itself.  The hats are smaller, the hems are a bit higher, the lines of class are blurring, but it’s still treated as a romantic, radical time.  Fortunately, 100 years later, we do certainly understand the idea of war and the home front emotion it brings- even if we don’t have footmen at dinner anymore either.

Perhaps my sympathy over the War is a sore spot because it was displaced by a few less than stellar new characters. Too many would be at home scandals are just not that interesting- Amy Nuttall (Emmerdale) as new maid Ethel is just a real stick in the mud that I could really care less about, and my gosh Clare Calbraith’s (Heartbeat) maid Jane is just too weird. I mean-spoilers!- one kiss in a few episodes when it took years for everyone else? This isn’t anything we haven’t seen before either, coughjaneeyrecough.  Wasting time on a quick war resolution and affairs while others are ill with the Spanish Flu was indeed a misstep. I’m sure favoritism and higher up favors went on, but the Earl pulls a few strings every episode it seems.  While it is great that they still care about all at Downton regardless of station- it’s quite touching actually- but Matthew’s extended leaves, English tours, and back and forth war travel feels too convenient. Ian Glen (Game of Thrones) as crusty newspaper man Sir Richard Carlisle is intriguing foil for Mary, but the love triangle between them, Matthew, and his kindly but dull fiancée Lavinia (Zoe Boyle, Sons of Anarchy) is also all over the place.  Why go round and round with them when we have under used sassy sister Samantha Bond (GoldenEye) and Maria Doyle Kennedy (The Tudors) as Bates’ scheming and love to hate worthy wife Vera? 

Even with World War I aside, it seems the two-hour finale of tacked on Spanish Flu is just an unnecessary twist. Yep, Downton Abbey zips right through that too, boiling the epidemic down to a Mary and Matthew convenience! Unfortunately, while others are praising the feature length Series 2 Christmas Special follow up, I must say I was a little disappointed.  This special was no more seasonal nor any more of a return to glam heights of the First Season.  The pace again seemed haphazard, with a Servant’s Ball that was just so important yet we never saw it before the war.  And said dance was squashed amid the much more critical Bates on trial drama- along with an odd Aunt Rosamund storyline and more dalliances with the maid.  Weren’t we just here? I love Samantha Bond as Lady Painswick and would much rather have more of her than this rotating maid door.  But tragically, all of this is also sharing screen time with a kidnapped dog plot. Huh? The Christmas Special seemed like an awful lot of filler, a strategically timed delay on the end of the Second Series. Did we really need an extra episode just to get some resolutions finally about ^$%#$&* time! for a few characters? I think even Downton Abbey’s most ardent audiences can agree Series 2 seemed a little by the seat of its pants, and viewers who liked the show when things were fine, dandy, and pretty to look at with not much was going on probably don’t prefer these fast paced war heavies and upheavals. 

Yes, international acclaim and all, yet Downton Abbey is not entirely perfect.  Again, despite the stylized favor, those of us who already watched British period dramas will feel a sense of déjà vu, with generic Titanic references, tame Lady Chatterley put ons, and repeat locations that akin Downton Abbey with feelings of Poirot, Englefield House, and even Hex and X-Men: First Class.  The Series 1, Episode 5 flower show plot is more than just a tribute to Mrs. Miniver; it immediately recalls the classic Greer Garson picture for anyone who’s ever seen it.  Sometimes, it’s as if Fellowes has run out of little events to pin each episode on - and underutilizes the big events- so the critical character storylines get down played for these seemingly random and standard soap opera plots.  Watching all of Downton Abbey together is nice, but viewing everything so closely when the episodes themselves span over 8 years is also unusual for the audience.  To us, all these dramatic life-changing things just happened, so how could they so easily forget? Oh yes, it’s been a few years for them hasn’t it? The uneven skipping- accentuating little plots while missing half of World War I- makes things move too awkwardly- slow on the relationships but fast on the history. It definitely looks like the ball’s been dropped by the writers, and if you don’t have some idea of the history, one can get even more confused.  Series 2’s expanded length further exposes these faults. You can’t have all the war mayhem and glory and shoehorn in the regular society at home, too.  The aforementioned maid meanderings are here one episode, gone the next, and are truly needless in the grand scheme of Downton Abbey.  Though a plus, the editing and pace of what’s good suffers when you have to cut away to the drivel.  Enough is already happening, and these random soap opera entrappings didn’t need to be part of Downton Abbey.

 Thankfully, that style, suave, and Edwardian glamour makes it easy to forget the soap pacing or story issues.  Everyone top to bottom looks dang smashing!  From Lord Gratham’s adorned military get up to Daisy’s little pink frock, Cora’s black netted gowns to Thomas’ footman livery.  The supposedly lower class people are just so proper and well mannered, too.  It’s not that they are British- the dialogue and accents are easy on all ears, classy and old school.  I wish I could speak like this without being looked at as though I have two foreign talking heads!  While I would have preferred more Christmas décor and celebration, I can’t say any more about the costumes than what’s been said by every single person watching Downton Abbey!  Oh, the fashion nostalgia! The period scoring and music are lovely, along with Highclere Castle and the surrounding English towns and countrysides.   The use of early technology changes is divine, too.  You know 21^st century kids simply cannot comprehend what it takes to get used to electricity, telephones, cars, typewriters, or gramophones. Hello, if they wanted to hear music they actually had to sing it or play the instruments themselves!  O…M…G!

 Despite some storytelling kinks and growing pains pacing, Downton Abbey is wonderful television on either side of the pond.  I liked it a lot actually, and am looking forward to more in Series 3! With a short seven episode debut and Year Two also available on PBS, streaming, and video outlets; it’s fairly easy to jump back with the Crawley gang for a marathon or a quick few weeks of yesteryear. I actually sort of forced myself into my marathon because I had all the glorious looking HD episodes hogging up my DVR!  It can get that addictive, oh yes. Period piece fans, anglophile audiences, and young or old viewers of soap drama can and should definitely get down with Downton Abbey.