Thanks! Took me a bit to figure out the release order.
Excellent first pairing of episodes this evening. I quite like the new footman, Albert, who not only fills William’s shoes almost precisely (providing a healthy measure of the naivete that serves as a means for the audience to learn along with him), but also adds a total outsider’s perspective.
The new American maid was also intriguing as a less transparent mischief-maker – an alternative to O’Brien, who seems more self-aware – though it is doubtful she’ll be staying.
Matthew made the wrong call, if you ask me, regarding Squire’s bequest. Not because he is incorrect about the ignobility of accepting the gift, but because, wedded to Mary and responsible for securing the future of an entire household, to say nothing of his future children, there is a compelling need for him to swallow his own pride and do what is in their interest, rather than his own.
Maggie Smith delivers her punchlines with perfection. Shirley Maclaine, however, does not. She paled beside Smith. That was the lowlight of the show for me, especially since I have an entire season of Maclaine to endure now. Loved everything else, though, and it was great to have the show back.
It will be interesting to see how they deal with the money problem. Will they sell off some land? Isn’t that what many of the nobles did, though I think the great decline of the upper class in England really started after WWII when England really embraced socialism.
I absolutely hated Maclaine’s character. It was this horrible dramatically overcliched personage of an American heiress who espouses early 20th century liberal Americanism in such an over-the-top manner that it makes you want to punch her in the face every time she appears. There’s only one scene in which I really liked her and I won’t mention it till it happens.
I agree with the equation, Smith > Maclaine, but disagree that Shirley’s loss in a difficult match-up against a long-established favorite is a sign that she’s either “totally forgettable,” or else “the lowlight of the show.” She didn’t always deliver her lines convincingly, but then neither do Edith or Matthew. And if, as Alan argues, she is “overcliched,” then what to say about the other characters in a show dedicated to mostly played-straight tropes – the flawed-but-noble paterfamilias, the embittered “ugly duckling,” the hidebound butler, the conniving ladies’ maid, the fanatic, and the idealist? I don’t need to play a game of who’s who. If Maclaine’s role was to toot the same note again and again, at least she did it at moments apropos.
The one character I’m trying to come to grips with is Bates. It strains credulity that he would, again and again, demand that Anna really ask herself whether or not it is possible that he killed Vera. Even if you take his violent reaction to his cellmate as a classic ruse, there is still the fact that he refuses to stop prompting the woman he loves most to see him as a murderer.
An aside. Without knowing what comes after Episode 1 Season 3, was anybody else a bit wary about hearing Lord Grantham declare that he was happy enough that his heart might burst?
Maclaine was the lowlight for me because I really found her disagreeable in the scenes she was in. Her delivery made me cringe. Whatever she was supposed to add to the show, the opposite has happened. She’s a net negative.
Polar opposite characters can be fun, interesting and a great foil. Maclaine, on the other hands, come off as a shrill ill-winded know-it-all written to foster Downton into a new era the Granthams will be obviously resistant towards. I’ll return later down the road on why it doesn’t work.
Aside from Branson she’s the dumbest, stupidest character in the whole show. I could go on and on about Branson.
Branson’s begun to bother me increasingly as a consequence of his inability to “turn it off” in polite company, though I suppose it is typical of zealots like him to hold “ordinary folk” responsible for the policies of their governments, whatever their levels of knowledge or interest.
I don’t dislike the cliche of Maclaine’s character’s attitude as much as the constancy of her rudeness. Nevertheless, she did seem to display a certain level of humanity as she patiently explained why she could not, in the end, come again to the Crawley family’s relief.
But talk of single-minded or foolishly selfish characters should probably include Matthew and Grantham, if not also Edith and Isobel. The latter pair are perennially annoying: Edith because she hasn’t any redeeming qualities to recommend her; Isobel because she is so determinedly pompous. I mentioned earlier that characters written in such a way tend not to have much credibility, and that is what is starting to happen. At least we have got certain human qualities in O’Brien and Thomas – an unexpected conscience, and a tendency to want to nurture putative friends and family in O’Brien; an abiding chip-on-the-shoulder toward those who have obtained power and freedom in society in Thomas.
I don’t see why Grantham should get a pass for his adulterous behavior, which greatly diminished him in my eyes. I much despise that common rhetorical device when used to introduce moral ambiguity to the paterfamilias. It would have been enough that he struggled with money in subsequent seasons. As it was, the affair seems to have added nothing, especially because there is no grappling with guilt.
Did Grantham actually have an affair? I thought it was a mutual attraction and a single kiss? I don’t recall it ever elevating beyond that.
I don’t really mind Edith because she gets so little screen time and while she’s often bitchy towards Mary, Mary has been plenty bitchy right back in past episodes. Mary torpedoed her relationship with the old guy originally. That was a nasty bit on Mary’s part.
Isobel can be annoying. I wouldn’t mind seeing less of her.
Interesting episode. Glad to see Shirley Maclaine was gone but I know she’ll be back. Maybe Edith will go to New York and we will have some scenes there?
So far this season is off to a rather limp start. Now that Mary is married we no longer have her story to provide much drama. The series seems like it doesn’t know where to go next. Edith is dull so we don’t want to spend too much time on her. We seem to be in for some Irish drama so perhaps that will be interesting.
Downstairs we have Thomas being an ass, as usual. Why he has decided to fight with O’Brien doesn’t make much sense, because she’s the only one who will play as dirty as he does.
PBS showed the first two episodes back to back last weekend and seemed like a single 2 hour episode. Last night’s episode was the technically the third episode, but will probably be referred to as the second one by most Americans.
I watched the two hour episode. I don’t remember any cut to credits in the middle. I think they edited the two episodes together. It did seem like one episode.
I predict that Edith will begin to push a plot line of her own shortly. But that’s rather obvious, if you ask me.
While I think it’s fair to say that Thomas picked a fight with O’Brien because the script told him to do so, notwithstanding the stupidity inherent in slinging shit at a shit-slinger, there was a cursory nod, at least, to a motive that is at least plausible: Thomas greatly resents the stratospheric rise of O’Brien’s nephew, and blames O’Brien.
I’m actually sorry that Shirley Maclaine is gone. Not only did I like her, but I especially liked the possibility that her maid would cause problems for others. But I’m satisfied to see Daisy get sweet on Alfred.
If Grantham only kissed the maid, that’s still infidelity, even if there’s nothing permanent about it. I think it’s odd to see him so contentedly married in every other scene. I thought the inclusion of that little sub-plot misguided and stupid.
Glad to hear Maclaine won’t be back. Can’t stand her or her character, and she wasn’t entertaining in her awfulness, as some other characters are.
So we’ve seen the resolution of the O’Brien / Thomas war. Took long enough, and given how long they took building to the crisis, the resolution almost felt rushed. For Downton, anyway.
I was really expecting Thomas to murder Bates when they had their little confrontation at night. Because they do hate each other, and if Thomas was feeling like he had nothing to lose, why not? Bates has had such a bad time of it, I keep expecting the writers to squish him again, just when he thought he’d gotten everything he wanted. Being suddenly junior to Thomas is hardly in the same league.
Lord Grantham was terribly inconsistent this episode. He’s being an egotistical ass about everything, but when he learns what’s going on with Thomas, he immediately does the Right Thing and is very modern and understanding, instead of a reaction like Carson’s, which would be more likely.
It seems weird that James, despite projecting such self-confidence, is so easily manipulated by O’Brien. You’d think that when Carson made clear which way the wind was blowing in the initial reference conversation that James would have the sense to back away.
I cannot for the life of me imagine what “little operation” Mary might have had to restore fertility in the 1920’s. Typical Downton that instead of telling Matthew what was going on, she let him think she didn’t want sex with him.
