|
Post by karenk on Jan 9, 2014 8:37:04 GMT -5
I was very disappointed with the Season 4 opener. Perhaps it should not have been 2 hours? I am worried that Downton Abbey has jumped the shark. Amanda, you've seen the whole season, right? Someone at work said a British friend told her it is boring in the beginning but worth it at the end. Without giving away any spoilers, would you agree with this statement? Should I keep watching? It took me three tries to finish the first episode and by the end I was playing Words With Friends and only half watching, I was that bored.
|
|
|
Post by meggie on Jan 9, 2014 9:38:21 GMT -5
I was disappointed too. It lacked the tight writing that the other seasons had. I think losing Matthew may be more that it can handle since the stories have revolved around him from the start, plus the loss of the multilayered archvillian, replaced by what's her name doesn't have the depth.
The whole thing seemed to be 'set up a problem, have it quickly solved, set up another problem, solved, done. No depth and no audience involvement.
It's still one the best things on tv but it sure isn't our Downton. I read that next season may be the last because Julian Fellows is going to be working on an American adaptation of it. He's either run out of ideas or should have replaced some of the actors instead of killing them off. "Matthew Crawley is now being played by......"
|
|
|
Post by karenk on Jan 9, 2014 10:45:57 GMT -5
That is a very good way of describing it: set up a problem, solve, set up another problem, solve, repeat until you induce a coma in your audience. There was very little in the episode that hooked me. They seem to be back to Thomas being dastardly and no one in charge noticing. The whole thing with Nanny West might have been better had it been strung out with a bit more intrigue. To have her get caught doing something so blatantly bad so soon into the show didn't even allow the audience to develop any kind of feeling for her. In the "old days," that sequence would have been meted out more carefully, with much more intrigue. It's hard for me to care whether Edith's beau becomes a German or not. It's as if they've thrown a bunch of story ideas at a wall to see what will stick. Very strange and just not up to the usual standards. It seems to have been patched together because they've got a financial juggernaut on their hands rather than a story to tell.
|
|
|
Post by ruffles on Jan 9, 2014 12:22:20 GMT -5
Yes, I thought, when compared to what we've had, it was rather ho hum. My interest held because I care about everybody. There should be more shock and uproar over Lady Edith's apparent connection with a married man. Instead, we've got live wire Rose kicking up her heels. That thing with Carson's friend was a dud and some of it didn't make sense. It bothered me that Isobel so readily took a strange man into her home? I miss O'Brien. She wields a whole different kind of control in the downstairs crew and hammers it right back at Thomas.
Reports have it that this episode achieved astonishing ratings. It had to be due to Matthew's cliff hanging loss right at the end of Season 3. We'll see if this holds.
|
|
|
Post by Amanda on Jan 9, 2014 15:47:44 GMT -5
I meant to rewatch the beginning of the season so I could keep pace with you guys. I need to do that. Looking back on the season, I did enjoy it, but since you mention it, I remember needing a while to get into it initially, because some of the stories were straying into areas that I didn't care about.
I was particularly disappointed that they seem to have reset Thomas back to season 1, which didn't jive with the growth we saw in him during season 3. I am afraid it was because, with O'Brien gone, there needed to be a villain, so his character got pushed back in that direction.
There are some disjointed stories that I think are so because of the loss of Matthew. But, there are also some compelling things coming, so hang on for now. I think you'll find more to like going forward.
|
|
|
Post by meggie on Jan 9, 2014 20:26:29 GMT -5
That storyline with Nanny West could have been done so much better. Imagine if grieving, disinterested mother Mary had overheard Nanny West's comment. That would have been a scene in more ways than one! It could have come directly after the Dowager Countess had the 'choose life or death speech' (wouldn't want to lose that one) as Mary is walking, thinking it over, and overhears Nanny. She'd have snapped out of her malaise, sacked the Nanny, and we'd have seen her as a caring mother.
As it was, Thomas got a couple of brownie points but he didn't even know what had happened.
|
|
|
Post by karenk on Jan 9, 2014 21:51:59 GMT -5
And it's not as if he cares about the kid, his motivation was a bruised ego. I am very disappointed in the Thomas character. He had shown some vulnerability that gave his character more depth. In last week's show, he was a one dimensional caricature of his former self. I would have played out the Nanny West character for at least a couple of episodes, perhaps showing her favoring George and treating little Sybil like dirt, but only we the viewers see it. I agree, it seems as if they got caught flat footed without Matthew and O'Brien. It's kind of like they had to come up something so they put in a sloppy, half-hearted effort.
Amanda, thanks for the confirmation of what my friend said. I'll try to stick it out, though I might play a little Bubble Witch while I'm watching.
|
|