Aurora B
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 162
Jul 31, 2006 21:33:56 GMT -4
|
Post by Aurora B on Sept 23, 2013 19:15:19 GMT -4
I was genuinely surprised by the ending to the Thomas/Nanny storyline. I guess it takes one to know one. Thomas learned from the best so it's not too surprising that he was able to figure out that something was amiss. I didn't interpret it that way. I thought Thomas was originally trying to stir up shite about the nanny because she was making demands on him to do stuff for her and he wanted to trip her up. I don't think he really thought she was doing what she did. He just benefited from Cora finding out that the nanny really was a loser. He's one of my favorite characters, and I agree, the actor deserves some Emmy love. I was concerned that Mary was going to spend the entire season moping around so I was glad to see they moved her character on to "choosing life." I only hope they don't plan on setting her and Tom up as a couple. Curious how the new/old characters are going to mix things up this season. Always love the long shots of Highclere Castle. The one in the fog was very haunting.
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Sept 23, 2013 21:24:09 GMT -4
I think it was a little of both - he decided to undermine the nanny when she wouldn't let him see Sybbie and started ordering him around, but there was also the scene where the nanny said Sybbie couldn't have an egg with tea or something like that and Thomas was all, "And why the hell can't she?" He was so fond of Sybil that it makes sense that he'd be protective of Sybbie, and I think suspecting that the nanny actually was being unfair to Sybbie in addition to ordering him around made him take action faster than he probably normally would and he tattled on her to Cora.
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Oct 1, 2013 0:00:01 GMT -4
Okay, this episode was boring as hell.
So Matthew had the presence of mind to write a letter to serve as Will in case he decided to drive into a tree on the way home from Scotland. And Robert is a butthole about the whole thing. Shocking.
Cora is easily manipulated by her maid and the rest of the staff. Again, shocking. Didn't they learn that "Evil for no reason" Thomas is boring as hell? Didn't he actually get some depth last season? Are we just going to forget about that?
Also boring as hell? Saint Bates. He gets money to a broke Mosley under the flimsiest of pretenses. I was hoping Thomas would roll his eyes so hard that they'd roll out of his eye sockets and across the floor. I'm glad it looks like someone will be coming to flirt with Anna. Maybe she'll realize what a snore her husband is.
And yet again, Edith is heading for disaster with her boyfriend. Color me shocked.
I hope next week is better.
|
|
Karrit
Sloane Ranger
Posts: 2,295
Mar 15, 2005 14:32:04 GMT -4
|
Post by Karrit on Oct 1, 2013 12:13:27 GMT -4
It was boring and re-using plot devices like the "convenient letter that explains everything" is one of the many reasons this show is losing it.
How is it possible that Mary can inherit Downton from her husband, but not her father?
I did a quick google and £30 in 1922 is worth anywhere from £500 to several thousand in terms of purchasing power, depending on your method of calculation. I know I would remember loaning that amount to someone.... So why is Moseley going along so meekly with Bates? Ugh.
The Carson storyline was a go nowhere/add nothing of interest plot. If Mrs Crwley wanted to help someone, why not Moseley?
I hope this is the last season.
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Oct 1, 2013 14:27:58 GMT -4
Exactly so Carson could have that go-nowhere plot. Why, exactly, should he feel sorry for that other Charlie as everyone assumed he should be? The last time he saw the dude was when he showed up out of the blue to blackmail him! He should have told the guy to kiss his eyebrows and then sent him back to the workhouse. Moseley used to work for Mrs. Crawley anyway, so why doesn't she just hire him back if she loves charity cases so much? Instead we get this ridiculous plot where Bates comes up a tissue-thin device to get him an assload of money.
This show is frustrating because it has the potential to be great, but they always waste that potential.
|
|
|
Post by angelaudie on Oct 6, 2013 18:31:44 GMT -4
Dear Dan Stevens, Jessica Brown Findlay, and Siobhan Finneran:
Over the past few months I have wondered if perhaps you guys have jumped ship too soon. After all, this is one of the biggest shows in the world and maybe you have at least left open the possibility of returning. I mean I think the fandom overreacted but still questioned if your decisions were wise ones. This is me officially apologizing. Tonight's ep proved you three knew what you were doing. While everyone clung to a sinking ship you guys got into life boats and are far away from the sinking!
Sincerely, angelaudie
P.S. Could possibly try talking Michelle Dockery into leaving? She really doesn't deserve to be associate with this shipwreck. THANKS A BUNCH!
|
|
|
Post by ratscabies on Oct 6, 2013 23:07:31 GMT -4
Disclaimer: I know next to nothing about this show, beyond that it exists. And it is popular.
That said, tonight I found out that Elizabeth McGovern is in it. I learned this because the gig tonight, that we were told was a fundraising event for the Shakespeare Theatre in DC, was in fact an award event for Ms McGovern.
The rest of the story turned into a rant, so I am moving it to the Peeves thread...
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Oct 6, 2013 23:15:01 GMT -4
Good gravy. When I went to watch this on ITV's website I got the "adult content" warning and I thought, "Adult content? On Downton Abbey? WTF? Wait...shit. Someone's getting raped." And wouldn't you know it, Fellowes really is that transparent. The actress playing Anna did a good job, but...oy.
And did Edna put something in Tom's drink? Did he get roofied AGAIN? I'm really beginning to suspect that Fellowes has a plot wheel with only about five items on it, and he gives it a spin before every episode and just matches one of those five plot lines up to a character -- if it has already happened to a character, no biggie! We'll watch the same characters go through the same shit over and over again.
And why does Edna want Tom so bad anyway? It's not like he's her ticket to a better life. If he gets caught banging the maids Robert could give him the boot and then he'll have nothing and so will Edna. If she insists on seducing someone, it should be a rich dude. Oh, and haven't we already seen a maid running after a dude she shouldn't? WHY, YES WE HAVE! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, FELLOWES. COME UP WITH NEW PLOT LINES!
|
|
iClaudia
Sloane Ranger
"When love and duty are one, grace is within you."
Posts: 2,215
Mar 13, 2005 14:33:41 GMT -4
|
Post by iClaudia on Oct 6, 2013 23:49:54 GMT -4
Exactly so Carson could have that go-nowhere plot. Why, exactly, should he feel sorry for that other Charlie as everyone assumed he should be? The last time he saw the dude was when he showed up out of the blue to blackmail him! He should have told the guy to kiss his eyebrows and then sent him back to the workhouse. Moseley used to work for Mrs. Crawley anyway, so why doesn't she just hire him back if she loves charity cases so much? Instead we get this ridiculous plot where Bates comes up a tissue-thin device to get him an assload of money. This show is frustrating because it has the potential to be great, but they always waste that potential. Maybe it's because my expectations were lowered after the first episode but I enjoyed the last two more. I've come to accept that the ridiculous plot devices are going to be just that - ridiculous. Apparently things are going swimmingly at Downtown now that Robert actually has to listen to other people so yes, Moseley should be back at Crawley House. Or they can write off Violet's butler. And maybe they can move Rose to Crawley House too because she doesn't have anything to do at Downton anyway. I thought they would continue to put her more in the servants' sphere. If they are going to recycle storylines, at least that one would give her more to do. I'm guessing that Maggie Smith and Phyllis Logan have reduced work hours for this season, which is a shame. This week, I enjoyed the Gregson plot for the first time. They've fleshed the character out a bit and I like how the actor played it this week. For a moment, I wondered if he was a bit of a rogue himself. Unfortunately, Edith became a second thought. I didn't buy that Cora would not have been involved in the arrangements for their special guest. Alfred's dreams are a much better way to explore issues surrounding the changing times than the treatment of a *gasp* professional singer. I was legitimately surprised by Anna's storyline. Julian Fellowes has written the dark turns in the upstairs/downstairs environment before (i.e. Gosford Park) and I find Anna not telling anyone to be believable but I hope Bates does not stay in the dark for very long. Robert, I can believe not putting two and two together (if ever there was a man who shouldn't be gambling, it's him) but not Bates. He's said before that he learned a lot in prison. I think he'd figure out a way to take care of things without getting in trouble himself. The Branson stuff seems a season too late and Edna is just not that interesting.
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Oct 7, 2013 0:14:54 GMT -4
I find it believable that Anna would tell no one as well (and that Mrs. Hughes would go along with her plan to tell no one), and again, the actress did a good job. I just don't know if I trust this show to handle it all that well.
But I could get behind Bates the secret murderer if he decides to go after this guy. I was always kinda disappointed that he didn't kill his ex-wife. Murder would actually make him interesting.
|
|