WARNING! SPOILER ALERT in the body of this review and comments of the Downton Abbey Finale of Season Three. If you have not seen the last installment, please view the 7th episode online at this link. I deliberately kept the incriminating images at the back of this post. Readers who comment can leave their honest assessments, for the 4th season will not be aired in the U.K. until next fall.
Tug of War. Credit: Courtesy of © Nick Wall/Carnival Film & Television Limited 2012 for MASTERPIECE
What did you think? Did Julian Fellowes leave us with a cliffhanger or a major downer? How will this latest catastrophic development change Season 4 and the actions of major characters? I must admit to some RELIEF that the 3rd season of Downton Abbey has finally ended. I’ve not been on such a roller coaster ride since I last visited our local amusement park, one minute loving the story lines and the next minute loathing certain plot developments. One thing is for certain, the popularity of DA is here to stay as long as Julian Fellowes continues to provide us with such lively and unpredictable entertainment. And, now, my rather cryptic thoughts on Downton Abbey Season Three, Episode Seven:
Off to Duneagle in Scotland. redit: Courtesy of © Nick Wall/Carnival Film & Television Limited 2012 for MASTERPIECE
An interlude in Scotland
An excuse for a change of scenery means a road trip to Scotland. This episode was divided between Downton Abbey with the servants and Duneagle Castle in Scotland with the Crawley family. Lord Grantham described the annual visit to the Highlands as the highlight of his year. (The war and Sybil’s death had prevented the Crawleys from visiting in previous seasons.) Viewers now understand why Lady Rose made her appearance in the last episode, for her family are close to the Crawleys. This segueway to the Highlands is a means to get Rose to Downton Abbey – as a replacement for Sybil? One shudders.
Mrs. Patmore’s pasties entice a Lothario
No sooner had Mr. Tufton the new shopkeeper, smelled the enticing aroma of Mrs. Patmore’s cooking and sampled a few of her dishes than his mind was made up – he would woo her until she was installed as his wife/personal cook in his kitchen.
Mrs. Patmore , flattered by his not so subtle attentions, simpers like a 16-year-old girl at all the testosterone aimed her way. She purchases a pretty new blouse for her date with the first man to pay court to her in decades and cheers him on in the rope pulling contest (which the men of Downton win.)
Upon seeing Mrs. Patmore all gussied up for the day, Mr. Tufton comes on as strong as a jack hammer: “I hope you don’t mind if I say so Mrs Patmore, but in that blouse you look like you stepped off the pages of Vogue”. This doesn’t fool Mrs. Hughes one bit. “You are free with your compliments,” she observes. And he replies tellingly: “I love to be in love Mrs Hughes. I’ll not deny it. Any time, any place, I love to be in love!”
But Mrs. Hughes wasn’t born yesterday. Tufton’s not so subtle moves on other women at the fair doesn’t escape her knowing gaze.
Like a true friend Mrs Hughes summons the cook to her quarters and reveals the unpleasant truth. Instead of stomping out of the housekeeper’s quarters, Mrs. Patmore giggles, saying: “It was the cookin’ he was after and not me. I never felt such relief in my life. The more he said about how he liked his beef roasted, his eggs fried, and his pancakes flipped, then the more I wanted out and get away.”
It is side stories like this one, filled with colorful characters, comedy, and a glimpse of the life of ordinary mortals, that elevate Downton Abbey from the mundane to the fabulous.
Love is All Around You
Romance is in the air for a number of Downton’s inhabitants. Bates and his Anna kiss by a babbling brook and she learns the reel for him.
Dr. Clarkson reaches the inevitable conclusion – that Isobel Crawley would make a perfect wife. Isobel likes their platonic friendship and discourages the doc from declaring himself. But after this episode’s awful ending, one can conclude that Isobel will need the doctor’s substantial shoulders and his considerable support to get over Matthew’s sudden demise.
Thomas sacrifices his pretty face to save Jimmy’s after the Downton men win a tug of war. If that isn’t love, what is?
Michael Gregson and Edith: “He’s brought his pencils and his rods what’s wrong with that?
This is the most improbable subplot in the season finale. Michael Gregson, fishing rod in hand, rushes to Scotland and finagles an invitation to Duneagle. His motive? To convince the Crawleys that he’s a decent chap despite his batty wife in the belfry.
It’s a good thing that Edie has low self-esteem or else she would have been spooked off him from the beginning. The family is not very receptive. Michael wants them to get to know him – the real him – so that the Crawleys can see that he’s the perfect man for Edie, with just one teensy little flaw.
This subplot had more in common with One Life to Live than Downton Abbey. Our Edie deserves better.
Michael: I thought if they knew me, if they came to like me, they might find it easier to be on my side. My basic fact is that I am in love with you. Really and truly. Cross my heart and hope to die.
Edith: And I want to be in yours. But this visit of yours is so creepy, I can’t see a happy ending.
Nothing stops Michael. Having made a tepid impression on Robert and Mary, who refuses to open her eyes, he makes a move on Matthew.
Credit: Courtesy of © Nick Wall/Carnival Film & Television Limited 2012 for MASTERPIECE
But his appeal to Matthew’s sense of romance doesn’t get very far (the dialogue is priceless; how can one make fun of it?):
Michael: Does the law expect me to have no life at all until I die? Would Lord Grantham?
Matthew: You can’t expect that he would want you to involve his own daughter, what when all you have to offer her is a job as your own mistress.
Michael: No, I love her. I’m offering my love.
Matthew: You’ve been misled by our surroundings. We’re not in a novel by Walter Scott.
Edith will not be put off when Michael tries to say his goodbyes, saying, “It’s odd. If you’d asked me before tonight how I felt about you I’m not sure what I would have answered, but now I’m absolutely sure, and this is NOT our last evening.” Ah, our rebellious Edith. Will she live in sin with this man? Set fire to the asylum in which his wife is housed? Carry on as usual and be dangled on a string for life? This improbable plot twist is not what we had hoped for Edith. These scenes seemed so contrived. I do hope that Julian Fellowes gets this relationship back on track in Season 4, for it had such an interesting start.
Edna and Tom
The title should actually read “A Brazen Maid Sets Her Sights on Tom.”
Tom, the new estate manager, lives in limbo. His position is much like that of a governess – he belongs nowhere, not with the servants and not with the family. Case in point, when the Crawleys dash off to Scotland, Tom remains behind, eating alone and thinking of his dead wife, Sybil, who is missed by one and all. Leaving Tom alone to supervise the estate worries Violet:
Violet: Do you think it is wise to leave him here unsupervised?
Cora: What do you mean?
Violet: Well I know he’s housebroken, more or less, but I don’t want freedom to go to his head.
Isobel: I’ll keep an eye on him.
But the one keeping her eye on him is Edna, the new maid.
After the Crawleys leave for Scotland, Branson is seen walking, eating, and sleeping alone in the house in scenes reminiscent of Jack Nicholson several months into winter in The Shining. Edna pops up wherever he goes – at the pub, in a room, in the hallway – smart, fresh, and pretty. Each time she hones in on Branson like a heat-seeking missile.
For a supervised maid, Edna seems to have a lot of free time to stalk Branson without a reprimand. While Branson’s intrigued, he is a male after all, Edna cannot make him forget his misery over Sybil’s death. When Mrs Hughes cautions him about getting involved with the help, he blurts out his misery.
Like a mother hen, Mrs. Hughes, who gets better with each season, comforts Branson and fires Edna, who is obviously not cut out of maid-of-all work cloth.
Credit: Courtesy of © Nick Wall/Carnival Film & Television Limited 2012 for MASTERPIECE
A Tale of Two Marriages: Shrimpie and Susan vs Robert and Cora
We don’t really care about Shrimpie and Susan, the Marquess and Marchioness of Flintshire, who have an awful marriage, but we do care about Cora and Robert. If the earl and his countess needed proof that their marriage was on solid footing, then Shrimpie and Susan, who have tired of each other over the years, provide it.
The marquess and his marchioness are stuck with each other, despite the absence of passion and lack of mutual respect. Worse, Shrimpie has squandered his inheritance by following the traditional route of estate management, which bankrupted him. He praises Robert for his modern thinking and for making smart choices. Robert is more grateful than ever for Matthew’s good sense.
Shrimpie’s solution out of his financial predicament is to take a post in Bombay, where he and Susan will live in couples hell, and leave Rose with the Crawleys for her coming out.
The contrast between the two aristocratic couples couldn’t be greater. While Susan and her husband quarrel over every minor detail, the earl begins to appreciate what he has. He gives his Cora a passionate kiss and recognizes Matthew’s part in his success. “Downton will survive because of Matthew’s vision and now I give thanks for him.” Even if many of us didn’t know ahead of time that Matthew was about to meet his Maker, these sentences act like sign posts: Matthew’s gonna die. Matthew’s gonna die.
Matthew and Mary
The dialogue between Mary and Matthew hinted of a less than happy ending because they have never been so happy before. She’s soft and amorous. He simply can’t resist patting her on her bump and giving her compliments left and right. They coo and ooh and ah all over each other…
… so that their love talk is beyond sugary. Mary to Matthew: “You think me nice, but nobody else does. What makes you sure I am? Matthew: “Because I’ve seen you naked.” The dialogue makes even the most clueless viewer wonder – What’s going on? Why the chemistry all of a sudden?
At eight months pregnant, Mary feels safe traveling to Scotland, but makes a mistake in joining the picnic. “I was stupid to go”, she says later, “we were shaken about like dice in a cup.” Which, as everyone knows, is code for early labor.
After Mary’s twinges start, she rushes back to Yorkshire to have her baby, telling Matthew he can join her later with the rest of the Crawley gang.
Alone and about to give birth prematurely, Mary confesses: “I feel I’m only half myself without him.”
The doomsday clock is ticking more loudly.
Matthew arrives to view his son and heir. “My darling, how are you really?” he asks. “Tired and pretty relieved. Just think, we’ve done our duty. Downton is safe. We have an heir, and as soon as I get out of bed we can work on the spare.”
Tick tock tick tock.
Matthew is giddy with delight holding his little chap and waxing eloquently about teaching his son cricket and estate maintenance.
And now we hear the dialogue that seals the doom deal:
Mary: “I hope I’m allowed to be your Mary Crawley for all eternity.
Matthew: “You’ll be my Mary always because mine is the true Mary.
Mary: “Ever wonder how happy you have made me?”
Matthew: “Right now I want to tell you that I fall more in love with you every day that passes.”
It’s a wonder that lightning doesn’t come out of the blue and strike him then and there.
Mary asks for a decent kiss before sending her beloved away to collect her family. Life couldn’t be more perfect for our happy couple. But this is Downton Abbey and no one is allowed to remain blissfully happy for long.
Matthew’s Death
Sybil’s death scene lasted 10-15 minutes, giving viewers time to prepare for her unhappy end. But with Matthew’s the viewers were robbed.
Matthew’s last moments. Credit: Courtesy of © Carnival Film & Television Limited 2012 for MASTERPIECE
One moment he is rejoicing in the birth of his heir, the next moment he is dead in some roadside ditch. End of episode. End of the season. PBS immediately switches to a fund appeal to capitalize on their stupified viewers. I felt cheated.
The camera lingers on the shocking scene for a few micro seconds before cutting to the Crawley’s drawing-room, where the family placidly awaits Matthew’s arrival.
Credit: Courtesy of © Nick Wall/Carnival Film & Television Limited 2012 for MASTERPIECE
As he lies dying in the road, Violet says appropriately: “We don’t always get our just desserts.” Which is exactly how the viewers are starting to feel.
Mary, who is happily expecting the arrival of her family, says of her husband: “Tell Mr Matthew he must wait his turn, he’s seen the baby and they haven’t.”
I wonder if that statement will come back to haunt her! Two major characters killed off this season. Life in Downton Abbey land is unfair!
Please vote in the poll or leave your considered thoughts about this episode and the third season. Will you return to view Season 4?
All images via PBS Pressroom.
Jane Austen's World 
It was good to see Phoebe Nicholls and Peter Eyre again. She was previously Lady Cordelia on Brideshead Revisited and Peter Eyre played Oscar Wilde in Lillie.
She also played Elizabeth Elliot in Persuasion 1995!
That’s where I’ve seen her before! I knew that face – those expressions – just couldn’t place them. Thank you.
good catches! She was also the horrid sister Elizabeth in the movie version of Persuasion.
Peter Egan played Oscar Wilde in Lillie.
Brenda – you are correct!! And I am gaga! I apologize for making such a blunder. It was indeed Peter Egan who played Oscar Wilde and who played the Marquess of Flintcher in the other evening on Downton Abbey. A fine actor indeed.
Lavinia’s death has already brought plenty of drama allowing Matthew to marry Mary and for her father’s money to save Downton
I kept telling myself that Julian Fellowes already killed off one of the daughters: Mary was bound to survive childbirth! I hated the endiing!!! While my mouth was frozen in an unattractive O of shock, PBS breaks away for a membership drive!!! Fellowes better be glad he wasn’t in my living room-it rang blue with words Jane Austen probably didn’t know, much less say.
Not all of us had to suffer the pledge drive right after the ending. My station here in metro DC re-showed The Secrets of Highclere Castle and it was a good way to transition from the ending of the story. I’m so sorry for the rest of you that had that happen.
Well, we knew it was coming, didn’t we? I still felt really stunned and couldn’t believe it was OVER! No hint of what is to come! Was really surprised that Edith has decided (or seemingly so) to take up with Michael – I think he is smitten with her title and he seems so timid or withdrawn, something. Edith makes VERY poor choices! I was disappointed that Isobel rebuffed Dr. C as I think it would be a good relationship for both of them. GLAD Edna is out of the picture, NOT the right choice for Tom. As always, love Mrs. Hughes and am glad she is helping Tom find his way in a very difficult situation…he and the baby should have been invited I think. But loved the scenes with Carson and the baby! I am also a fan of Carson&Mrs. Hughes getting together. Was very glad to see Robert being appreciative and thankful for Matthew and his family. I am glad to see Jimmy/James finally cutting Thomas some slack – can’t believe how much I am beginning to like him – his last scene with Jimmy, I really liked him! Mrs. Patmore is usually the voice of reason and to have her head turned so quickly was too much, in my opinion…although, I did like her new blouse. Could care less about Shrimpie and his wife; Rose either although she is a very pretty little thing but the fact that her parents marriage had obviously deteriorated could not have escaped anybody’s notice and the wife/mother came off as a fish-wife! Horrid! I say let’s develop Ivy and Daisy a little more and leave Rose in Scotland, which is absolutely gorgeous, by the way. Loved Mosely and his dancing! But I must say, I was a little confused by all the “socializing” at the ball between the classes…was it a ball like they have at DA at Christmastime? And what was with O’B and that woman maid? Did not really get that whole interaction.
My mind is reeling with it all, trying to remember certain things and all I can really see is Matthew under the car, head bleeding badly, imagining the shock and horror to once again hit the house, especially Mary, Robert and Tom – who have all come to rely on his presence so deeply. There have been quite a few deaths at DA but this will be the real twister, I think….and just as they are rejoicing over Mary and the baby both coming through the birth safe and sound. I never saw Sybil’s death coming and I felt like a member of my own family had passed but I almost can’t bear the thought that Matthew will no longer be in the picture, so to speak. But this will be the chance for Tom to really step up to the plate and solider on in Matthew’s place concerning the running of the estate. It will bring him and Robert closer or put them under.
Thank you for letting me “vent”, just can’t get over why he had to go and leave before season four was wrapped up!!! Drat a thousand times!
The actor playing Matthew had signed a 3 year contract. He has been doing plays and I believe there is a big commitment he’s involved in that would preclude his continuing with DA. He might have wanted todo other things and that was the timing of it. Or, he may not have wanted to be typecast. Either way, I’m devastated, too. I’m picturing Mary receiving the news and tears form unbidden.
I’ve waited patiently through the entire season having already known of Matthew’s pending death (so as not to spoil anyone else’s fun). Now I can say that I think letting Dan Stevens go was the worst mistake ever.
The two most important people (upstairs) who were young and vital to the entire Downton Abbey storyline – Sybil and Matthew have been exterminated.
These two were the most down-to-earth of the Upstairs bunch and, they both were doing great things to bridge that awful gap between the classes; afterall, it IS the 1920s not 1890!
Fellowes had us so vested in the “new upstart heir of Downton” and whether or not he would marry a Crawley sister and keep it all in the family for 2 1/2 seasons only to give us just a brief moment of satisfaction with Mary & Matthew married FINALLY. Then we see a couple with no chemistry for the first few episodes of season 3 and suddenly like magic, M & M are madly in love and trying to make babies and then, they DO make a baby and BOOM! Our beloved hero and champion for the common man (and woman) is dead and gone.
So, all of our musings about how M & M would fare as the future Lord and Lady Grantham have been for naught. Oh Julian, for God’s sake man, don’t tell me you couldn’t have gleaned another season out of Stevens – with the right amount of salary increase and an agreement to make his filming schedule flexible so he could pursue those other projects you could have kept this character on. You did with Dame Maggie (and she, and Penelope/Isobel have both done movies and other projects through the seasons and they’re considerably older than Stevens).
I will say that Fellowes did do a good job of trying to conjure up romance from other areas from Edith and her forever married to someone else editor, to Anna & her “Mista Baytes” to even a possible relationship between the doc and Isobel. BUT…my heart has truly lost a big lump of love for all things Downton with such an integral character as Matthew dead and gone forever! And (as my husband so aptly pointed out) Mary is such a cold fish of a B–ch that the only thing making her seem “warm blooded” was Matthew. Better hope that baby melts her cold, aloof heart otherwise, she’ll be hard to watch.
That whole storyline with the new saucy housemaid stalking Tom (Branson) just seemed like something to distract us with as the day of doom was quickly approaching. Now, Tom is going to feel even MORE out-of-place without Matthew to mentor and make him feel part of the family.
While Scotland was a nice diversion, Rose falls way short of the charm, warmth and compassion that Lady Sybil brought to the story (and I’m sorry but she seems awfully large and masculine for an 18 year old girl – sorry!).
Thank heaven for the steady downstairs crew and ongoing great character peformances in Mrs. Huges, Carsen, Thomas, Anna & her Mistah Baytes, O’Brian, Mrs. Pattmore, etc. etc.
While the DC will always bring light, depth and laughter to any upstairs scene, there will be forever a gaping whole that Matthew and Sybil once filled so vividly.
I can honestly say this will be the FIRST year I won’t be waiting and counting the months and weeks and days to the next season. A new freedom of sorts that I’d really rather not have.
DAN STEVENS CHOSE TO LEAVE! DAN STEVENS CHOSE TO LEAVE!!!!
People: Quit blaming Fellowes!!!!! When an actor no longer wants to play a character, you can toss the Crown Jewels at them and they won’t change their mind. Many very talented actors refuse to be involved in television for this very reason: they do NOT want to get bound into a contract. They are all about the CRAFT of acting and not the $$$$$. That’s why you see so many infamous actors in guest roles or short story arcs: In-Out and on to the next project, whether that be acting, writing, directing, stage or screen.
And for the last time: DAN STEVENS CHOSE TO LEAVE! Get it????
I don’t think anyone is disputing that Stevens wanted to leave. This has been known for a long time. HOW the writers deal with a popular and pivotal character leaving is not up to the actor but up to the writer, in this instance, Fellowes. He gave Matthew’s final scene all but 3 minutes. Very short shrift, indeed.
I guess I’m in the Uber-Minority regarding the treatment of Mathew’s exit. I’m used to the intense Cliff Hanger at season’s end from shows like CSI: NY; The Walking Dead and the old Buffy show. And who can forget that most infamous of last second cliff-hangers than the final scene of the 1979-80 season of DALLAS, where the character J.R. Ewing, played by Larry Hagman, was shot twice by an unseen assailant? All of those shows will have a very main character shot, fall off a cliff, drive into a pond, and we have to stay put until the next season to see what happened. I imagine that there will be viewers that leave the show out of protest, just as when Tara Maclay was killed in BtVS.
In a Fellowes video interview, he stated that he couldn’t replace the character as he knew audiences wouldn’t cotton to it and he couldn’t very well “ship Mathew off to London” or some foreign port, with a new baby and a loving wife. So, he was forced to kill him off for good.
Again, as a representative of a micro-minority who felt that the ending happened as it should, they can’t very well advance the plot with a newborn baby. Just as Baby Sybil advanced a year to the toddler stage in the Christmas episode, I think Fellowes is forced to have the new season 4 begin a year after Mathew’s death so the plot can move forward. It would be quite odd, for the 1st show to begin immediately upon the death and then the following episode state “One Year Later.”
At least Mathew did his family well by gaining money, rehauling Downton, and giving a legit MALE heir to Downton so we don’t have to play the entail game card again.
Fare thee well, Mathew and Dan. You were cherished and shall be missed.
Not only did he chose to leave, he refused to make guest appearances in the future, so the only alternative was to kill the character (although Matthew’s leaving to go somewhere and then reappearing sporadically would be even more contrived than this ending).
cahow,
I have to agree with Vic. I also saw an interview with Stevens done in the UK and he indicated that he (thought he) would be in at least the first few episodes of season 4. However, something obviously went amok with the negotiations and BAM! Fellowes has given him and all of his fans (myself included) a mere few seconds for a good-bye notice.
In the interview Stevens also sounds somewhat uncertain about his leaving the show as if he were lamenting before it was even done. I personally think that Fellowes and producers could have offered him a big pay increase and a more flexible shooting schedule and he would have been around for at least another season.
Sorry, but Michelle Dockery’s ‘Mary’ has become a real bore herself (while ALWAYS being bored by everyone else below the tip of her nose). Really good writing (like that of our dear Jane) has characters growing and developing over time yet Mary has been aloof, snobbish, self-serving and whiney since the series began and she was what…nineteen or twenty years old?
Dan’s character was an integral part of the main story and ensemble. Kathryn Hepburn famously said about Fred Astair and Ginger Rogers, “He gave her class and she gave him sex appeal.” Matthew gave Mary warm blood.
Problem is, I don’t think Fellowes realized the true value of his character and the important energy he brought to the upstairs crew of DA.
cahow,
Stevens was in an interview that was taped while they were filming season 3 and he said quite clearly that he was anticipating being in at least the first few episodes of season 4. I think IF Fellowes and producers HAD tossed the crown jewels to him – he would have gladly taken them and managed his schedule but I do know from some other interviews that Fellowes and D.A. producers have been known to be very tight with the budget with their ensemble with the exception of Dame Maggie.
LacyJ – I appreciate your sentiments because you have expressed mine exactly! What DID happen to the romance between Matthew and Mary in Season 3? To me it seemed to reappear with an unnatural amount of “passion” and his repetition of the same line in two different scenes about how happy she has made him should be edited out! I got a hint that there was something about the ending that was making everyone unhappy so I “peaked” online for a spoiler. Glad I did or I would have been sobbing! I spent the whole last episode saying goodbye to Matthew! I do wonder if the foundation won’t go out from DA with his departure. And the way they did it leaves zero opportunity for him to come back. I do love many of the other charaters but there was something different from the usual TV fare with Matthew and Mary – something that made me able to truly escape into DA for pure enjoyment. The other way I agree with you is I won’t be waiting as excitedly for Season 4 because DA can’t be as wonderful without Matthew. Sad to say.
Barbara,
I’m not sure how Fellowes got so off course on Season 3 but anyone who watched the first 2 seasons can tell that he was ‘all over the map’ with the essential characters/ensemble! I’m like you, if I hadn’t been aware of Matthews’ pending death (and especially the way Fellowes showed no respect in killing off his character), I would have probably fallen to pieces!
No matter what Fellowes says in his attempt to do ‘damage control,’ Matthew – the upstart poorer cousin inheriting Downton; and whether he would marry one of the daughters and keep it in the family, was the HEART of the entire story line! We watched Matthew and Mary almost get together, break apart, Matthew fall in love with another (Lavinia – who was really very lovely person/character) only to have her die a sudden death so the Matthew & Mary could finally be together and THEN, we finally get some closure and happiness for these two and BAM! Matthew is killed off in a 3 second 3rd rate depiction!
I haven’t even been able to go back and watch season 3 again and not sure if I’ll hang on to the first two – this is a huge turn-about for yours truly – who was a serious DA fan!
I’ve heard here and elsewhere that Julian Ovendon and Tom Cullen were being considered for potential love interests for Mary. I personally thought RIchard Armitage (of North and South) and Rupert Penry-Jones would have been much better fits and could have mustered up just the right energy to turn Mary and her cold blue blood back to a warm, red blooded woman!
Not even sure if I’ll be able to tune in season 4 – will probably record it and wait and hear what the feedback is so I don’t get caught up in the loop of disappointment again!
Well, I’ve watched the 1995 version of Persuasion (my favorite) and re-reading Jane’s book. And, Calling the Midwives has started up again on PBS (a great story set in early 50s in England) and, we’re cautiously checking into “Mr Selfridge” with Jeremy Priven which starts out in Edwardian England. :-)
What people need to understand is that Dan Stevens wanted out of the show. They wanted to keep him. So instead of doing the ruinous change of actor, which NEVER works, they killed him. I was bothered when I saw it during the English season but having had a little time to sit with it, I am not. It frees up a lot of new storylines for Mary. New characters can arrive, new love stories, new troubles and possibly some scandals. I miss Sybil though. I loved her. Liked finally seeing poor old Shrimpie and his wife who I adored in Brideshead and Persuasion.
I trust Fellowes to give us a new aspect of aristocratic life in the 20s. There really is so much he can do with some new dashing chaps and fellows to bring to DA.
In reply to lacy, it’s agreed that “Matthew gave Mary warm blood” which is why his character told her that he knew the real Mary. It’s not the actress who is cold, but the character as it’s written by Fellowes. I look forward to seeing who Fellowes will provide in Season 4 for Mary’s character to come alive again. I’ve loved the little moments where no one sees Mary, when she’s alone with Lavinia, or William when he tended her horse, that show her humanity.
Miss Acosta CA,
It will take a mighty actor with a great physical presence (say, on the level of a Colin Firth, Richard Armitage, or Clive Owen) to ‘thaw Mary out’ sufficiently to make her a character that I would care about watching!
I agree that those rare and all to brief moments when Mary was being a human being were wonderful but they seemed virtually non-existent in this last season. I do wonder why Fellowes is so keen on making her so cold…?
I beg to differ regarding the ‘killing’ off of Mathew – if you noticed the amount of saccharine coochie-cooing between Matthew and Mary, it seemed too over the top to last. Fellowes’ options were to have another ‘other woman’/’other man’ type of break between the two, or to kill off one of the characters. Mary after childbirth would have been too much after Sybil’s death, so Mathew had to go. I imagine Dan Stevens has already been booked for a major film, after the exposure he has gotten from DA.
My take on Season 4 (pre-filming spoilers?) is that it opens in the mid 1930’s that lead up to the start of WWII, rather than rehashing the immediate aftermath of Mathew’s death.
In a recent New York Times article, Fellowes said the next season will begin 6 months after Matthew’s death. No funeral, none of the shock & immediate mourning–no chance for the other actors to emote…
since I knew the actor who plays Matthew was leaving the series I was not surprised and my friend who lives in the UK spilled the beans during a skype call but it was effective and leaves the viewers hanging
Great post again, Vic! But what are your thoughts on the ending? I think it was a very good example of bad script writing. I understand that Dan Stevens wanted out, but I should have thought that Julian Fellowes would have come up with someting more imaginative than this. I had the impression that he prepared us the whole season for this event by making Matthew less sympathetic, and tried to win us back to the Mary-Matthew story in this last episode, so we didn’t feel too much but just enough about the death of Matthew. Horrible ending. I was so impressed of the scene where Sybil died, which was very well written and acted. But to end a season like this? And I’ve watched on Christmas Day, can you believe what a ‘festive’ mood I was in after that? ;-)
I thought the ending was a cop-out, frankly, and too abrupt. The Matthew Crawley death deserved at least a 5-10 minutes of screen time, especially in the aftermath, with the family driving to the hospital and being flagged down by the truck driver for help. Imagine the response when Lord Grantham discovers his son-in-law under the truck. The viewer would have been able to grieve and worry alongside the family.
The ending was rushed and poorly done. Dan Stevens deserved more, for his character was instrumental in making this series so successful.
Wonderful review, Vic! I just wanted to agree with you that the ending was just so rushed, and Stevens’s character did deserve more. I wanted to see the family grieve a bit, or at least be aware of what had happened, rather than hearing them make blissfully ignorant statements about how everything’s peachy keen at Downton now and Mary saying that Matthew will have to wait his turn to see the baby. Ugh! And I read today that the timeline for season 4 begins 6 months after the end of season 3, which means we won’t get to see the family’s reactions, the initial shock and grief they experienced. This worked so well with Sybil’s death and made it one of the more powerful scenes of the season.
So disappointed that Matthew’s death was not better handled.
And as a side note–I had the same thought as you, that now that Matthew’s gone, I bet Isobel goes to Dr. Clarkson for support and something happens there.
I agree!
I loved Matthew, my perfect man, how will the show manage?
I bet Fellowes, et al., kept trying to persuade Stevens to change his mind. Throughout the regular series, then through the Christmas special. Nope, he really wanted to leave. Thus, the tagged on accident–that many Brits did not enjoy as part of their cozy Christmas telly watching.
He had to die but it could have been handled better….
Vic, I agree, and believe it was really contrived. not bridget did say what I’ve believed for a long time. Dan didn’t a make final decision until the proverbial eleventh hour and forced the tacking on of the scene. And it looked so very tacked on. As if Dan stopped into the studio a week before Christmas, filmed the scene and waved goodbye. I’ll bet that was edited 10 min. before airing. If not, it certainly looked that way. There were rumors to this effect… whether true, we’ll never know. Dan doesn’t deserve much sympathy from me. His behavior seems selfish and I can’t help thinking how betrayed his fellow actors must have felt.
VIc,
Another amazing recap – a lot of work for you and a gift to the rest of us reading your blog. I absolutely agree with your sentiments regarding Dan Stevens character and now that I hear from others on this thread that Fellowes is jumping past the family’s response to Matthew’s death and funeral, I’m doubly disappointed!
I’m “cleansing my palate” by watching the newest remake of “Little Dorrit” on Amazon (starring my 2nd favorite “Mr. Darcy” Matthew Macfadyen) and reading (once again) our dear Jane’s “Persuasion.” Deep sigh.
Great review, as usual. So much crammed into each episode. I think there must have been a very acrimonious split between Dan Stevens and the show, otherwise they could have found another way for him to disappear and leave the door open for a possible return. Just think of all of the juicy story lines Sir Julian could have imagined in the interim.. Matthew could have gone to London on business for the estate, fallen into some kind of financial trap,or something that would compromise the family, for instance. The whole matter of his and Branson’s takeover of that vast heriditary inheritance was wrapped up a little too neatly – Lord Grantham constantly throwing a fit and then acquiesing over such huge deciding factors as Branson deciding to play cricket. lol.
One thing I noticed was that when the Marquess was complaining to Lord Grantham about the eventual disappointment in his marriage, Lord G nodded in a kind of agreement, indicating that he felt his pain in that regard – which I guess in retrospect set the scene for him having a kind of Epiphany at the end, but that’s just my take on it. I predict a relationship between Branson and Rose next season. It seems as though all of the intriguers downstairs have suddenly changed their ways. Who is going to throw nastiness into the upcoming shows?
There was considerable press on the matter in the UK after this “Christmas” episode. Lord Fellowes wanted Stevens to stay–with perhaps an episode or two in the next series. Stevens wanted to leave. The tacked on death (with no dramatic fallout) probably meant that they kept hoping they could convince him to stay until the last minute..
Dan Stevens is interested in writing, as well as acting. After being forced to handle the sub-par writing in series 2, I can see why he’d had enough. He had a 3 year contract; he fulfilled it. His part was pivotal; if he could not stay full time, it’s better he be written off. Too bad the writing wasn’t a bit better….
My belief is that at the start of each filming, James-Collier and Finneran flip a coin, and whoever wins gets to behave horribly and make trouble. Obviously, he’s been losing all season, but maybe his luck will change as production starts again!
Karen,
I think your spot on about the bad relations between Stevens and Fellowes.
And yes…so MANY possibilities other than the abrupt and brutal ending for Matthew! He could have survived the accident but wondered off with amnesia into the countryside and hitched a ride into the big city. OR, a vagabond could have hijacked him, knocked him out, changed clothes with him and then, lose control of the car and off the cliff into a burst of flames… In those days they didn’t have the forensic science of today so finding Matthew’s shoe or ring would have made them believe he was dead. Meanwhile again, he’s wondered off with amnesia and Stevens could do the movie or play and come back by season end (just like his legs came to life again in seaon 2!).
Oh, so many opportunities with just a little imagination and effort on Fellowes part — but again, obviously he didn’t think so.
Stevens did want to leave the show – he has been on Broadway in The Heiress and is also involved in a literary magazine The Junket: http://thejunket.org/ There is also talk of his playing Darcy in James’s Death Comes to Pemberley! He wanted out; and Fellowes has famously said that it is much harder to write about [and interest viewers in] Happy People than those at odds [though I did find Lady Rose’s folks just depressing rather than interesting!] I thought it was all doomed since Mary opened her eyes when kissing Matthew the night before their wedding – she will remember that and feel as though she alone sent him to this end. Like the idea of Dr. Clarkson offering comfort to Mrs. Crawley and that leading to something…
A good show all in all – not nearly as funny as last week of course, though the Walter Scott line by Matthew is right up there with the best… a long wait til next January for us with Lots of hanging storylines – even all the improbable ones! [it is a Soap Opera after all!] – I do think that PBS should have at least had a moment of silence before jumping into their campaign…
Thanks Vic for once again offering a lively and insightful review! – did you view it with your DA buddies? – how did people who did not know about Stevens leaving react to the ending??
Vic, though I knew Matthew’s death was coming because of the actor’s wanting to move on in his career, I thought it completely unnecessary. Unlike some of the characters, Matthew’s was one that could have been transitioned to another actor. Killing off the character was pointless. But THE most annoying thing in the entire series was the premature birth of the baby. Number One: After having very recently witnessed the painful death of her sister in childbirth, no young woman (especially of that era) would have undertaken a train trip to Scotland at 8 months. Number Two: If she had been that stupid and careless, her mother who had just lost a daughter in childbirth would not have been; her father, after bungling things with Sybil’s birth would certainly have taken every precaution this time around. Number Three: If they had all been stupid enough to make the trip, they would surely have refrained from the rough carriage rides and dancing. Number Four: If she had been that stupid and needed to go home on the train, her husband and parents would not have stayed behind. That was ridiculous!
Good points all. I was going to write sarcastically about the premie baby but decided that the review was long enough. There are too many holes in Season 3s plotting. I hope the Fellowes family (Julian, wife, and daughter) get it right for Season 4. I can see the fans leaving in droves if DA becomes too much like a soap opera instead of a high fallutin’ British drama.
I know I’m over it! I have very little patience for such silliness and lazy writing. Killing off Sybil and Matthew in the same series is overkill. *snort* Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Yup…silliness. Point well taken. Who cares what comes next? More dead bodies??
Neither rough carriage rides nor dancing will bring on a baby. Even in the 20’s they probably knew this. (I fell down a flight of stairs when about 8 months. The doctor informed me women have been thrown from automobiles without labor starting. Due dates were not as firm in those days. The methods for determining the due date before ultra sound were not all that precise. They simply calculated from the last menstrual period a certain number of days. Very likely the baby wasn’t all that premature. Maybe not at all. A period can occur after conception, throwing off the whole calculation. And look at all the hair on the infant!
You are correct about the term of the pregnancy but I need to tell you that I was born with that much hair -full term and 8 lbs. It does happen.
Come on! Two major characters killed off in such a brief period of time!
The story is now driven by the off screen career interests of the actors. What’s next?… Carson falling down the stairs and taking out Mrs. Hughes and Anna?
Hey, I have a story idea! Have a zeppelin crash into Downton Abbey and wipe out the lot of them so they all can go pursue other acting gigs!
Anyway, the Scottish scenery was gorgeous.
With Matthew gone, who will be the heir to DA? The baby? And certainly Rose is being brought to DA for a reason. Will she be Tom’s new wife? That would be almost a repeat of the situation between Lady Syble and Branson. Will Edie really take up her life as the mistress of that man, who now having seen all the wealth and luxury surrounding her, has suddenly discovered he is “in love” with her. Can we really be certain that his wife is insane, or is this just another “my wife doesn’t understand me” ploy? I’d be very careful if I were Edie. I just loved the way the character of Mrs. Hughes has developed. She has been wonderfully realistic and human right from the beginning, so its great to see her getting more screen time. Just like “Upstairs, Downstairs”, it seems to me that the downstairs characters are much more interesting than the upstairs ones.
Notes about Dan Stevens, from an interview with Julian Fellowes: As Julian has said in interviews, they BEGGED Dan to stay, but he declined to sign back on. In the U.K., actors are traditionally signed up for a 3 year contract. In America, the same actors are signed up for a 5-6 year contract. As Fellowes has said, ONLY in America can an actor make the Mega Money that a Fan Hit can generate, NOT in the U.K. So, if a male/female actor desires more income and additional roles than the series they are involved with, they must leave. Plain and simple. No fights, no threats…just economics and the desire to grow, on the actors part.
The only pity in all of this is that the two actors that wanted to leave also happened to be major characters who were married with children.
Dan had ample opportunity to pursue his career while doing DA. Maggie made 2 movies, Michelle made 2 mini-series and a movie, Hugh made an entire season of a new series, Elizabeth made a movie and cut a cd of her music…in other words, Dan had no excuse for “whinging” as the British say. And I can assure you that no one was making peanuts on this production. All were very well paid.
Completely random musings about the show:
1) In 1975, a devastating fire struck Inveraray castle (Duneagle) and for some time the 12th Duke and his family lived in the castle basement while restorations requiring a worldwide fundraising drive were carried out.
2) THANK YOU, Mrs. Hughes, for sacking Edna and being such a good mate to Mrs. Patmore. I fully expected the cook to take off in a huff when the “goods” were revealed about that “beefy lothario.” LOL
3) Did any of you catch the brilliant interview on 60 Minutes with Maggie Smith? If not, you can catch it online or watch more of it on “60 Minutes Overtime.” (don’t know if links are allowed HERE) http://www.cbsnews.com/8334-504803_162-57569775-10391709/the-dowager-maggies-best-downton-moments/
4) My husband is Scottish, from the Loch Lomand area, and we’ve spent many a blessed Summer in Inverness, at their Summer cottage. I recall hearing that the fictional Duneagle was in Inverness, but in truth, the real castle is justbarely included in the Highlands, it’s so far South.
5) No thanks to some rubbishy bad manners from posters at other recap websites, I knew Dan Stevens was leaving Downton from the 1st show of the U.S. broadcast. :( That said, I didn’t allow myself to become invested in his character this year, more the pity. I can completely understand why the internet chatter said that “The Christmas episode was pants”; our poor fellow Brits were subjected to NO SPOILERS about Mathew’s death and it happened on Christmas! However, for U.S. viewers that were tainted, well….if an actor refuses to sign back on, what are you to do but write him out, permanently.
6) I’ve come to Downton very late, only watching on amazon the two past years, one week before the 3rd season began. I love ALL three seasons equally and don’t feel the series declining one iota, as many other commentors have expressed.
7) Julian Fellows has said that if Maggie Smith ever leaves the show (by desire or nature), there will be NO DEATH of Violet; she’ll simply be shipped off “to the seaside.” Bless Fellowes and dear Maggie/Violet. <3
8) LOVED Sybbie and Carson and Sybbie and Sybbie and Sybbie.
Maybe we will find out that Matthew is not really dead….it looks like he is but then….writers can change things with the stroke of a pen..
No, he is really dead and not coming back. The tight camera shot on his lifeless eyes and bleeding face confirm that the writers have no intention of suddenly resurrecting him in true soap opera fashion.
There is an article about the season finale in the New York Times, Feb. 18 in which Julian Fellowes indicates that Downton Abbey might himself leave the series in the future due to other plans. Obviously not before Season 4 is finished but it the series continues to be popular beyond his interest, others may take over. Fellowes said it makes no sense to air the show separately when the internet is available.
We always know when they are going to bump off another character because there are charming moments with the loved one just before the character bites it. Same with Matthew. Ah, Matthew, I will miss him. And I do agree with you, Vic, the ending was a cop-out and too abrupt.
I also felt like this episode had them throwing plot bits at us with last minute “barely there” romances that didn’t satisfy. What was up with Matthew’s mother and the the doc–I liked that romance–but then he thanks her the next day for saving him from his folly? Egads.
My other thoughts: Michael is a cad and I was laughing out loud that he is campaigning to bring shame to the family because he “loves” the object of his lust. Please. How selfish can one get? Edith is desperate and so may fall for that bull. Too bad. I was just beginning to like her. The maid Edna WAS a brazen hussy and I’m glad to see her go. Enuf already. As I said the last time, Branson deserves better.
I especially enjoyed reading your comments about Michael and “the object of his lust” – right on the mark. And your “Egads” made me chuckle.
One can only wonder, Vic, where next season will begin. I worry for Mary, whether such an unusual, substantive but misunderstood woman will again find love. I know Branson will but not so sure about Mary. I can see her as a young Violet.
Bless you, Vic, for summoning any energy and enthusiasm to recap/review this messy crap of this episode. It was a veritable buffet of stilted storylines that might work but then are squashed and go nowhere and were all much too late for the finale. It just seemed like an everything but the kitchen sink episode. I just give up. I, too, could care less about the next series. Only bright spot continues to be the downstairs staff, especially Thomas. Rob is a marvel. I am more impressed with Branson, despite how stupid the plotline was with Edna. I knew Matthew would die but it was done so badly. All the melodramatic foreshadowing and cutting between the family and Mary/baby and his speeding car and goofy smile. I didn’t mind how quick it was, let’s just be done with it. It’s too bad Stevens left. He gave the show and his character a credibility because he’s such a genuine, natural actor. That hole will be very obvious in future.
Loved your summery – “messy crap” was such a great phrase. A friend used the same one – do we think this might be a consensus? I know no one who has liked much about the season. Branson did turn out to be a bright spot, in many ways, because Allen Leech is a very strong actor.
[…] Overbey (love her recap and further ruminations) Jane Austen’s World Entertainment Weekly Tom and Lorenzo Downton Abbey’s IMDb message board (a favorite […]
I think that Michael has a strong resemblance to the cad that jilted Edith at the altar. Physically, that is. I think the person who wondered if Michael is using the line that his wife is mad was fibbing – that he feels his wife just doesn’t understand him – may have something there. Edith checked Michael’s background, etc., but did she follow up on checking about his wife? I don’t remember. Back then I don’t think data privacy was so strictly enforced, so maybe she could have checked up on the wife. As to Matthew, when I first heard he was leaving, it was before Robert recognized Matthew’s good ideas – so I guessed that Matthew would take his money and go off to Australia or South Africa – probably without Mary since she was continuing with the show. Then since he was in good graces with Robert and they were off to Scotland, I guessed he would fall off a highland cliff. Well, that is why I am not a script writer.
I also knew ahead of time that Matthew was going to be killed off; however, although I also knew that Sybil was going to die too, his death did not affect me as much as hers did. It was almost like ‘sigh’ well that’s over and done. With Sybil’s demise I cried buckets and it almost felt like a member of my own family had died. Seems odd that the babies in the family had to have a parent die on the day of their birth…will that be a continued pattern for future Crawley babies? Please, no!!
Leaving aside the obvious “extra-tale” (Downton is most definitely a “tale”) that the actor wanted out, I think that the sweet madonna Mary was less interesting in many ways than the vituperative original with her caustic airs and cynical views. i suspect the death of her young husband will bring about the return of caustic Mary. (Remember how she says he’s the only one who sees her as sweet?) I disagree that the shortness of the death scene is a mistake or cheats the viewer. The eternal truth that death is often sudden and unexpected and can happen when we are in the midst of joy is much more powerfully portrayed here. I knew Matthew was doomed injury or death when we kept seeing the cut-aways to him driving too fast and not paying attention in his joy. The cut-away method used reminds me of the very early silent film where a victim (usually female) is tied to a railroad track and we see flashes between the oncoming train and the struggling victim. I suspect Fellowes may have been nodding at the history of the genre. I grew up on radio soap operas, so Downton is very much “mother’s milk” to me. I’ll be waiting to see if Edith becomes a “scarlet woman,” and other exciting developments in the next season.
Julian has certainly created a sensation with D.A. Last night the majority of the local Facebook posts I read talked about the finale, and then this morning the posts by my West Coast friends showed up, all talking about the finale!
Some of my thought, in no particular order are:
I’d read a spoiler that said Matthew was being killed off, so I knew it was going to happen in this episode; I just didn’t know how. I thought perhaps he’d get caught in the rain while hunting in Scotland, get chilled, get pneumonia, then die. No go. When I saw him happily driving in the car, I knew. What I didn’t know was that his ending would be so abrupt, and I thought there was still a half hour left of the show when it ended. That was more of a shock to me than his death, since I knew that it was coming.
Someone above posted that perhaps he didn’t REALLY die, maybe he’s just bleeding…I’d love it if it were all “just a dream” like the J.R. Ewing episode on Dallas, but I know that would be too good to be true. Still, wouldn’t that be a great way to start Season Four? And I feel so bad for those that saw this ending on Christmas in the U.K. I had no idea. That would have ruined my holiday!
A few things I didn’t like about last night were: since when are Daisy and Ivy friends? Daisy hasn’t liked her, and now they seemed like “BFFs”. Also, Dr. Carson has seemed to merely tolerate Mrs. Crawley, and there he was courting her and proposing. Both my husband and I wondered if Isobel honestly knew he was proposing, and gently rebuffed him, as he seemd to think and thanked her for, or was she honestly clueless about the proposal?
Another thing I wondered about was, why did Lady Violet suddenly seem to care for Rose, when she knew what she’d been up to in her dalliance with a married man? All I can figure is that Violet has a past herself, it seems that has been hinted at several times. Also, I don’t like Rose, no matter how cute she is, and I don’t want to see her at D.A., especially is she’s to take Lady Sybil’s part. BTW, I LOVED Sybil and cried when I read a spoiler that she died (and for that reason I’ll never look at D.A. pictures on Pinterest again!) And on a brief note re: her death…why couldn’t Julian have had her still be alive, and perhaps living in Ireland with Branson, and doing a guest appearance every now and then? All I can figure is that since Matthew was going to be killed off too, Branson had to take a great role on the show. but I don’t know what the dear fellow will do without Matthew helping him out!
Some of the things I liked last night were how it turned out between Mrs. Hughes and Mrs. Patmore: that Mrs. Patmore was relieved to have a way to get out of the proposal. My husband and I got a big laugh out of that, and out of her nervous/relieved laughter at the end. I was also pleased that Edna got sacked; I couldn’t stand her voice (sorry), and I couldn’t figure out how she had so much unsupervised time to stalk Tom. And I sincerely hope that Julian doesn’t hook Rose and Tom Branson up together; yuck! On a side note, in the “old days” a widowed man often married his sister-in-law. I’d rather see Tom marry Edith than her go off and have an affair with her editor, which is where she’s obviously headed. I also liked that Thomas took the beating and robbing for Jimmy; it was brave, stupid, and loving. I always love the interactions between Carson and Mrs. Hughes, and I liked seeing Carson with baby Sybie. I also liked seeing a drunk Molsley dancing like a fool, but wondered why the servants were allowed to participate in the ball. And if O’Brian ever leaves the show, I hope it’s to be a Lady’s Maid to Shrimpie’s wife. She told her maid she wouldn’t mind an adventure like going to Bombay, and I wondered what exactly she whispered to her after the maid tried to get her drunk (hope you could follow that thought, as I can’t recall the names).
I loved the scenes of Scotland, the castle, the activities that they participated in while there. My Scottish friend loved the bagpipe call to dinner, and I liked how everyone else looked like they were going deaf!
Several people on the Facebook threads I read last night called the show “Downer Abbey”, and said they could see the plots coming from a mile away (such as Matthew’s death), and are disgusted for both those reasons (no surprises and his death) that they will no longer be watching the series. As for me, I’m HOOKED and will watch it come hell or high water, and can’t wait for Season Four to start!
Thanks for letting me ramble.
Really entertaining thoughts, Stephanie. :) Regarding this comment of yours and others, “since when are Daisy and Ivy friends?” Remember, a year’s time had gone by. It would be very counterproductive for a tiff to continue between these two over some silly lads. Same goes for the Doc and Isobel; in a year’s time, they would have many interactions and that’s when his “tinder” was lit.
Regarding the amusing sobriquet “Downer Abbey”…~shrug~. If anyone has watched any TV, we know/hear from the zealots of a show that scream bloody murder when something happens on it. From the fans going mental when Tara was killed in “Buffy”, to Sheriff “SkinnyJeans” biting the bullet in “Once Upon a Time”, the fanatical “Losties” and the losses of life, and the endless amount of stars killed off on “The Walking Dead”…I just yawn and refill my cuppa tea when I read the threats and rants from “true fans” who “Hate this show! I’m stopping watching! This show suks! I hate this season!” Yeah, whatever. As Yoda might say, “Complain not. Watch or Watch Not; there is no complain.”
Thank you for the feedback re: the time frame. I keep thinking no time has passed between episodes, yet I did think baby Sybie looked older. I should have realized a year had past, and yes, that would explain the changing relationships.
No problemo, Stephanie. If a person *blinked* they would have missed the title shot: “One Year Later” which happened in the first 3 seconds of the show beginning.
Wouldn’t Lady Shrimpie and O’Brien be a pair? They’d take Bombay by storm. Ms. ,O’B is smart enough to know Downton has nothing for her.
Just as aside, Stephanie, people in the UK responded the same way on Facebook the night it aired (Dec 25). From what I could gather, very negative and angry viewers.
I have nothing constructive to add to the comments about Matthew’s death; it’s all been said. However, I would like to add a positive note about the quality of the actors’ skill and the quality of production.
I may not always agree with the narrative, but I so much appreciate the performances, as well as the various ages of the actors. It all lends itself to a far more credible production. From the promise of baby Sybil to the sardonic wisdom and humor of the Dowager, and all in between, I’ve enjoyed it. And I look forward to Season 4.
Thank you, Vic, for your time, energy & talent with yours DA reviews. It’s not Jane Austen, but it’s fun.
“It’s not Jane Austen, but it’s fun.” Thank you, Peg. I can’t wait to return to Jane and all things Regency!
Yes! I agree! What about a great series of Mansfield Park (which is long overdue, I think).
well…..I guess I’m in the minority. The ending to me was expected when you think of the rising (and somewhat sappy) emotions toward Matthew. Fellows is obviously writing to the emotions of romantic women in this season. We get swept in and thrown to the wolves…but, good writing evokes emotion and in that, Fellows is highly successful.
But, when all is said and done, remember, the show is called “Downton Abbey”…it is truly about the estate and the dynasty of the estate…not about individual characters. Mary’s words said it all after the baby was born “we’ve done our part”…in securing an heir for Downton…so, actually, either one could have been expired. I’m not sure how the series will continue but it is fitted to go on, just like the Downton family goes on together through thick and thin~
Very well stated! And like you, not sure how DA will continue but it will and I’ll be watching and commenting/criticizing, appreciating the fine acting and entertained!
After watching the episode last night and sleeping on it, and reading everyone’s comments above … may I say that what I love most about Downton Abbey are the characters and actors and the settings and sets. The small vignettes of life a hundred years ago. BUT … what dismays me to no end is the choppy and inconsistent writing! Everyone adores Julian Fellows (me too!) but the first season was very derivative of many other great movies and series from the past (the Downton Flower Show was lifted directly from Mrs. Miniver for example) and the whole was a rehash of the first season of Upstairs Downstairs (Lady Marjorie went down on the Titantic at the end of Season One there). I allowed for Lady Mary’s initial going back and forth on Matthew as being “human nature” to be indecisive. But often the writing/plot seems to have no continuity at all … someone above mentioned that suddenly Daisy and Ivy are best friends, for example. But from the beginning, we have had to make such leaps … other examples – the “Canadian” soldier who seemed to be the lost Patrick Crawley, who came and went for no reason at all except to pad out that season. And Mr. Pamuk’s death affected Mary through two seasons but his screen time was actually quite minimal. While many of the great aristocratic families faced financial difficulties after the First World War, they usually dealt with this by selling their London homes (Crawley House is spoken of but never shown in this series) and began flogging paintings and sculpture to Americans. To set things right financially. (I wondered why Cora’s wealthy mother did not just buy a few treasures from Downton as a way of setting things right for them?) If Julian Fellows had read Brideshead Revisited he would have learned this. Then when Lady Mary feels the first twinges of labour last night she decides to go back to Downton on an arduous train ride. To travel from the Highlands to Yorkshire back then was not an easy train ride. People did not typically go to hospital to give birth back then. The aristocracy ALWAYS had their babies at home.
The handling of Matthew’s death last night: yes, we have come to expect that if people speak kindly to one another then we know they will be facing tragedy moments later. But that was just too jarring … and I felt it was very tasteless to show him dead (reminding me of Princess Diana’s death and the photos of her in the car wreckage). Then Lady Mary holding her baby and a sudden cut away. This is not good storytelling … this is merely a cheap ruse to “hook” viewers into coming back next season!!! They discovered there when JR Ewing first got shot on Dallas many years ago and they have used this same plot device ever since.
From all of this I get the feeling that Julian Fellows did his best with Season One and was surprised to be renewed for Season Two and now he just kind of jots down little vignettes of whatever pops into his head after reading some memoire without any regard for continuity of storyline or how it might affect the loyal viewers. He connects the dots with the merest trace of of linear logic. Yes, I understand and accept that the stars are receiving offers from Hollywood and need to be let free to pursue them but couldn’t a more carefully written exit be arranged for Matthew – who was the linchpin of the show? Lady Sibyl (who barely appeared this season until her death episode) had a better written set up for her demise and exit.
And while much has been made of how “authentic” Downton Abbey is – it views events in the 1920s through the eyes of 2013 with our contemporary sensibilities. Maybe these points only annoy me and I am in the minority …
Yes, I will watch it next year and eagerly look forward to it’s return. Season Four is already being filmed so I doubt that my words will have much impact on the writing!
I watched Mrs. Miniver just last week and my mouth fell open when I saw the flower show and it’s similarity to DA’s flower show, right down to her ladyship “bestowing” first place to a villager who had acknowledgeably the best rose, even though the judges had kept with tradition and listed her name as the winner. (By the way, in Mrs. Miniver, immediately after the show there was an air raid and the villager who won first place was killed in the bombing. Quite a sad moment.)
Kathryn,
Loved your commentary. You mentioned many points regarding the gaps in the writing or should we say gaffes? I agree that one can easily see the similarities in Fellowes writing with stories written by our dear Jane across the board to W.M. Thackeray. He does have a great sense of making the scenes just long enough to make us wait for the next scene.
Oh so right about the cultural attitudes being more in alignment with 2013 than the Edwardian and post Edwardian periods! The stubborn traditionalist, Earl Grantham is giving speeches about how gay people are just like the rest of us and they can’t help the way they are (all true statements if rather poorly worded but) R-E-A-L-L-Y Lord Grantham saying these things?
I suppose in this household we’ll feel obligated to look in on season 4 but without the excitement and joy that we did in those first 2 seasons. I’m reading (again) “Persusasion” as a good dose of Jane is perfect for smoothing over disappointments on the DA front. ;-)
One other thing I forgot to mention. During the war, Mary felt ill, as though “a goose had walked across her grave” (or something like that) when Matthew was injured, but didn’t seem to feel anything when he was killed. I kept waiting for her to DO something (like faint) while sitting in the hospital bed, but it never happened. That was a disappointment to me.
I was expecting the identical reaction, Stephanie. All I could think is that the baby was 1/2 Mathew so she didn’t feel the psychic loss like before.
On another matter, I felt from the first of the show, when all those guns were being hauled out and about, that Mathew was actually going to be “Dick Cheney’d” and shot by one of the major characters, resulting in endless guilt and recrimination.
Again (this is just too much fun to comment; sorry, everyone!)… I had hoped to see Lady Sybil’s coming out, but it was never shown. I hope Julian will show Rose’s. And perhaps in season four Rose and Edith will be partners in crime in meeting their married lovers in London!
Whatever shortfalls it may have in uneven writing and choppy, often unbelievable plot lines, I love Downton Abbey and I look forward to next season.
I have learned that soap operas never close the door on an actor who is a fan-favorite. We saw Matthew still and bloodied. We presume he’s dead. But is he really? Perhaps just badly injured. Badly injured enough to require a year’s convalescence, a case of amnesia, and a recovery just in time for Season 5. Stranger things have happend.
Regardless of the parting between Stevens and Fellowes, both the character and the actor deserved a better send-off.
They did deserve better – or better yet, nothing. Ending with such violence in an otherwise non-violent series seemed totally wrong. Just end the story on a high point and explain Matthew’s death in the past next season.
This is what happens when a writer clearly comes up with a one season show and is asked to continue it beyond that.
The episode credits at Wikipedia show other writers assisting him on two episodes–of the first season. Since then, Lord Fellowes has written every word. (According to a recent Vanity Fair piece, his wife is his “editor.”)
For such a complex show, the American model might have worked better. In which the showrunner writes–but not every word of every episode; there is a team of writers. Plot arcs & character development are also worked out, long-term. This definitely would have helped series 2 & 3….
Too bad Mathew was written off just like Sybil. Only two really nice and decent people in whole cast of characters, really in my opinion. Everybody else — it was just getting easier to like them.
Although I have this feeling that Matthew’s character is not dead yet… stranger things have happened.
I think I’ve gotten more excited about the recaps than the show this season, and this is a lovely one.
Thomas’s face in exchange for Jimmy’s, though? Not a fair trade at all. Thomas has medical training. He should’ve. hid in the bushes until the thugs were done and then “saved” Jimmy. Thomas has had his butt whipping; Jimmy is past due for his.
“Bloody Hell!” is right! Enough pain and anguish. I know that’s life, but it just hit me wrong. As soon as one saw Matthew sailing along, singing a song, you knew it would happen. The very last camera shot was not what I wanted to see. Also, wish Fellowes would write Downton (sp?) books…,maybe 4 or 5 in the series.
I don’t have much to add to what previous posters have written. It may be possible for Mosely to return working for Isobel as the butler since that’s what he was doing during seasons 1 & 2.
The PBS station I watched didn’t do a fundraising campaign; a half-hour long “Secrets of Highclere Castle” documentary followed once the credits and sponsoring ad spots were done. Anyone else see this?
Elisa, lucky you to not have to abruptly go to a pledge!! They played the special on Highclere here a couple of weeks ago and last week they showed one on the Duke of Devonshire’s estate which really is a “don’t miss”! Each was shown just prior to DA which was a lovely tie-in. Not sure I can handle another continuing saga of DA next season. I wish Fellowes had planned on 3 seasons and then just wrapped up the story. This stretching of time-frames is just too silly.
Like all of you I waited until the end, going through my “mourning period” with my mouth shut so as not to spoil the story for others. Vic and others have summerized it all pretty well but forgive me if I vent a little as I feel this should never have ended as it did. The ‘train wreck” (sorry for the analogy) that passed as the end of the season episode is a perfect example of poor, trite and lazy writing, hasty and impossible-to-beleive production, a selfish actor and a greedy network colliding at once. To ask us to watch the death of a character that was key to the DA story is absurd. It’s possible to kill off on key character in a season but 2 deaths stretches credibility to the edge and implies that Fellowes has no imagination left at all. Matthew was the essence of the inheritence story line and allowing Dan Stevens to dictate the end of that character is equally incredible. Now we are asked to accept that the whole Matthew/Mary story was just a passing moment. Really? Then why did we all invest 3 yrs. in their love and marraige? Fellowes has now stated in the press that Matthew was just “too happy and happiness is just too difficult to make interesting”. He’s the writer – he made his that character that way. He has also stated that “Mary will be the center of the story next year and not lack for suitors.” How crass can you get?! (Recommended reading: several stories in DailyMail.co.uk and Telegraph.co.uk. regarding all parties involved.)
The backlash in the UK (on Christmas day when this episode airs) was tremendous. Fellowes, Gareth Neame (Carnivale Productions), and ITV network have all issued statements since then, regarding the ending. All of them seem to be forms of back-peddling from a disatrous decision. Dan Stevens comments come across as selfish and shallow.
Can DA be saved? Unlikely. Will next season be the last? Almost certainly. In fact, if this year had been the last, none of this might have happened. To write and produce 3 seasons, at least in part, on the strength of these characters (Matthew and Sybil), and then completely change tack tells me that the real DA is gone.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your comments and thoughts, lmhess. I’d love to read the backlash articles: what should I google?
Oddly, I ONLY turned to “Downton Abbey” these past 2 months so I could ditch AMC’s “The Walking Dead.” If you think the two deaths in D.A. are brutal, try making it through the loss of 90% of the main characters in 3 years! It was the death, through childbirth, of a main character that did it for me and every one of my friends; we felt that she was the lynchpin that kept you interested in the story. I never went back to the show after the mid-season break.
And now I come here, to D.A. and it’s the same darn thing!
How many of you are old enough (Baby Boomer Gen) to remember TV shows where 100% of the characters stayed with a show until the end and then, even made TV movies of the show, years later?!? That’s what I miss: imagine killing off Miss Kitty or Carol Brady?
Seems like the younger generation just wants to “off” popular characters for shock appeal and as lmhess said, “…poor, trite and lazy writing.” :(
Ah, yes, the good old days of tv…thanks for the kind words. I had to keep it all bottled up since I had found a spoiler by accident the day after Christmas. All of my friends are fans so I was mum while steaming. I know I ranted but tried to make my points clearly. Like you, Sybil’s death was difficult. I recommend that you get Season 1 & 2 and watch through. I firmly believe they were better than this season. No need to Google…just go to http://www.DailyMail.co.uk or http://www.Telegraph.co.uk. There are plenty of DA articles in both.
Alas, I’m sure Lord Fellowes was upset that two actors chose not to renew their contracts–after fulfilling their previous obligations. It was so much simpler when one’s employees were serfs….
Well put! Damn those lazy, disodedient peasants.
Yes, Elisa, our station had the “Secrets of Highclere Castle” as well. It was clearly a filler. It was preferable to having a fundraiser right after the final DA scene.
Imhess re your comment about next yr. being the last season, I read online that JF may be leaving as a writer due to forthcoming project with NBC. It was a CBS interview which should have more credibility than some other sources.
Perhaps best for him and all of us. I remember JF and some of the cast saying last year that even though they were thrilled with their popularity they didn’t want the show to continue past its’ sell-by date. I’d have to say that date has passed.
I don’t mind Matthew’s dying (since all happy families are alike) but I do resent that the mourning was left to the audience and we will never see the immediate impact on the other characters. As I understand it, Season 4 will take place long after Matthew’s death, so it will be appropriate for Mary to entertain suitors, and that is a cop-out! Does anyone think that she and Branson will become an item?
Eeew! I cannot see Branson and Mary ever being an item. Aside from the fact she’s half a foot taller, Mary is a force and Branson was married to her soft though independent sister. I can see him have a fling with Rose but end up with a woman more like Sybil–perhaps an Irish lass. I kinda like the idea that there are Catholics in the Crawley family. Adds a bit of spice.
I agree with you Chaarlotte, that the mourning is left to the audience and we will carry those bad feelings over till the next season. Perhaps it will be like the “blink it and you’ll miss it” line with this episode…”one year later.”
Oh, Fellowes! That was the most morbid Victorian melodrama ever. So the lad was off to greener pastures? You would have been better off doing a Dr No—let Dan Stevens end the season without trauma and then bring in a different pretty boy and swear on a stack of Bibles that He is Matthew Crawley for the 4th season.
Almost anything would have been better that this. I could visualise Fellowes trying to write script with all the aplomb of a deer caught in the headlights. One would think a TV series would not start before the producers have a plan B for when the rats bail out to more lucrative offers. I certainly won’t be waiting with bated breath for next year’s season 4.
Exactly! The character of Matthew Crawley could easily have been played by someone else.
You certainly have a way with words but, oh, you said it so well!! A good friend who is an English teacher said of the ending “a piece of crap” (sorry..) and that any of his higschool seniors could have come up with something better.
There were actually a lot more deaths of younger people in those days, such as with childbirth, cars not having safety features like today, poorer medical treatment, war being fought on the ground, some widespread disease without cure. It is not unrealistic for the day and age.
Sorry, that should have been Dr Who. Every new series had a new Who and a new girlfriend it seems to my recollection.
I suppose “Matthew” was board with his part and wanted to move on, but if you ask me, it was a pretty lame ending to his life. Big disappointment.
Of course I will watch season 4! But I have to say season three was a trial! Bad writing, horrid plots that went no where or lasted so long one was gagging for relief. Characters whose characters didn’t stay in character. Weird!
Wasn’t Matthew’s euphoric not-paying-attention car trip sooooo ‘City of Angels’ with Meg Ryan on the bike? Ugh. So upsetting.
I’m going to go against the tide on the topic of Matthew’s death. Since he wanted to go on and do other things, which was NOT a selfish decision as someone above said. If any of us had the opportunity to pursue our career and that it would lead to more things that we were passionate about, who would blame us? And I’m really tired of people berating Julian Fellowes. The man came up with this whole program and storyline and created characters that we’ve come to feel we know and we weep when tragedies happen and rejoice when wonderful things happen. Who among us wasn’t holding their breath, anxious for Season 3 to begin? IMHO, all of the criticism leveled at this last episode is people bitter by certain plot developments not going as they felt they should. I don’t like the deaths this season because Mr Fellowes had to follow his actors and their plans and then work out ways to accomplish this. He’s not speaking out about acrimonious breaks with the 2 actors. He knows that in careers of this sort, timing and opportunities take the lead for an actor. My last thought is that the way I’ll remember Matthew’s character is him at Mary’s bedside speaking words of love to her and holding his baby and then him driving his car, grinning ear to ear, euphoric, which led to careless driving and then the crash, although I’ll choose not to dwell on the crash scene. He was a man who was on top of the world as he went out. Tragic, of course. But these things happen in real life. I, for one, cannot wait to see Season 4 and discover how the family gets through this. A few commenters above mentioned that the story picks up 6 months later. Some of us will like that and some of us will be utterly forlorn at not having a proper goodbye for Matthew. I promise, last, last thought. Who among us has been a creator and screenwriter who is juggling a large cast of people? I doubt anyone on this blog has done so, although if there is one, pipe up and let us know. How can we throw stones at JF’s actions/ lack of actions? He created this amazing place and story! Just be thankful for all of the joy he has brought to viewers!
I still wish Lord Fellowes was a better writer–or had the skill to create a writing team. Plot and character develop better with long-term planning–by more than one mind. I’m not “throwing stones”–but as an American, I believe I have the right to criticize the nobility. Series 3 was better than Series 2, but that’s not saying much. There are other shows that handle large casts & complex plots with equal or better skill; I have other things to do than “hold my breath” between series/seasons of Fellowes’ cash cow….
There remain some fine actors in the cast; let us hope that Fellowes can reward their loyalty with good scripts. The production staff does well–especially when they are allowed to use a location beyond Lord Fellowes’ Friends’ Pile. This is why I watch.
“There remain some fine actors in the cast; let us hope that Fellowes can reward their loyalty with good scripts. The production staff does well–especially when they are allowed to use a location beyond Lord Fellowes’ Friends’ Pile. This is why I watch.”
I agree with not Bridget on this. It seems that the episodes are written one by one instead of with a long range view for the major characters such as Branson, Thomas, Mrs. Hughes, Carson, Mrs. Patmore, Daisy and of course Edith. The actors and actresses of these characters do deserve greater depth and time rather than the snatches of time they have been getting.
Off the subject, I have been reading “Felling the Ancient Oaks: how England lost its Great Estates by John Martin Anderson. It is fascinating history.
kfield2,
Sorry…had to respond to your ardent defense of Fellowes’ outcome for season 3. My husband and I are both (long time) published writers/authors of non-fiction and fiction and while I’ve not written a screenplay for television, I have produced a 2 hour special for a major cable network (although over 20 years ago). We both felt that Fellowes (who DOES have immense skill as a writer for the screen) really dropped the ball on season 3.
There were SO MANY possible ways to end this season with Dan Stevens going OR staying. In one interview with Stevens that was done while they were still filming season 3, he clearly thought that he would be doing at least a few of the first episodes of season 4 which tells us that negotiations went amok somewhere. I think that Dan did want to stay as long as he could have flexibility with his schedule so he could do the other projects too. It seems that he and Fellowes (and perhaps the producers) could not come to a ‘meeting of the minds,’ and then Fellowes retaliated by killing off Matthew’s character in a most abrupt and somewhat disrespectful way. IF he had let integrity prevail over pride, then he could have come up with a dozen ways to keep Stevens in for Season 4 – even with limited involvement. [You can reference one of my previous posts here about some of those possibilities]. At the very least, Matthews’ character deserved a better treatment of his death AND, viewers deserve to have a chance to mourn along with the remaining characters, the loss of such a central figure to the story.
Fellowes failed to fully take into account the feelings of his viewers worldwide and that is why we’ve seen/heard so many Season 3 post interviews where he and producers are scrambling about trying to justify the deaths of both Matthew and Lady Sybil.
Finally, I think ANYone who has been watching DA since its’ inception and considers them self a true fan absolutely has the ‘right’ to their opinion about the way the series was handled (or mishandled this season)! One does not have to be a writer or a producer to discern whether a story has been done well or not. If that were the case, we’d have very few ‘professional critics’ reviewing books and movies, etc.. (In other words, if a reviewer had to actually be a writer of books or screenplays, there would be very few reviewers indeed).
I may be a bit biased but I also think people who regularly read Vic’s blog and are diehard fans of Austen, are a wee bit more in tune in distinguishing a good story from a bad one. And Fellowes has freely given us both good (Seasons 1 & 2) and bad (season 3).
I agree. And one of the best comments on the page is the one that points out that the story is about Downton Abbey and its fate, not the fate of the individuals. So, once Matthew had provided the heir who would take over after him, he was actually no longer needed. He also allowed us to see a loving and gentle version of Mary. I fear his death means the return of her less pleasant, but more interesting self. And as for plot lapses, and unbelievable turns of events, try describing in detail the plot lines of victorian novels, Dickens, Thackery, and even dear Jane herself, uses all sorts of blatant trickery teachers in Writing 101 warn their students against. Downton Abbey is in the fine old tradition of tales told to amuse and entertain. It has to be viewed without irony and with a willingness to suspend not only disbelief but the desire to peek behind the sets and find out how the real lives of actors or limits of funding or whatever affect what is presented. It’s not supposed to be great art. Enjoying it for what it is enriches. Finally, anyone whose holiday is ruined because a fictional character in a period comedy-melodrama dies, must live a very uneventful life.
I feel cheated. Of course I already knew what would happen but this is turning into a SOAP OPERA and I am disappointed.
The explanation of not enough “stress” between Mary and Matthew is facile, in my opinion. There are numerous examples of married people who love each other carrying on with their lives and with enough drama to satisfy anyone. Coping with the changes that were happening during the 1920s was very interesting and as was born at the end of the 1930s, that time is interesting to me because I grew up hearing how people coped with those changes.
Frankly, there seems to be a pattern, a formula of killing off a certain number of characters each season and to me it has grown repetitive. As I say, more soap opera than generational family drama.
I’ve been wondering if Peter will come back and displace Matthew. Maybe he’ll come back and displace the baby.
Maybe because I had heard rumors, Matthew’s death did not really bother me much, certainly not as much as Sybil’s death, when we saw and felt the family’s pain so graphically. The whole car scene was a bit cartoonish and reminded me of maybe Goofy aimlessly driving a car and crashing into a watermelon wagon.
My take on O’Brien…I agree that it appears she might go to Bombay with Shrimpie (hate that name) and Susan. She indicated that she would love a job like that, and then when the other woman spiked her drink, she said something like “I don’t have to be loyal to you” and then immediately walked over to Susan and talked to her. Those three women are evil triplets!!
It was nice to see a tender side of Carson when he was holding the baby.
One thing I found odd. I did not see Seasons 1 and 2 so I don’t really have the whole background. But when Mrs. Hughes was firing Edna she said “there are rules” I bristled because didn’t Tom Branson break the rules? He was not fired, or was he? I have to get the back CDs and watch that scenario. I am not condoning Edna’s behavior – she was a manipulative and cunning woman. But I can see where Edna believed that it was okay. She did not even try to hide her meetings with him, announcing it to Carson and the rest of the staff.
I think there were rules for Tom Branson when he was the chauffeur. I believe the difference is that Lady Sybil fell in love with him. If she hadn’t, he would have been fired. And most of the family was NOT pleased with her choice of beau and her decision to marry him.
Had Tom fell in love with Edna, and fought for her, perhaps she wouldn’t have been fired, although I think she would have been, and the family would have put Tom out on his ear. He’s in a sad situation: he no longer belongs below-stairs, but he doesn’t fit in upstairs either. I think Edna thought it was okay to pursue him, as she still saw him as the chauffeur, and not above her postion. It wasn’t a crime, but it’s certainly not allowed. That’s the “rule”.
I wonder, in real life, how many upstairs men pursued the downstairs women, strictly for sex, or how many were actually raped. I know that children were born to those liasions at times.
In the end, it was a man’s world.
A few perhaps rambling comments from one of the few guys on here…
My recollection of the NPR interview with Julian Fellowes on the day the very first episode was to run is that his sense of who the “star” of the series would be was not an individual actor or even Downton Abbey itself. The star was to be the tumultuous period of history we’ve witnessed in this series and its effect on a cast of characters with varying degrees of flexibility as to how they saw life itself and their places within it. Dan Stevens played Mathew perfectly and I will miss him, but it’s not inconceivable that most of the original characters might not live to the end of the series. I am often unhappy with this or that plot twist, but the underlying story of what I see as the beginnings of the world we know today will continue to be beautifully executed and worth my time.
Mrs. Crawley: She has always been assertive and confident – ahead of her time in that sense – and what I saw in her matter-of-fact “no thanks” to Dr. Clarkson’s marriage talk was a been-there-done-that rejection of marriage as being right for her, not a lack of fondness for him. Her “I don’t need a man to make me happy” may not have been new, but the unapologetic cheerfulness was striking.
Thomas: The scene in his room with Jimmy was powerful. What I heard in his reply to Jimmy’s “I can’t give you what you want” was, “What I want is to be completely comfortable with one person on this earth just as I am, just once.” I’m sure he’s not done being a sh*t but redemption stories always work for me.
Branson: Among the very best performances of the series. Watch Sybil’s death scene again as well as his visit with Mrs. Hughes in this last episode. He spends most of his time in stoic self-control as he bridges two worlds, but the man can break down when necessary and take me right along with him.
Best line (paraphrased): Love is like riding or learning French; if you don’t get it right early on it’s much harder later in life. Or something like that.
Thanks for the forum, Vic!
John
Thanks for the comment on Branson – I felt like he has outshown many of the cast members this season. I’ve decided I’m running away with him as soon as he asks:) Seriously though, Allen Leech has a real career ahead. He seems to have just jumped into his role as Branson and given it his all. I look forward to seeing more of this guy in the future (on the screen, that is).
Anyone who thinks Downton Abbey is NOT period soap opera is kidding themselves. Just because everybody is in period costume and speaks with posh accents doesn’t mean that what the show is depicting is high art of some kind. So dramatic twists, characters dying at the drop of a hat shouldn’t be a cause for demanding that smelling salts be passed out.
To take a little break from all the gloom-and-doom and forswearing of watching ‘Downtown Abbey Season 4’, here is something for you.
Watch Carson save the day in Sesame Street for ‘Mum’:
Or read about DA in an alternate universe in :
http://www.amazon.com/Agent-Gates-Secret-Adventures-Devonton/dp/1449434347
There’s even a youtube blurb for the book above:
The only thing that matters is what is on the screen. Why we see on the screen what we see, while interesting from a nuts and bolts, backstory perspective, does not matter, especially when used to weave elaborate and sometimes speculative rationalizations when things seem to deteriorate narratively. Does anyone regularly ferret out the background of why a book or movie goes off the rails after 60 pages or 60 minutes? Editor was fired? Director was in an snit with the production company? The DR story went off the road along with Matthew. Poorly done artistically. However, maybe it is just a bump in the road!
A lovely and thoughtful review, Mr. Tessaro; excluding the final scene, I, too, had a positive response to the characters you named.
I do think Season 4 may have some creative input from other sources, as JF will be involved in a new project in the US. All the better because it will add story lines with a fresh perspective.
Wow! Really good reading from all of you! Almost as good as an additional episode of DA! Just a few random things,one being NO! NO! NO! A thousand times NO on Rose and Branson getting together – she is too shallow, too young, would not want the responsibility of a baby, and she still has much partying to get out of her system. Think her mother being so critical is nothing more than empty nest syndrome or plain old jealousy? I agree with several who said Susan and Shrimpie were depressing rather than interesting and what teenager in their right mind would want to spend time with them? If O’B did leave to be Susan’s ladies maid that would mean we would have to see more of them and that isn’t a good development. I think Isobel is quite happy to have Dr. C as a companion and possible co-worker but she does not need a man in her life although once the news of Matthew strikes, who knows? She won’t want to leave his child without her influence – probably thinks Violet will taint the child somehow. I also would like to know what O’B whispered in Susan’s ear at the ball. Was glad to see Mrs. Hughes and Mrs. Patmore become friends, share confidences and have a good ‘ol gals gab-fest. They need it. I agree with most comments above that there could be NO replacement actor for Matthew-I would not accept that…better a clean death; let’s let him RIP already. I do think it is a mistake to not let us in on the aftermath, the funeral, have some communal grieving. I wouldn’t be surprised if Robert spiraled into a depression of some sort, kind of the same as during the war and he didn’t know what to do with himself. I agree with John Tessaro above that Thomas needs to be accepted fully for who he is by at least one person there and let me just add I do not like James/Jimmy and I think he is a coward. Maybe for Mary, Peter will now resurface and become the next love of her life and be a wonderful father figure to baby boy Crawley…besides, that child has a whole host of people to help bring him up. kfield2, was in total agreement with you, well said! And I also agree with Madden42, accepting DA for what it is, very entertaining entertainment. And last but not least, does anyone see a resemblance of Michael to Anthony Perkins in “Psycho” – that nervous little smile, always looking around to see who agrees with him? he just always seems on edge, uncomfortable like a caged rat, not very well spoken for a man that runs a newspaper! He seems very furtive to me. Done. Thank you.
And I meant to add, I am hopelessly, foolishly in love with DA and will be counting the time until we get brought back into all of their lives…
The pledge drive was so horrid after that ending! PBS…ugh.
Nobody could replace Dan Stevens as Matthew so, I agree, he had to come to an end. Still hate it though. I will miss Matthew immensely because I’ve grown into a huge fan of Dan Stevens and Matthew seemed, at times, to be the only voice of reason above stairs. My biggest complaint, however, is that Julian Fellowes knew Dan Stevens would be leaving at the end of Season 3 so why kill off Sybil as well? Badly done!
For once I’m glad we won’t see the new season for such a long time because I need a break after this one! I really love DA but the prospective story lines right now are not exciting to me. I’m tired of Edith being stupid, Thomas and his infernal cigarettes mooning over Jimmy, O’Brien’s schemes, and sudden deaths. I am most interested in what they do with Branson’s character and how his relationship with Robert develops now.
Actually, the people doing the pledge drive looked rather shell-shocked as they attempted to valiantly persuade people to give more money. I felt sorry for them, coming immediately after Mathew’s demise and the cutaway from Mary and the baby.
As I’ve gone back over some of the comments I do feel that there has been some unjust criticism leveled against Dan Stevens. From what I’ve read he made it clear at the beginning that he would only do three seasons. Just because he and the show became so popular doesn’t mean he was obligated to change his mind and renew his contract. Heartbreaking though it may be for us it’s not like he threw a fit because he wasn’t getting more money or a better story line. I agree with Vic that JF is to blame for the abruptness of Matthew’s death and for a share of the bitter feelings people have. It feels like Julian Fellowes was mad at Dan Stevens for not changing his mind and so he gave the character the least dignified exit he could imagine.
Well after reading more and finding that the actors were leaving I don’t know how to feel. I thought the writing was silly the entire season and was getting sick of Mary putting downtown and her father ahead of her marriage. This all feels like several series disappointments I’ve had before where I don’t care about any of the newer characters or plot twists and some of the scenes feel like fillers. I’m annoyed w the actors for leaving bc the show made their careers. But who knows what was really going on? Matthew’s death was too much for me. I just don’t care anymore. I gave these characters my heart and I don’t want to feel sad for the poor babies on the show the whole time I’m watching. So no Mathew plus turning into a lame soap opera means over it. Loved the historical side, but even that was wanting after season 1. Goodbye Downton and good luck.
I knew Matthew would be bumped off as soon as I hear the actor wanted to leave the series. It was still depressing. He and Bates have more sense than all of the rest of them (well, maybe not if you give the rest of them Mrs Hughes). Frankly, Matthew was too good for Mary. Well, now that he’s gone, the two living daughters of the Earl of Grantham will be free to unsheathe their claws on each other next season.
Edith is a dingbat to want to be with Michael. Helllloooo- it’s 1921, not 2013. Fornication and adultery aren’t acceptable societal behaviours. Not that people didn’t do both ninety years ago, but they kept it well hidden. Perhaps Edith has forgotten the newspaper editor who chased after Mary in Season Two, and who would have been very happy to splash the story of Mary and the Turkish Ambassador’s son across the front pages of his tabloids. I hope that Julian Fellowes isn’t going to give the Downton clans (up and down) the morality opinions of the 21st century.
I am glad Mrs Hughes chased Edna off. IMHO, she was another pre-Charlie Ethel, a bimbo planning to sleep her way out of service. Mr Fellowes, you can only use a plot line once. Per series, not per season. Tom is, however, certainly quite the hottie with his shirt off (and to think that 20 years ago, how our hearts fluttered with Colin Firth with his wet shirt on!) (mine still flutters).
Rose is a mixed-up kid, but her mother is a total b “rhymes with witch.” As long as she doesn’t throw herself at Tom (or he at her – please!) I can endure her on the show next season. I envision her learning of Edith’s (likely) affair with Michael, and then blackmailing the hell out of Edith.
Best moment in this episode? Carson picking up Sybbie and cooing at her. Where *was* that nanny! She should be fired for leaving her charge alone like that!
I am REALLY upset by this. To kill off THE main character in the story – AND to kill off the ONLY 2 sympathetic characters in the entire series over the course of 1/2 a season is wretched decision-making. What will they do next – kill off the Dowager?? She’s now the only reason worth watching. I disagree that Cora and Robert are worth caring about. They are total non-entities and unlikable. The writing for Edith is a trainwreck and Mary has a despicable character. I was an avid follower of Downton…but after this episode, I could care less if it comes back. Unless they engage the remarkable Colin Firth to join the cast – I’m not sure I care WHAT they do with the rest of this story. Sloppy, Sloppy, Sloppy.
And I was SUCH a big fan.
Just noticed your comment Lani and have to say, “well stated!” Unless they bring in someone really amazing (like the remarkable Firth or a Clive Owen, or Richard Armitage, etc.) I can’t see myself watching the fall out from what was not-so-long-ago, an excellent series!
PS Of course I doubt the producers or Fellowes would foot the bill for one of these amazing actors as they seem to be VERY tight on the budget. I continue to believe that had they offered a truly significant sum AND a very flexible schedule to Dan Stevens and Jessica Brown Findlay, we would have indeed seen them in at least some of season 4.
I do know that Dame Maggie is getting a big sum for her part (as she should) but I think they underestimated how much fans liked Matthew and Sybil and, therefore, how valuable they were (and instrumental in keeping a true heart beat to the show).
Grief aside, I am so relieved that Mrs. Patmore gave Mr. Tufton the boot! I couldn’t watch him lick his fingers another moment!
As the turmoil begins to subside a bit about Matthew’s death and the future of Downton, as well as Dan Stevens’ career, I find myself wondering about the real-life drama: Is there a woman out there somewhere who had a baby in Croydon on the day Mr. Stevens was born, thinking to herself that he looks awfully familiar? It’s known that he has no interest in his birth parents, but I doubt the reverse is true. I’d be curious to know the current rights of birth parents in the UK.
I hardly need to add my two cents here but I have to agree with you and others Vic, the episode, if not the entire season, was a disappointment. Sybil and Matthew were the best two characters but I expected this as it was well-known that they wanted to leave the show. However, the series became even more like an American-style soap opera this season and now I half expect silly subplots like “Tom gets hit on the head and has amnesia and goes to his doom in Ireland” and “Cora discovers that she has an evil twin who makes a play for her husband.” I’ll watch the next season, but it will be mainly for the historic costume rather than for an intelligent storyline.
Before I read that Dan Stevens had declined any and all further involvement in the series, I imagined that Fellowes could write some very touching scenes where Mary imagines conversations with him. Other than the one time when she knelt to pray for Matthew’s safety in the war, no one in the story has much interest in religion or even the idea that departed loved ones could come to mind in times of distress (O’Brien’s Ouija board notwithstanding). With Catholic Tom Branson around to encourage her, I think Mary might have been saved from what’s now likely to be a bitter sadness by Matthew’s occasional “appearance.” My memory is that she was never more human than when she wept over Pamuk’s death, not because of the scandal but because he’d actually made her feel something. And yes, I talk to my departed friends and feel strengthened and comforted when I do. But then, if I weren’t a romantic I wouldn’t be here, would I?
John, I like your thoughts on this and wish for a little more spiritual feeling occasionally. The scene where Mary prayed for his safe return struck me as very sweet and sadly that feeling was missing this year – along with everything else that people have mentioned. Almost every character seemed more harsh this season. I’m a romantic as well and the very compelling tale about Mary and Matthew deserved something better. It will be missed.
Imhess,
I’ve enjoyed reading your comments as we seem to see things from a similar perspective regarding DA and the awful and abrupt death of Matthew.
I also agree with John that the only time I really felt any care for Mary was when she was praying for Matthew, nursing him (when she thought he’d be in a wheelchair for life), and crying about Mr. Pamuk.
It seemed as if Fellowes took unusual delight in making her even more snobbish and boring this season – except of course when the script called for her to show some warm blooded response to Matthew in those last few scenes (just to placate us for the impending death of Matthew).
I have no idea how Fellowes is going to get that chemistry with the upstairs crew again. Except for Tom Branson and the DC (Dame Maggie) no one can come close to filling the shoes of Lady Sybil and Matthew – they brought warmth and compassion (and, the earnest desire to bridge the class gap) when other characters were much happier with the status quo.
I’m putting my hopes on the upcoming series of the new “Upstairs Downstairs,” and later in the year, “Call The Midwives.” ;-)
Thanks, lacyJ, for your kind words. You’re going to love “Call the Midwives” if you haven’t seen it already and “Upstairs, Downstairs” was good but not as good as their first series. As to DA, I really loved Mary, if only because of that journey she took from obnoxious, rich girl to a kinder, more sensitive young woman. That seemed to disappear this season and she went back to snappish, rude…blah, blah… I confess I feel Julian Fellowes really let us down this year because so many of the characters were poorly written. Even Robert, whom I love, was too sharply drawn. My new love (I mentioned above somewhere) is Branson. I loved him and am looking forward to seeing where he goes next season. And that’s about all there is to look forward to next season. That said, I’m digging out all my Jane Austen dvd’s to make myself happy again.
Imhess,
I have thoroughly enjoyed the first season of “Call the Midwives” (and of course the Christmas special) it is top notch programming – much like DA was in the first 2 seasons!
My husband who rarely watches “period movies/shows” also found himself very attached to DA when he tuned in for 2nd season since it had some very good scenes involving World War One. He then had to go back and watch season 1 – which I was more than happy to watch again with him. He has had some success as an author in the past with a large publishing company here in US (we are both writers as part of our respective work/careers) so he tuned in with me in Season 3 for the characters. We both were just baffled at what Fellowes did to Roberts’ character. I mean, he was always a traditional “aristocrat” but he also had that great sense of compassion and forward thinking attitude that made us love him as the Earl of Grantham. Yet, this season Fellowes turned him into an absolute snobbish curmudgeon so when he regressed Mary’s character back to her snobbish somewhat cardboard persona, we were quite put off. Needless to say the icing on the disappointment cake was the death of both Lady Sybil and Matthew – the two “upstairs characters” with the warmest blood and biggest hearts!
I’m not even sure if my husband will tune in for season 4 and while I’ll feel obligated just to see if Fellowes can pull the story out of the muck where he’s dropped it (and, like you, see how Tom Branson fares since he is now the ‘heart’ of what’s remaining of the upstairs cast – although of course, the DC and Isobel will surely give us some satisfaction), no longer will I feel the eager anticipation that I did in previous seasons.
Like you I’m ‘cleansing my palate’ and trying to erase those awful memories poor dead Matthew lying under his car, by watching (once again) my favorite version of “Pride & Prejudice” the 1995 mini-series with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, and re-reading “Persuasion.” It’s so nice to know we can always turn to Jane to take us to another place where she keeps her promise to, “Let other pens dwell on guilt and misery. I quit such odious subjects as soon as I can, impatient to restore everybody not greatly in fault themselves to tolerable comfort, and to have done with all the rest.” I think Julian Fellowes would have done much better in Season 3 with a bit of this philosophy! ;-)
•
Gosh, you and your husband sound like interesting people. I’m glad you shared your backround – whenever I post on a blog like Vic’s, I love finding about the other people who come here as well. I’m certainly not a writer but did have a minor in English in college (about 800 yrs. ago…:)) . But I agree with your evaluation of Robert, Mary…and did you notice how poor Sybil became almost invisible before she died. I so loved her character for her spark and fire. It seemed like Fellowes just “dumbed her down” because she was leaving. And do we think we could get Vic to pull down the last photos of Matthew – I just don’t want to remember that character that way.
As to your comment about Julian’s writing and maybe using some of Jane’s philosophy, did you know he made the statement recently that he found it difficult to write interesting stories about happiness? He said that it was just as well that Dan Stevens quit because his character was just too happy?? (I came close to flying into a rage at that point – such an idiotic comment.)
As to our friend Jane, I’m doing Colin and Jennifer this weekend and just re-watched Pursuasion a few days ago. By the way – this is for everyone who loves Jane Austen – Stephanie Barron writes a wonderful mystery series about Jane. Well written and plotted and close to Austen’s style.
Imhess,
I too enjoy the interesting people here on Vic’s blog – think it says something about the quality of her work here (and, just something special about Jane Austen fans because HER work was so special!).
You’re so right about Lady Sybil’s character being dumb downed or minimized – pretty sure that was Fellowes way of ‘weaning us’ from her – hence her absence in last seasons’ Christmas special. I am glad that Allen Leech remained as his performance as Tom Branson keeps getting better…and he’ll be a reminder of Sybil with babie Sybbie.
Fascinating that Fellowes has a problem with characters who are “too happy” and maybe that’s part of the reason two of our most beloved characters have been killed off – and Mary keeps reverting back to that “oh…ho-hum, I’m so bored with life and everyone” persona (and why poor Edith cannot seem to EVER find happiness!).
Are you watching the 1995 adaptation of “Persuasion” with Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds (my favorite) or the 2007 version with Sally Hawkins and Rupert Penry-Jones? Oh, and thank you so much for telling me about Stephanie Barron and The Jane Austen Mysteries – and I thought I’d uncovered everything out there pertaining to Jane! I’ve already added her web site to my favorites and look forward to reading her books. :-)
I borrowed the 1995 version from the library but own the 2007 version. Both are excellent in different ways but I do prefer Penry-Jones as the Captain. I’ve also got the older version of Mansfield Park from the library. I need a “happily ever after” to escape those DA images. (Fellowes comment about happiness was in an article in the Telegraph. Wed site in one of my comments above.)
Last night I decided to watch again the last episode on PBS. It was interesting to see it after reading all the comments. I picked up some nuances that I missed the first time around. That whole dialogue between Mary and Matthew about how he’s the only one who thinks she is nice….we’ve heard that at least twice now. Either they will bring her back next year as a shrew who has no use for her child or as a sweet, more loving woman who cherishes Matthew’s baby. I tend to see her as the first since they need some conflict upstairs! Who would chastise Edith for her mistakes?
Anyway, thank you all for making my first season of DA so enjoyable. It is so nice to be able to discuss the show- sort of like a book club, where you enjoy talking about a book – even if you did not enjoy the book.
Carol S., I agree. I am so very thankful to have a forum to discuss D.A.! Thank you, Vic!
Folks, I am very impressed with the quality comments, observations and constructive criticism which appear above. Details relating to story continuity, performers’ off-DA lives and comparison to other productions have allowed me a greater appreciation that what I know (or think I knew) is more open after listening to those with a differing or similar interpretation.
In several instances, I found myself rethinking how I perceived the series. One benefit of re-watching an episode is the opportunity to discover something I missed the first time. In the same light, reading the entries here, permitted me that same opportunity to re-visit the program and come away with thoughts I might never have come up with on my own. Thank you.
I loved Susan and her husband. Their tragic relationship coupled with their fall from prosperity was most sad. I wished that their dynasty could have been rescued and restored to continue on. What occurred to me most deeply was that in an unseen point in history, someone would remark, “This is where the bigpipes used to be played each day.” The words, “used to” speak volumes of traditions lost to changes of fortune. That would truly be the day the music died.
Your observation about “the day the music died” could be an epitaph for DA. It certainly felt that way this year.
I will never forgive Julian Fellowes for killing off Matthew in the last minute of Season 3. I was just starting to get over Sybil’s death, as the characters surely had barely started to do. There was no need to manipulate our emotions in that way again in one season, and it surely strains credulity. To kill off two of the youngest, kindest and most blameless characters in one season is sadistic. It is cruel to the viewers who have come to care about these characters. We can see that we will never be rid of O’Brien or Thomas, no matter what happens. The only people you can depend upon surviving at Downton are the evil ones. Matthew had suffered enough for drama to be allowed to have some happiness in his life. Must someone die immediately after every baby is born in that family? We watch Downton Abbey to escape from the cruelty of real life, not to be immersed in a crueler one. I resent that Fellowes has caused his fans this heartache.
And, who forced Fellowes to turn the thoroughly evil Thomas into a sympathetic character? That is another strain on my credulity.
I wonder why Lord Grantham, when at a loss for a male heir for Downton, didn’t just tell Mary it was her duty to get married and produce a male heir asap? As soon as a grandson was born, he would take precedence over a distant cousin, would he not? For that matter, in Pride and Prejudice, why didn’t Mr. Bennet tell Jane he was very sorry, but for the sake of the family, she had to get married ASAP and produce a grandson, so that Mr. Collins would not inherit Longbourne? Am I missing something?
You might have missed the 1st season scenes where Mary was urged to marry by her father, mother and even Granny. She quite pointedly told Robert that she couldn’t just marry whomever she was told to – she was too stubborn.
Imhess,
I’m laughing because one of the posters here said she didn’t think those of us who were so very upset about Matthew’s character being killed off so suddenly had much of a life! Well, I’ve had a pretty interesting life SO FAR and there are few tv shows that I get really attached to (and the majority I just haven’t seen).
However, DA (at least season 1 & 2) was a wonderful respite from the worldly world and somewhat of a “mini-vacation” for me (just as virtually ‘everything Jane’ is). I think that’s why many of us took it so hard when Fellowes et al sort of made a mess of the whole thing this past season (3).
I haven’t seen the music videos, but like you, I can’t even bring myself to watch season 3 for a second time. I have seasons 1 & 2 and until this year, enjoyed going back and watching the older episodes as I do with many of the Jane Austen movies – at least the classical/best productions. But, I honestly don’t know if I’ll even be able to watch the first 2 seasons again because they are reminders of the expectations I had for seeing how the story would unfold for Matthew and Mary as the future Lord & Lady Grantham.
Now, none of it makes much sense to me…I mean, Fellowes obviously killed off Lavinia (who I thought was a very sweet and sincere character) so M & M could finally be together and then suddenly Matthew is no more. As I noted in several previous posts; I just can’t get excited about watching Mary without Matthew in the picture to warm her blood (and heart).
I think the ONLY thing that could possibly get my interest up again (considering that Sybil is gone too), is if a really intriguing actor like Clive Owen (who played in Fellowes’ “Gosford Park” movie) or say, Richard Armitage (of “North and South”) were brought in to bring out the human side of Mary again. Of course Clive Owen is probably wishful thinking since he’s been fairly successful in a number of mainstream movies in recent years (on both sides of the pond). And my number one and number two Mr Darcys’ (Firth and MacFayden) are also likely to be too expensive and famous for Fellowes and producers. S-I-G-H!
I may be wrong here, but an entailed estate couldn’t have passed to the daughter. It would have passed only to the next male in the line of succession. Unless Jane had married Mr. Collins, she couldn’t have produced a grandson that would have inherited, and likewise with Mary. Marrying Matthew was the only way she could have had a grandson that would inherit.
You are absolutely right. Mary’s new son is the closest she will be to the title. And she will never be the Countess or Dowager Countess.
American Former Fan (love that user name ;-),
From my previous posts you can see that we are on the same page regarding Matthew and Sybil’s untimely demise. I’ve had some weeks now to look back on it all and surprised at how little I care about the show now. [And I was an AVID D.A. fan for the first 2 seasons!].
By this time in season 1 and 2, I was already watching the season over again, but could not bring myself to look at season 3 again. SUCH a disappointment all around with the way Fellowes altered main characters’ personalities (as you mentioned; Thomas turning from a narcissistic schemer to a guy who’s just really wounded and then, Robert…the EARL going from a traditional aristocrat with a very compassionate and even forward attitude, to a stodgy curmudgeon without even the insight to help save his daughter’s life!)
Even my husband (who previously thought he was ‘allergic to’ period pieces) had hooked into season 2 with the World War I back story, has thrown in the towel after season 3’s inexplicable character alterations and the deaths of two of the best people from the entire ‘upstairs’ ensemble.
I spent 2 seasons investing into what was truly the HEART of the story; the poor (or at least middle class) cousin inheriting the great estate and the burning question: would he marry the present Earl’s daughter? We bought it all lock, stock, & barrell anticipating how Matthew and Mary would do as the future Earl and Lady of Downton and in the 11 1/2 hour, we’re expected to just toss all of that out the window!
I am truly sad to say that this “former fan” of Downton Abbey is no longer attached to the residue of what was once a great series!
Holy Cow, lacyj, we must have telepathy. I’ve been feeling the very same way as you. I couldn’t wait to get my own dvds last year and now I’m just putting it off because I can’t watch it over again – at least not yet. And on top of that, I had gotten into the habit of watching some of the DA music videos on YouTube – some very well done and using some really compelling music. Now I can’t even do that – I get all teary-eyed. Yes, a sentimental fool. Vic was dead-on when she said it was unfair that we didin’t get to mourn – I will always feel cheated. And you are so right that there isn’t any real reason to look forward to Sea.4. Unless it’s to see if the show can be saved…ugh!!
Perhaps as some have put it, Mary is so cold blooded, etc. Perhaps as with so many classic stories or characters, they could become very trendy and do a vampire hunter or zombie slant. Matthew could come back as a CGI zombie and Mary could become a vampire if she already isn’t one. Decided just to have some fun for a moment here.
In case you did not read the news yesterday, O’Brien IS leaving, supposedly to go with Shrimpie and Susan…..actually just leaving the cast. It may prove to be quite dull without her wiley ways! Every show needs a villain.
Dang. I predicted that, but I’ll be sorry she’s leaving. I’ve loved to hate both she and Thomas (although in the end I like Thomas now). At least Fellowes isn’t killing her off! He might as well: he’s on a roll!
too many comments for me to see if someone said it, but on Houston pbs they didn’t do fund drive – they had an odd panel that they may have had all season ( downloaded other episodes, but just tonight finally saw this one, as we had tv trouble), but no fund drive. I’ve enjoyed your recaps all season!
Sorry folks but I have no problem at all with Matthews demise, or the way it was depicted. Not much interested in the professional skulduggery that led to it either. Fact is Matthew, Isobel, and to a lesser extent Tom and Sybil were sops to modern audiences who want to judge a bygone era by our current mores and thereby enjoy the comforting glow of superiority. OOOWWW all that nasty class division stuff, well we all know better (cause of course it no longer exists…yeah right). Actually I think Carson, and Robert (series 3) are far more representitive of the sort of attitudes most every character on the estate would have had. Still one must have drama so anachronisms are going to exist.
Anyway a few thoughts; Matthew…a bit wet really somewhat effiminate too. An upper middle class lawyer who marries a rather cold heiress is an unlikely hero and I never much cared for him. Mary…going to be fun watching her come into her own as the true villain of the show (one hopes). Sybil…rather liked her will mourn with Tom. Tom…slowly becoming what he hated. Cora…an American with good sense and a lack of finger wagging jingoism,refreshing. Martha…not so much. Edith…one does so want to like her. Rose…who cares she’s hot. Violet…you bet she had a past,her snobbery sometimes comes off as simple good sense. Isobel…before her time in many ways some less believable than others. Robert…the acceptable face of Toryism.
Downstairs; Carson…trying to bring honour and a sense of duty into the modern world. Mrs Hughes…I will not hear a word against her. Mrs Patmore…wow the comic relief is developing a character. Daisy and Ivy…kind of the same person and due for a move up in the world,a bit. O Brien…almost no redeeming qualities and god help us if they give her a back story to make us care, yuck. James/Jimmy…a person of almost no weight or substance whatever. Whatsisnamegayunderbutlerchappie…a villain becomes nearly 3 dimensional blimey.Alfred…very tall.Anna and Bates…the heart of the show.
Others; Dr Clarkson…this man is confused. Shrimpie…poor taste in women.Shrimpie’s wife…worse taste in hairstyles ever. Editorguy…a grifter of the worst sort,may not know he is a grifter.Rosemund…could go either way really this show is not starved for villains.
O’Brien: when I saw her walk over to Lady Shrimpie during the “ball” I knew she was headed for India with her. Recall her mentioning that she’d like a warm climate. And…I still think she bumped off Mrs. Bates. In re-watching S2 she tells Thomas how in very strong language how she’d like to stop Mrs. Bates from hurting the family/her Ladyship (Cora).
Lady Mary: She’s going to be devoted to her child but cold to anyone who tries to knock down her wall. I’ve seen the names of the actors who are coming on board and don’t know their work but wouldn’t you like to see someone (like Richard Armitage in North & South) quietly win her over? A man who comes to help Branson and Robert run the estate because he’s worked hard and been successful. Or what about Evlyn Napier? Remember him? It was so important for him to personally let Mary know that he was not responsible for the rumor about her and Pamuk. And, his marriage plans had been cancelled. I think he still secretly loves Mary.
Branson: He’s really coming into his own on DA (the actor and character).
Robert: He’ll be devastated by Matthew’s death but will rally and dote on his grandson.
And will the mysterious character who claimed to be “Patrick” return to stir things up a bit?
Somewhere in Episode 1, Season 4 I envision Mary having a dream…it could be of Matthew and her playing with the baby, or walking the property together, then she wakes up from the dream and begins to grieve again…giving us all a chance to grieve with her.
I hope others continue to read and add their comments to this forum throughout the year. Reading such comments can make the waiting for Season 4 less of a W-A-I-T.
Dear Vic: I add my thanks to all of those above for providing this forum where we can express our thoughts in a genteel manner. Some have given me food for thought, some have made me laugh out loud, and some have been as entertaining as watching another sneak preview of DA. Good health and blessings until January 2014!
Your thoughts are interesting and I would like to see some way of sharing Mary’s grief. But since Mr. Stevens refused to even do a scene or two I suspect we won’t be able to do so. As to your query about the 2 new actors …Julian Ovendon played the son in Foyle’s War and could be very good for a new romantic interest … very charming. I also agree about Evelyn Napier – I always liked that man and wished he would return. But knowing Julian Fellowes he won’t bring him back. He tends to drop plot threads on some people and/or happenings and not return. A shame…
I agree also, on keeping this forum going. It’s just such fun to share other fans’ thoughts.
Just a note to those of you who have Comcast/Xfinity cable. They are running a Marchathon whereby this week a lot of shows are free. I have been watching Seasons 1 and 2 of DA because I had never seen them. So this is a good time to see the whole series free! I hope I am not in “overload” by the end of the week!
Well, I finished Seasons 1 and 2 last night and my eyes are bleary. All I see when I close my eyes are opening scenes of the dog’s backside traipsing along the fields…. What I realized by viewing the previous shows (Season 3 had been my first introduction to DA) is that I now have very different views of the characters than I originally did in 3.
For example, in Series 3 Mary was, in my opinion, vain narcissistic and selfish, always looking in the mirror and begging for money; yet in earlier series, she did dress casually and behave kindly at the hospital. Never would have thought that! Matthew is just as he was all along, although I finally saw Lavinia and liked her immensely. I think he would have been happy with her – let Mary have Richard – they are so alike.
My biggest surprise was that in Season 3 I saw Isobel and Edith as the nicest and kindest of the women. Who knew that Isobel could be manipulative and pushy or that Edith would have betrayed Mary with a letter to the embassy?
It was good to see good old Dad being kind rather than whining constantly about losing his money. I think that his almost-tryst with Jane gave him a better understanding of Sybil’s love for Branson. As for Branson – I know everyone likes him so much, but I don’t. I think he was rude and disrespectful to Sybil’s father, and that is wrong on every level. Too arrogant for me.
Anna and Bates – I finally understand why she loves him. Season 3 was all about jail and darkness and I wanted Anna to run from him.
And then we have Thomas and Obrien. Who knew Obrien could be kind to Cora and nurse her through sickness (albeit because of the soap incident).
The dowager – as funny and snippy as she can be, watching her help William was great. The other characters seemed to remain the same through the 3 seasons. I have to check out this website to see if I can get summaries of the first two seasons – would love to read what others thought. Thank you all for great fun.
I’m going to weigh in briefly on Mary before I suggest my choice for a cast addition that might help everyone get over Matthew…a bit.
What I’ve always loved about Michelle Dockery’s portrayal of Mary is that she behaves pretty much exactly as I think she should given her situation. She’s cold and bored because her world is cold and boring. Unlike her sisters, both of whom were/are ready to bolt Downton with little regret, Mary at some point concluded that her destiny was to marry the heir she could never be herself, and that her life would continue to be comfortably empty. What she could never have hoped for was that the heir would be someone she could fall in love with. That love was based, I think, on the fact that she and Matthew shared this sense that whatever plans they might have conjured over the years, their lives were now set in stone, AND they both had come to accept it. Like many a fate none of us would choose, it goes down a lot easier if you’re not doing it alone. The question for me as the series goes forward is whether Fellowes will allow Mary to have been permanently changed by Matthew in a way that won’t evaporate now that he’s gone.
My idea for a new male actor would maybe bomb in Britain since this fellow is so much more a fixture of serial TV there, but I think in the US, Rupert Penry-Jones would do a pretty good job reviving interest in the show. He’s a bit old for Mary but that’s not the only role that matters. Branson will be a dominant figure as Downton evolves, but he could surely use the legal expertise that Matthew brought to the table, so I nominate RPJ for such a role.
John, you’re amazing! I actually thought Rupert could have stepped into the Matthew part without a blink of the eye. He is one of my favorite actors and just seemed to pop into my head when Fellowes went on and on about how they couldn’t possibly recast the part. (Pooh!!!) But he would do just as nicely as a new character. He is older but looks younger so would pass just fine. They have hired 2 new actors – Julian Ovenden and Tom Cullen – but you probably knew that. I really liked Ovenden in Foyle’s War – he could be keeper. I know nothing about the other fellow.
Michelle Dockery has done a terrific job of molding Mary’s character and I, too, hope that will continue. I’m more and more of the opinion that Fellowes needs to give his actors more latitude with their characters. They are all pretty seasoned now and have a real grasp of the person they are playing. He should let them run with their gut feelings. Hugh B., Maggie and Michelle do this but I’d like to see as much with Elizabeth Mc. and Allen Leech, as well as others. They seem under-used…and it might help improve the rather hopeless writing in some of this season’s episodes.
Great posts everyone. Saw it last night and it was a shocker. I agree with all the comments. We do not deserve to be treated like fools after investing our time and emotions in the story line. So I guess we will now see the return that heir that was not really the heir or was he? Will he return and marry Edith? Never quite got that storyline. This possible storyline will give the recently colder Mary a more predictable character to play instead of the non-person she has become. Yes a replacement Matthew would have been better. Don’t forget we have 1916 coming up and that will take Branson back to Ireland. What happened to the fire in his belly? He became unbelievable. The British Television industry is in a bad way. A less popular story “The Royal” left us in the lurch with the main character laying on an operating table losing a bucket load of blood. The plug was pulled on that show due to financial problems. I would rather they pull the plug on DA now rather than later.
They might pull that plug next season. I have my doubts as to how the show will survive without two prominent characters and their storylines. We shall see…
Don’t forget we have 1916 coming up
Woops meant 1922 if they keep skipping a year between episode but I do see now that there is a funeral for matthew coming up.become. Yes .