Who cares about detail or rose may have a slight speech impediment... it was just wonderful.. as someone who watched all the originals as they were broadcast, it brought a tear to my eye, well done the BBC they do period the best by a mile... MORE MORE MORE please..
I have no idea why it was so emotional, nothing bad really happened apart from the death of the Jewish lady. I don't know quite how they fleshed out the characters so well in just a few episodes. It felt like a proper family had been created by the end.
I liked some things better than Downton Abbey, which was good but felt like it was building to something exciting but never did.
Is that it for Upstairs Downstairs or are they doing more.
The second episode was utterly brillient, it reminded me of the old series. I much prefer this to Downton Abbey, that is very Howards End.
As much as I respected Downton Abbey, feeling it was a reasonable drama, it's nothing compared to Howards End, which was a superior production, had better acting and a stronger story, too. Still, as I said, that's not to say that I didn't like Downton, I did.
This on the otherhand, like the original, was about the politics of the time and the human stories that it impacted.
It was rushed and a bit disjointed, sort of unbelievable in parts (why that driver didn't get sacked is beyond me) and fairly unsubtle. I did like the episode to some degree (the Jewish servant and the Sikh manservant were interesting characters and finely acted), but it did have quite a few faults that didn't completely sell it to me.
I don't think it's anything like Downton and I feel that is a very lazy comparision. It's like saying all historical dramas set in a certain era with servants is like Downton. Thats just pure laziness on behalf of the critic.
Well, you do make a point there, but I do think there is some truth, even if such a criticism can be overused. Still, I did find it a bit cliched and fairly weak in parts.
However, saying all the above, I didn't regret watching it, but if they're going to make this a series beyond the three, they really need to strengthen things to get me to continue watching.
I have no idea why it was so emotional, nothing bad really happened apart from the death of the Jewish lady. I don't know quite how they fleshed out the characters so well in just a few episodes. It felt like a proper family had been created by the end.
I liked some things better than Downton Abbey, which was good but felt like it was building to something exciting but never did.
Is that it for Upstairs Downstairs or are they doing more.
Looks like it will return next year as a full series.....the TV ratings were very healthy
I was reading an article in the Daily Mail today that the BBC are a bit annoyed that ITV broadcast Downtown Abbey before they had a chance to screen Upstairs Downstairs : apparently DA wasn't due to hit our screens until 2011.
The show is being made by BBC Wales, all part of the percentage of programmes made out of London thingy (give it a few years and everyone will complain about the amount made by BBc Wales ) . The interior is all sets so I dont see why they couldnt have kept it more like the original in layout , also I dont see why they couldnt have used Eaton Place for exterior shots for continuity as opposed to Leamington Spa , unless it was for costs .
Westminster charge huge amounts for parking permits and licences for road closures, plus all the surrounding buildings would have been disrupted and in that area it would be huge amounts plus Up - Down would have attracted large crowds also needing to be managed
By moving to Leamington Spa they would have attracted money from the local film agency to the project who would have bent over backwards to accommodate them. The locations could be closed off easily and any alterations would not cost a fortune plus you don't have congestion charges for all the vehicles which would have mounted up daily.
To be honest watching the episodes I did not know it had been filmed outside London before reading it on here but it did feel wrong, The whole Cable Street riot did not feel like the east end of London which has the yellow brick and the proportions of the exterior of "Eton Place" felt smaller, The design overall was not good, the colours of some of the sets was pretty horrific, the blue in the hall especially. I didn't like the eighties square paving slabs outside the house either. The size of the smaller posters outside were all A4 not imperial and generally it felt shoddy.
The costumes also had some horrific pieces, Mrs had one dress at the finishing school that was ugly and also not period,
I have no idea why it was so emotional, nothing bad really happened apart from the death of the Jewish lady. I don't know quite how they fleshed out the characters so well in just a few episodes. It felt like a proper family had been created by the end.
I liked some things better than Downton Abbey, which was good but felt like it was building to something exciting but never did.
Is that it for Upstairs Downstairs or are they doing more.
I never liked any character from Upstairs Downstairs the reboot, they had three episodes to warm us and for me they sent us cold.
Downton Abbey came from no-where, gave us decent plot-lines and likeable characters.
I really enjoyed the 2 I watched, will watch epi 3 later to-day if I can fit it in. I wondered if it was Leamington and did comment, such beautiful terraces.
You must have had your HD box audio channel set to "description for the blind/partially sighted"
Hi,
Thank you for responding to my posting. I can only assume that the setting to which you refer was preset in the factory before delivery. There does not appear to be any reference to it in the Instruction Manual. However I found a button on the remote which is marked AD for audio description. I have now set this to off and perhaps this will eliminate the narrative on future broadcasts. What I find odd however is that in the on position, audio description is not included on other digital broadcasts, Freeview or Freesat. Am I missing something here?
As already stated Rose didnt age over the 30 years of original UD, at the start she was about 30, so at the end would be around 60, add six years and she would be late 60's.
And as I stated in my original post, I had not had time to read 20+ pages.
It is ridiculous to try to make original UD vierwers believe that only 6 years had passed and Rose had aged so much. She was supposed to be about 50 when the original series ended.
And as I stated in my original post, I had not had time to read 20+ pages.
It is ridiculous to try to make original UD vierwers believe that only 6 years had passed and Rose had aged so much. She was supposed to be about 50 when the original series ended.
I agree - just wondered whose idea the whole thing (to bring it back) was - was it Jean Marsh or the BBC or someone else?
Also, still not getting exactly what Rose's role here was - is she now employed full time by Hallam and Agnes as (what) or does she still have the agency and is there in an advisory role to get them set up?
And as I stated in my original post, I had not had time to read 20+ pages.
It is ridiculous to try to make original UD vierwers believe that only 6 years had passed and Rose had aged so much. She was supposed to be about 50 when the original series ended.
Surely the problem lies with the original UD, not the current version.
In the original series the character of Rose was in the programme from 1903 to 1930. In 1903 she had already been 13 years in service to the Bellamy family and was head upstairs maid. She looked to be early thirties and was played by Jean Marsh aged 37. At the end of the series Rose was getting on for 60 and played by Jean Marsh aged 41, with little or no attempt to age her.
In the current series Rose is mid sixties and is played by Jean Marsh aged 76, which is less of a stretch than was made at the end of the ITV series.
Also, still not getting exactly what Rose's role here was - is she now employed full time by Hallam and Agnes as (what) or does she still have the agency and is there in an advisory role to get them set up?
I suspect that a slice of dialogue, or even a subplot, explaining Rose now working full time for the family has been cut as they condensed the programme into a shorter time slot.
I agree - just wondered whose idea the whole thing (to bring it back) was - was it Jean Marsh or the BBC or someone else? Also, still not getting exactly what Rose's role here was - is she now employed full time by Hallam and Agnes as (what) or does she still have the agency and is there in an advisory role to get them set up?
Lady Agnes handed Rose a key which she hung up on the key rack next to the butlers one, I think it read Housekeeper but I'm not sure now. Maybe somebody else can remember.
^^^^
Yep, she's the Housekeeper. The subtext was that she was returning home, ir was mentioned that the agency wasn't making money so it all fell into place
I agree - just wondered whose idea the whole thing (to bring it back) was - was it Jean Marsh or the BBC or someone else?
Also, still not getting exactly what Rose's role here was - is she now employed full time by Hallam and Agnes as (what) or does she still have the agency and is there in an advisory role to get them set up?
I read an interview with Jean and she said they were trying to get a remake of the series going for years but there were all sorts of copyright issues preventing it from happening.She says the three episodes we saw this week were in planning since 2006.
I haven't seen the original and didn't know anything about it but this version was good and had more plot than other dramas of its type although it was probably too soapy for me at times and some of the actors were miscast.
I couldn't warm to Ed Stoppard at all as he was like a piece of cardboard ! I love Keeley Hawes but her character could do with some warmth if a second series is produced.
I would lay claim to being the original Upstairs Downstairs number one fan - Sarah, Lady Elizabeth and Lady Georgina were my childhood heroines so when I saw the intention to bring the series back, I was a little peturbed. When the first episode started I thought I'd been right. It seemed jerky and contrived but as it wore on, I realised my reservations had been completely unfounded.
The characters were beautifully portrayed - the new cook and butler stepped beautifully into the shoes of Mrs. Bridges and Hudson and the weaving of reality with the abdication and the Mosley stories worked brilliantly - not to mention the little cameo with Cecil Beaton- all due to the depth and quality of the plotting and the storytelling.
I did enjoy Downton Abbey but always found it much paler and shallower than the original UD and believe it to still be so compared with these new episodes. The writers of DA seem to have watered down real events that happen in favour of making a modern style soap opera in period costume. The writers of the new UD (not surprised one was the fantastically gifted Jean Marsh) avoided the soap trap beautifully and made a piece of real period drama.
The only thing that ruined this series was this forum and the inability to post without using the words "Downton Abbey" :rolleyes:
Then stop reading this forum if it's spoiling your enjoyment (not sure how it can spoil your enjoyment, though).
Let's hope we can lose that and them should the show started decades before Downton Abbey came to be, returns.
Yes, but this new Upstairs Downstairs isn't really up to scratch with the original. In some ways it does compare to Downton Abbey, but you're right to suggest that it's a lazy criticism that often forgets that this sort of story is way older than this year.
Then maybe we could discuss this show rather then the constant attacks by the DA fans.
Well, I'm not a DA fan as such, more an appreciator. I thought it was reasonable, but it was a bit soapy for my tastes to make me a fan. However, I preferred Downton to this, which I felt was even more soapy and weaker. Still, maybe they'll learn from this and improve, but compared to the original, this is fairly diluted.
Comments
Thanks...I never think of iplayer! of course...blonde moment x
A natural blonde or from the bottle ?
I have no idea why it was so emotional, nothing bad really happened apart from the death of the Jewish lady. I don't know quite how they fleshed out the characters so well in just a few episodes. It felt like a proper family had been created by the end.
I liked some things better than Downton Abbey, which was good but felt like it was building to something exciting but never did.
Is that it for Upstairs Downstairs or are they doing more.
Just seen your profile pic ! Never mind, they may invent a cure for it one day !!!!!
As much as I respected Downton Abbey, feeling it was a reasonable drama, it's nothing compared to Howards End, which was a superior production, had better acting and a stronger story, too. Still, as I said, that's not to say that I didn't like Downton, I did.
It was rushed and a bit disjointed, sort of unbelievable in parts (why that driver didn't get sacked is beyond me) and fairly unsubtle. I did like the episode to some degree (the Jewish servant and the Sikh manservant were interesting characters and finely acted), but it did have quite a few faults that didn't completely sell it to me.
Well, you do make a point there, but I do think there is some truth, even if such a criticism can be overused. Still, I did find it a bit cliched and fairly weak in parts.
However, saying all the above, I didn't regret watching it, but if they're going to make this a series beyond the three, they really need to strengthen things to get me to continue watching.
Looks like it will return next year as a full series.....the TV ratings were very healthy
I was reading an article in the Daily Mail today that the BBC are a bit annoyed that ITV broadcast Downtown Abbey before they had a chance to screen Upstairs Downstairs : apparently DA wasn't due to hit our screens until 2011.
Westminster charge huge amounts for parking permits and licences for road closures, plus all the surrounding buildings would have been disrupted and in that area it would be huge amounts plus Up - Down would have attracted large crowds also needing to be managed
By moving to Leamington Spa they would have attracted money from the local film agency to the project who would have bent over backwards to accommodate them. The locations could be closed off easily and any alterations would not cost a fortune plus you don't have congestion charges for all the vehicles which would have mounted up daily.
To be honest watching the episodes I did not know it had been filmed outside London before reading it on here but it did feel wrong, The whole Cable Street riot did not feel like the east end of London which has the yellow brick and the proportions of the exterior of "Eton Place" felt smaller, The design overall was not good, the colours of some of the sets was pretty horrific, the blue in the hall especially. I didn't like the eighties square paving slabs outside the house either. The size of the smaller posters outside were all A4 not imperial and generally it felt shoddy.
The costumes also had some horrific pieces, Mrs had one dress at the finishing school that was ugly and also not period,
I never liked any character from Upstairs Downstairs the reboot, they had three episodes to warm us and for me they sent us cold.
Downton Abbey came from no-where, gave us decent plot-lines and likeable characters.
Yes, two pantomime nasties. So what?
Hi,
Thank you for responding to my posting. I can only assume that the setting to which you refer was preset in the factory before delivery. There does not appear to be any reference to it in the Instruction Manual. However I found a button on the remote which is marked AD for audio description. I have now set this to off and perhaps this will eliminate the narrative on future broadcasts. What I find odd however is that in the on position, audio description is not included on other digital broadcasts, Freeview or Freesat. Am I missing something here?
And as I stated in my original post, I had not had time to read 20+ pages.
It is ridiculous to try to make original UD vierwers believe that only 6 years had passed and Rose had aged so much. She was supposed to be about 50 when the original series ended.
Also, still not getting exactly what Rose's role here was - is she now employed full time by Hallam and Agnes as (what) or does she still have the agency and is there in an advisory role to get them set up?
Surely the problem lies with the original UD, not the current version.
In the original series the character of Rose was in the programme from 1903 to 1930. In 1903 she had already been 13 years in service to the Bellamy family and was head upstairs maid. She looked to be early thirties and was played by Jean Marsh aged 37. At the end of the series Rose was getting on for 60 and played by Jean Marsh aged 41, with little or no attempt to age her.
In the current series Rose is mid sixties and is played by Jean Marsh aged 76, which is less of a stretch than was made at the end of the ITV series.
I suspect that a slice of dialogue, or even a subplot, explaining Rose now working full time for the family has been cut as they condensed the programme into a shorter time slot.
Lady Agnes handed Rose a key which she hung up on the key rack next to the butlers one, I think it read Housekeeper but I'm not sure now.
Yep, she's the Housekeeper. The subtext was that she was returning home, ir was mentioned that the agency wasn't making money so it all fell into place
I read an interview with Jean and she said they were trying to get a remake of the series going for years but there were all sorts of copyright issues preventing it from happening.She says the three episodes we saw this week were in planning since 2006.
The only thing that ruined this series was this forum and the inability to post without using the words "Downton Abbey" :rolleyes:
Let's hope we can lose that and them should the show started decades before Downton Abbey came to be, returns.
Then maybe we could discuss this show rather then the constant attacks by the DA fans.
I couldn't warm to Ed Stoppard at all as he was like a piece of cardboard ! I love Keeley Hawes but her character could do with some warmth if a second series is produced.
I've never seen a single episode of Downtown Abbey so I am able to give an unbiased opinion of Upstairs Downstairs (and thought it was very good)
The characters were beautifully portrayed - the new cook and butler stepped beautifully into the shoes of Mrs. Bridges and Hudson and the weaving of reality with the abdication and the Mosley stories worked brilliantly - not to mention the little cameo with Cecil Beaton- all due to the depth and quality of the plotting and the storytelling.
I did enjoy Downton Abbey but always found it much paler and shallower than the original UD and believe it to still be so compared with these new episodes. The writers of DA seem to have watered down real events that happen in favour of making a modern style soap opera in period costume. The writers of the new UD (not surprised one was the fantastically gifted Jean Marsh) avoided the soap trap beautifully and made a piece of real period drama.
Then stop reading this forum if it's spoiling your enjoyment (not sure how it can spoil your enjoyment, though).
Yes, but this new Upstairs Downstairs isn't really up to scratch with the original. In some ways it does compare to Downton Abbey, but you're right to suggest that it's a lazy criticism that often forgets that this sort of story is way older than this year.
Well, I'm not a DA fan as such, more an appreciator. I thought it was reasonable, but it was a bit soapy for my tastes to make me a fan. However, I preferred Downton to this, which I felt was even more soapy and weaker. Still, maybe they'll learn from this and improve, but compared to the original, this is fairly diluted.