Why are people comparing the two in the first place?
They are both totally different shows and as such could be and should be enjoyed as two seperate entities.
Constantly making analytical observations and comparisons is inevitably going to detract from anyone enjoying this show. I loved it and as I didn't see Downton Abbey (I got it for Christmas on DVD so will be watching it on Sundays w/C 9/1/11 at 9pm so I get a Lark Rise/DA double bill) I haven't got anything to detract from my enjoyment..
Watch UD as a different show and you'll enjoy it a whole lot more.
Why are people comparing the two in the first place?
They are both totally different shows and as such could be and should be enjoyed as two seperate entities.
Constantly making analytical observations and comparisons is inevitably going to detract from anyone enjoying this show. I loved it and as I didn't see Downton Abbey (I got it for Christmas on DVD so will be watching it on Sundays w/C 9/1/11 at 9pm so I get a Lark Rise/DA double bill) I haven't got anything to detract from my enjoyable.
Watch UD as a different show and you'll enjoy it a whole lot more.
couldn't agree more:D
we saw downton abbey for the first time this week as i bought it for mum and i to watch, and we loved it: - i hope you do too:)
These people who say "oh, it doesn't compare to Downton Abbey at all" really need to get a grip.
You've had a whole series of that show and one of Upstairs Downstairs, yet already judgments have been made.
Dear me! A grip needs to be got here :rolleyes:
Possible what disappoints people is that there are not enough characters to latch on to as DA or the original UD when households were much bigger. That's why there are more outsiders. The King, Wallace Simpson, The future Geaorge VI. Von Ribontropp. It looks like it may go the Nancy Mitford route of Nazi sympathsisers verses the family. Things have to be politically correct nowadays.
These people who say "oh, it doesn't compare to Downton Abbey at all" really need to get a grip.
You've had a whole series of that show and one of Upstairs Downstairs, yet already judgments have been made.
Dear me! A grip needs to be got here :rolleyes:
Hmm..
I can never understand why some people can't accept that we all have different perceptions of "good average and bad."
If someone says that in their opinion one series is better or worse than another, that's good enough for me. Why should I care?
So in my opinion, suggesting someone needs to "get a grip" is a bit pointless. I'd suggest that it's more a case of someone else should, "just let it go!"
It's a pity the BBC had to use the original title, because now amateur reviewers will tear it to pieces for not being identical to its 35 year-old predecessor, for not resembling every other similar period drama, for minor social inaccuracies (or just ones part-time social historians have made up), and for "bad scripts", since everyone is an accomplished script editor, set-designer, director and casting agent.
If it hadn't been resurrected the same whiners would have been lamenting the fact that no-one had brought it back.
Better to just remain silent and watch it all first - only three episodes.
Well, that'll teach us to think this forum is for giving our opinions, good or bad, rather than only when those opinions are glowing adoration of every programme we watch. :rolleyes:
Look, we're all entitled to say what we think, whether that's good, bad or something in between. We also have the right to compare shows with one another if we want to and to comment on an opening episode if we feel so inclined.
Digispy would be a dull place indeed if we all waited until the end of a series to comment, if we never compared one thing with another, or if we only posted when we had something complimentary to say. I found this first episode interesting up to a point and will watch the other two, but it doesn't bother me that some people have said they hate it while other seem to have loved it. They're just opinions - and isn't that what Digispy is all about?
Am I imagining things or did one of the leading ladies say something like "Put these words together to form a phrase - door, bolted, horse close" ?
I used to laugh at some of the noughties idioms used in Heartbeat (set in the 1960s), but this takes the biscuit.
Its very much an old saying:
Locking the stable door after the horse has bolted. The Peppergate in Chester produced a similar saying. It is noted in several histories of the city and I checked the references. The Peppergate gained notoriety when, in 1573, Ellen, the daughter of Mayor Aldersey eloped through it with her lover, leaving the City Assembly to order, on 15th January 1573 that the gate be shut! This gave rise to a Chester proverb about shutting the Peppergate after the daughter had gone (similar to shutting the stable door after the horse had bolted).Later, in April that year, perhaps after the Mayor had calmed down, thegate was shut at night and opened in the day.
However, the Chester saying was certainly just a topical local riff on an already well-known proverb. In the form "When the hors is stole, steke the stabull-dore" it was already in a collection of traditional sayings written in 1350. (VSD)
As I mentioned earlier, even the BBC doesn't think it was up to much, as it's scheduled over three consecutive nights.
If they thought it could hold on to the slot given the first episode, you'd have seen the others on successive Sundays.
I thought Keely Hawes was good- her character was very confident "Lady Agnes" and secure in her role.
Til Ma in law appears and you see the terror in her eyes.
She has been titled but poor (her famaily has to sell their jewellery) and she is clearly embarrassed by her hoydenish sister which is why she wants to send her to etiquette school.
Her face during the National Athem was a picture.
Her whole personna has been learned and is a fragile facade.
I usually hate intrusive music, and admit that I didn't notice it last night, I guess cos I was so engrossed.
Doubtless I will notice it tonight!
It wasn't the saying itself that wasn't around in the thirties - it was the device of saying words in wrong order and telling them to put it together. It just sounded like something David Brent would have said rather than an elderly upper class lady of the thirties.
These people who say "oh, it doesn't compare to Downton Abbey at all" really need to get a grip.
You've had a whole series of that show and one of Upstairs Downstairs, yet already judgments have been made.
Dear me! A grip needs to be got here :rolleyes:
This is the problem with tv though and why there was a little bit of a race to get the shows on air first. DA is in peoples minds when they watch this and a number of people will have already have compared UD unfavourably with DA and given up when if DA had not existed may have carried on.
As I mentioned earlier, even the BBC doesn't think it was up to much, as it's scheduled over three consecutive nights.
If they thought it could hold on to the slot given the first episode, you'd have seen the others on successive Sundays.
They're clearly monitoring the ratings though : if they're good,I have no doubt we will see a full series.
They're clearly monitoring the ratings though : if they're good,I have no doubt we will see a full series.
Yes, 7.5 million is good and as long as it retains most of that i reckon there will be a series. Larkrise to Candleford is not expected to last after the next reduced 6 episode series so there wil be a gap so to speak. Whether the money is there is another matter.
It wasn't the saying itself that wasn't around in the thirties - it was the device of saying words in wrong order and telling them to put it together. It just sounded like something David Brent would have said rather than an elderly upper class lady of the thirties.
It was Bruce Forsythe in the 60s "Sunday Night at the Palladium" when he used to get a couple from the audience to play a game to win prizes. ",rearrange these words into a well known phrase or saying"
Just watched the first episode on iPlayer and I thought it was great. Good to have Rose back, and I think Eileen Atkins is just wonderful in this. The background music didn't bother me in the slightest -- I hardly noticed it, to be honest.
Looking forward to watching the next episode later.
When the Bellamys lost all their money, I doubt that Rose was on their list of priorities. She'd also received a large inheritance from a male admirer, but lost it when one of James' investments that went bust..
Virginia tells Rose that they will look after her in the final episode. The Bellamys felt responsible for her because she had trusted James with Gregory's money, and he had lost it .
Watch UD as a different show and you'll enjoy it a whole lot more.
Well said Wizzywick. I enjoyed both and for different reasons. Like you I received a copy of DA for Christmas, but would like to see a run of UD. It'd make good watching. Can't wait for Episode 2 tonight. A recent article in the paper did mention that DA beat UD to be screened first. Either way, a comparison would have been made.
As one forum member mentioned, it may be the last of Larkrise after this series, so what better to fill a cold winter's evening.:)
I think the real comparison that needs to be made is with a film I saw the other night with Emma Thompson and Antony Hopkins - The Remains of the Day.
This episode was all but a re-gurge of that film, to the point where I nearly thought I was watching the same show. I thought the interior was the same house at first. Then there was the German / Nazi visitor storyline etc. Even the 'setting free' of the bird was so similar to setting free the trapped bird in Remains.
I did enjoy it even though it was a bit too deja vu.
Just a small gripe: I would like the theme to reflect the music of the time.... It changed in the original series... and on Radio 4, they did a year of Upshares, Downshares, with so many variations, there was bound to have been a 30s style (trad jazz?)
Possible what disappoints people is that there are not enough characters to latch on to as DA or the original UD when households were much bigger. That's why there are more outsiders. The King, Wallace Simpson, The future Geaorge VI. Von Ribontropp. It looks like it may go the Nancy Mitford route of Nazi sympathsisers verses the family. Things have to be politically correct nowadays.
Eh
UD in the original series was always historically on point, and brought real life people and events in to the narrative. Edward VII came to Eaton Place. Bellamy was a member of parliament and then in the Lords, so there were countless references to and meeting with political figures and situations at the time. Lady Majorie died on the Titanic. Elizabeth was involved with the suffragettes/radical policitics, All the stories that related to and built up around WWI, James losing all his (and Rosie's money in the great stock market crash etc, etc.
Also I have no idea what "political correctness" has to do with anything in the new series. The programme is set in 1936, errm let me think what big policitcal issues were on at the time.....Nazi militarism and expansionism in Europe, Oswald Moseley and his British Union of Fascists at home. Which of course did attract a number of supporters from the upper classes. The Battle of Cable Street. How is it PC for the writers to want to introduce these huge historically accurate themes into the drama!!
Just watched the first episode on iPlayer and I thought it was great. Good to have Rose back, and I think Eileen Atkins is just wonderful in this. The background music didn't bother me in the slightest -- I hardly noticed it, to be honest.
Looking forward to watching the next episode later.
Comments
Why are people comparing the two in the first place?
They are both totally different shows and as such could be and should be enjoyed as two seperate entities.
Constantly making analytical observations and comparisons is inevitably going to detract from anyone enjoying this show. I loved it and as I didn't see Downton Abbey (I got it for Christmas on DVD so will be watching it on Sundays w/C 9/1/11 at 9pm so I get a Lark Rise/DA double bill) I haven't got anything to detract from my enjoyment..
Watch UD as a different show and you'll enjoy it a whole lot more.
couldn't agree more:D
we saw downton abbey for the first time this week as i bought it for mum and i to watch, and we loved it: - i hope you do too:)
Possible what disappoints people is that there are not enough characters to latch on to as DA or the original UD when households were much bigger. That's why there are more outsiders. The King, Wallace Simpson, The future Geaorge VI. Von Ribontropp. It looks like it may go the Nancy Mitford route of Nazi sympathsisers verses the family. Things have to be politically correct nowadays.
Hmm..
I can never understand why some people can't accept that we all have different perceptions of "good average and bad."
If someone says that in their opinion one series is better or worse than another, that's good enough for me. Why should I care?
So in my opinion, suggesting someone needs to "get a grip" is a bit pointless. I'd suggest that it's more a case of someone else should, "just let it go!"
"It's just telly!"
Look, we're all entitled to say what we think, whether that's good, bad or something in between. We also have the right to compare shows with one another if we want to and to comment on an opening episode if we feel so inclined.
Digispy would be a dull place indeed if we all waited until the end of a series to comment, if we never compared one thing with another, or if we only posted when we had something complimentary to say. I found this first episode interesting up to a point and will watch the other two, but it doesn't bother me that some people have said they hate it while other seem to have loved it. They're just opinions - and isn't that what Digispy is all about?
Its very much an old saying:
If they thought it could hold on to the slot given the first episode, you'd have seen the others on successive Sundays.
Til Ma in law appears and you see the terror in her eyes.
She has been titled but poor (her famaily has to sell their jewellery) and she is clearly embarrassed by her hoydenish sister which is why she wants to send her to etiquette school.
Her face during the National Athem was a picture.
Her whole personna has been learned and is a fragile facade.
I usually hate intrusive music, and admit that I didn't notice it last night, I guess cos I was so engrossed.
Doubtless I will notice it tonight!
This is the problem with tv though and why there was a little bit of a race to get the shows on air first. DA is in peoples minds when they watch this and a number of people will have already have compared UD unfavourably with DA and given up when if DA had not existed may have carried on.
They shouldnt but they do.
They're clearly monitoring the ratings though : if they're good,I have no doubt we will see a full series.
Yes, 7.5 million is good and as long as it retains most of that i reckon there will be a series. Larkrise to Candleford is not expected to last after the next reduced 6 episode series so there wil be a gap so to speak. Whether the money is there is another matter.
It was Bruce Forsythe in the 60s "Sunday Night at the Palladium" when he used to get a couple from the audience to play a game to win prizes. ",rearrange these words into a well known phrase or saying"
Glad I am not the only one who remembers her has Ken Barlow's first wife:)
Yep, Ken should have fixed the plug on that iron.
Looking forward to watching the next episode later.
Virginia tells Rose that they will look after her in the final episode. The Bellamys felt responsible for her because she had trusted James with Gregory's money, and he had lost it .
I always thought it was a hairdryer wot done it lol!!!
Well said Wizzywick. I enjoyed both and for different reasons. Like you I received a copy of DA for Christmas, but would like to see a run of UD. It'd make good watching. Can't wait for Episode 2 tonight. A recent article in the paper did mention that DA beat UD to be screened first. Either way, a comparison would have been made.
As one forum member mentioned, it may be the last of Larkrise after this series, so what better to fill a cold winter's evening.:)
This episode was all but a re-gurge of that film, to the point where I nearly thought I was watching the same show. I thought the interior was the same house at first. Then there was the German / Nazi visitor storyline etc. Even the 'setting free' of the bird was so similar to setting free the trapped bird in Remains.
I did enjoy it even though it was a bit too deja vu.
UD in the original series was always historically on point, and brought real life people and events in to the narrative. Edward VII came to Eaton Place. Bellamy was a member of parliament and then in the Lords, so there were countless references to and meeting with political figures and situations at the time. Lady Majorie died on the Titanic. Elizabeth was involved with the suffragettes/radical policitics, All the stories that related to and built up around WWI, James losing all his (and Rosie's money in the great stock market crash etc, etc.
Also I have no idea what "political correctness" has to do with anything in the new series. The programme is set in 1936, errm let me think what big policitcal issues were on at the time.....Nazi militarism and expansionism in Europe, Oswald Moseley and his British Union of Fascists at home. Which of course did attract a number of supporters from the upper classes. The Battle of Cable Street. How is it PC for the writers to want to introduce these huge historically accurate themes into the drama!!
My thoughts exactly.:)
Me too. I thought it was great and part two is keeping up the standard.