Posted on 01/25/2017 1:17:00 PM PST by drewh
I just looked him up. Women must like him for his money, I’m guessing.
DA was supposed to be an improvement on USDS by somebody who really knew that world (sort of), and in the beginning it was.
Then they started to get sensationalistic, killing off characters to spike the ratings, but I don't think it was worse than USDS in the 70s -- and it was better than the recent version.
I don't remember the American series. I heard it was awful. But the audience for high society period costume drama is so much smaller in the US that it couldn't possibly have been a success on American commercial television.
THAT’S A MAN, BABY!!!!
I have really learned to love TCM over the past several years.
Total agreement on modern movies and TV.
Me and my wife have gone to those events where classic movies are played on the big screen like they deserve.
The last one was Singing In The Rain which is one of the few musicals I ever liked.
DA stunk on ice, was inacurate, in many instances, kept looping the same damned story lines, and never resolved most of them, until the very last show; a CHRISTMAS SPECIAL at that! And yes, I watched all of it; every single show.
PBS sliced and diced and cut out lots of scenes from the original Brit shows. It didn't matter all THAT much, but just so you know.
Fellows pretends to know all about the aristocracy and really isn't "one of them" at all; mostly, he just knows some now...since he has been knighted.
OTOH, the two great authoresses, of US/DS, came from families whose parents/grandparents/or their family members had been servants in great houses and knew those family stories. And both Marsh and Atkins are far better writers than Fellows can even begin to dream of being close to!
I have seen UP/DS long after the first run and HELL YES, it holds up and does so very well!
You can blame some of the deaths, of leads, in DA, on the siren call of Hollyweird, where some fled too and died. No, not literally...figuratively; re their being seen and/or lauded.
DA was shown WITH COMMERCIAL BREAKS, on Brit T.V. and the Brits has hissy fits for two reasons: 1) far too many commercials 2) most of the actors mumbled.
In NYC, in the late '40s through the '60s, channel 9 and 5 ( both local stations ) showed old movies. Channels CBS and NBC did too.
I have LOVED TCM for the same reasons I loved those old movie shows of my childhood. OLD MOVIES ARE GREAT; EVEN THE MEDIOCRE ONES, WHEN COMPARED TO THE GARBAGE THAT HAS BEEN MADE, HERE, FOR THE PAST 40 OR SO YEARS !
Having seen SINGING IN THE RAIN, in a movie theatre, when it first came out, I have no desire to do that again, but I understand. :-)
I also saw the musical play, in London, with Tommy Steele in the Don Lockwood part, in '84. And yes, it was good.
Watch CHICAGO, when TCM shows it again. I bet that you'd like that musical too.
You might even enjoy DADDY LONGLEGS, with Leslie Caron and Fred Astaire.
“That’s a MAN, baby!”
I read Kristy at 17 was dating Alan Thicke and engaged to him two years later he was 42.
That dirty dog was also supposedly dating Julie McCullough.
I haven’t given Hollyweird one cent since 1992. To be Hollyweird-free is truly liberating. I heartily recommend it.
Hollyweird vs. America. Again.
PING!
Was there any character on USDS as entertaining as Maggie Smith's Lady Violet? The upper class characters on DA were more interesting and appealing than those on USDS. Maybe that's not realistic. Maybe upper class Edwardians were as unlikeable as the Bellamys, but it doesn't make for entertaining television.
Similarly, in spite of all the sudden deaths, I found DA more positive and optimistic than the earlier series. That's probably not realistic either. WWI was a very grim time. Being a servant in London wasn't any fun either. But grimness doesn't make people want to turn in. Knowing that the characters didn't have much hope for happiness didn't make for pleasant viewing. The spareness of 1970s production values doesn't change that impression.
As I said, I don't think DA lived up to its early potential. The writers realized that they could up the ratings with sensationalism. And maybe their insistence that they were going to tell the real inside story wasn't really accurate. I notice that the creators of the earlier series did come from the upper class. But Fellowes was from a similar background and did marry into the titled aristocracy.
Anyway, I sense that you really have a bee in your bonnet about this and I don't really care that much. I'll just point out that between the caddish Bellamy son and Rose's eternal miseries I really didn't like USDS much.
What I will press upon you, is the simple fact that the character development of UP/DO, for both the aristos and the servants, were extremely well developed, intelligent, and true to life. OTOH, nobody, in DA, really was developed, expanded, nor grew. Add to that, there wasn't a single person of the aristos, in DA, who anyone I know cared about or liked. They were all stereotypes, of a MODERN, not an Edwardian-roaring '20s sort. They were all completely locked into a one dimension, until the bitter end.
I guess you enjoyed the dragging out of the same damned story, sans change of any kind, with little to NO resolve until the last Christmas special. I'm glad that that made you happy; it bored the rest of us to tears!
Re UP/DS...
There were many twists and turns, people changed due to circumstances and the times; both upstairs and down stairs. Also, there were so many different characters to love/care about, and as far as the "sparseness" of the UP/DS sets...either you have an extremely bad memories, or you're just nuts! There were far more sets, more glamor, more elegance, faaaaaaaaaar more accuracy in costume, set decor, and even the food!
Marsh and Atkins did NOT come from nor were even remotely connected with, as a peer, the aristos of ANY era! And yes, it was those women's idea and they were the MAIN writes ( plus one was in it...Jean Marsh as the beloved Rose! ) of UP/DS!
Yes, Maggie Smith was fun to watch; nobody else was!
And yes, there wasn't just one such in UP/DS, but MANY; both upstairs and down!
There was very little, in DA that was "positive"! Oh yeah...the poor little, ugly, no personality middle daughter FIIIIIIIIIIIIIINALLY hooked a guy. WOW...so "positive". LOL
Americans who like costume series and movies are a larger section of the populace than you imagine. Sadly, American T.V. doesn't do ANYTHING well at all, now and except for attempting a very badly copy of UP/DS, hasn't EVER tried to....except for old WESTERN series.
OTOH....Brits don't do it all that well anymore either!
Since you really don't care, why are you arguing with me? OF COURSE YOU CARE; ESPECIALLY SINCE YOU DISAGREE WITH ME. :-)
James Bellamy started out as somewhat "caddish"; however, as time went on, he changed, grew, and settled down.
Rose was NOT continually set up, nor was she "a maid of constant sorrows". As with every single real life person, her life had its ups and downs.
Of course you didn't "care much" for UP/DS; it was beyond your ken and level of appreciation. Pity that....
You're better off sticking to watching badly written and worse done "fluff". ;^)
And FYI...the remake was written and in production BEFORE DA was written or set in motion. Unfortuantely, DA was put on first, which kind of did the remake UP/DS in.
Yikes, put a burkha on that bag!!
Just checked IMDB. He doesn’t seem to have much cooking project-wise. Good thing...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.