It's the final Downton 3: Heartfelt reasons for and sensible reasons against a Downton Abbey film (or movie)

Time was when it was easy to be blasé about the possibility of a Downton film. Now, after the end of the final series, I've lost count of how many times I've googled "downton abbey movie" (forget "downton abbey film" - the top hits are all about filming locations). I know it makes little sense to wish for a film when the series was so nicely wrapped up, but I really, really want one.

Roughly, this is the argument that takes place in my head on this subject:

Downton Abbey went out with a bang with series six. The script was zingy, the pace had picked up since series five, and the characters continued to engage our interest. Most importantly, there were happy endings pretty much all around. So why risk a less satisfying ending of the drama with a film? Surely it's better to pull down the curtain while everything's still sunny.

Granted. But some of the characters' stories could safely be expanded upon. I don't want to complain or anything, but it would be nice to see Molesley and Miss Baxter married - other romances that hadn't been around as long were all right as hinted future scenarios, but after two and a half series I'd have hoped for these two to have reached the engagement stage, or at least the kissing stage. It would also be reassuring to see that things still look rosy for Edith and Bertie Pelham past the wedding night stage, and there's surely more fun to be had from Bertie's steely mum. Plus, do I have to remind you that Thomas still doesn't have a fella?

I'll get back to that. Meanwhile, about those hinted-at romances. Because the series ends where it does, we can imagine them all coming to pass. If the story goes on, one or two of these romances will probably be seen as to come to nothing, for the sake of "realism" and dramatic tension. Do you really want that?

No, fair point. But some of the romances could get into troubled waters and then be patched up again at the end of the film - that would make for some dramatic tension. And I'm ashamed to say I could, if pushed, sacrifice a romantic scenario or two for the sake of more Downton. Molesley and Miss Baxter have to end up together, and it would be really sad if Mrs Patmore didn't manage to become Mrs Mason. But it wouldn't be a catastrophe if Branson and Miss Edmunds didn't become an item - why, they've hardly met. As for Daisy and Andy, I would certainly like to see her married to someone, after all her footman troubles. It doesn't have to be him, though. When Daisy said "I could do a lot better an' all" I was inclined to agree with her.

There is talk of setting the Downton film ten years after the final episode, as Maggie Smith doesn't want to continue as the Dowager Countess. This would allow the Dowager to pass on - or die, as she herself would robustly put it - off-stage, and for the mourning period to be safely over by the time the film starts.

Sooo?

So, there would be a Downton Abbey film without the Dowager Countess! Come on!

Look, I know she's the show's most popular character, but while I have nothing against the Dowager, I would be able to bear her absence for my own part. She was great when interfering in the other characters' storylines - like Mary's love life, say - but her own plot lines were more feeble. And the epigrams started to pall a bit somewhere in series four; in the last series, I thought the best lines went to Mary and Mrs Patmore.

It would only be reasonable if one or two of the other oldies were goners as well, if we are to fast-forward as far as ten years into the future.

Mmm, I see what you mean about making sacrifices. What about Carson? He wouldn't want a long inactive retirement anyway. And Lord Merton - sweet as he is - thought he'd had "a good innings" in 1926. If he were to have died after a few final blissful years with Isobel, surely that would be all right.

But everyone would be older. And we'd be in the boring Thirties. And there'd be Nazis.

Ten years on does sound a lot. Five would do it, surely. On the other hand, ten years on, we'd be able to see Sybbie and George as adolescents, which would be fun - Sybbie would even be old enough for her first crush. The original actors could still convincingly play their characters (except the children, that is!), even if they're a little older - after all, in the first series, most of them acted characters considerably younger than their own age. And the Thirties aren't all about Nazis, Fascists and Communists. It would be dramatically rewarding to see how Mary tries to make as sure of George's safety as she possibly can in the event of a future war (to her father's disgust), but otherwise the film could steer clear of World War Two themes without much effort - Gosford Park did, and that was set in the Thirties too. And thankfully, none of the Downton regulars is much at risk of being seduced by Nazism, or even the homegrown Fascist variety.

By the way, I hope you realise that a Downton Abbey film does not mean that Thomas is going to get any? If there is anyone less likely to score than a gay Yorkshire butler pushing forty in the Twenties, it's a gay Yorkshire butler pushing fifty in the Thirties.

Not necessarily. Look, how does this sound? A corrupt government or army VIP, himself no spring chicken, with influence in recruitment matters promises to make sure George gets a cushy job in the event of a war if Thomas puts out. Thomas, not thinking it too much of a hardship, complies, with Mary's morally anguished encouragement. But the new footman (Andy having left to become a farmer) doesn't care for the arrangement as he's infatuated with Thomas himself, so he shops the VIP to the latter's superior who happens to be the Duke of Crowborough...

Oh, I give up.