So, I was going to blog last week, but had my energy sapped by a week-long heatwave. All right, maybe not just the heatwave. Curiously, I've found it hard to find the motivation to tackle the subject I've lined up, although it's a juicy one: the second, and surely final, Downton film.
Perhaps the subject is a little too juicy. I actually enjoyed Downton Abbey: A New Era more than the first film, but I haven't been looking forward to summarising my thoughts on how the stories for the whole numerous cast of main characters in Downton ended. Therefore, I will dial down the ambition level somewhat, though this is in all probability the last Downton drama we will ever get (unless there's a spin-off set in the future, featuring the Crawley kids as grown-ups and Lady Mary as the new stern matriarch). I'll try concentrating on two aspects: why I prefer this film to the first even though it's essentially lightweight, and why neither of the films lives up to the Downton Abbey series at its best.
I always enjoy rewatching the first Downton Abbey film, but every time I do I get annoyed at the daft "servants insisting on serving the King and Queen and defending Downton's honour" plot. For reasons I explained in my film review, I simply can't buy this. Moreover, we spend an inordinate amount of time on the royal visit, and side-plots connected to it. I didn't think a royal Downton visit was that clever an idea to begin with: it felt like one of the less inspired plot thefts from Upstairs Downstairs (where it was more believable that the then King would pop by). I'm sure the story about Princess Mary and her unhappy marriage is interesting in itself, and I wouldn't have minded seeing more about it in films and TV series about the royal family at the time (The King's Speech, say). But why do we spend time on her in a Downton film, which is already overcrowded with protagonists – the characters we've actually been following for six series? Fellowes did try to connect the King and Queen's visit with what was going on in the lives of Downton residents up- and downstairs, but the conceit felt forced, and if you strip away all the pomp and circumstance, the visit wasn't a very significant event for the main characters of Downton the series.
Downton Abbey: A New Era has a similar problem, in that the two main plotlines – a film crew wants to make a film at Downton Abbey, and the Dowager Countess inherits a French villa from an old beau we've never heard mentioned before – aren't stories that have grown organically, so to speak, from the plots and conflicts we've seen in the series. Like the royal visit, they seem to be there to provide glamorous set pieces around which the characters' personal dramas can unfold. Here, though, I think Fellowes does a better job of integrating the glamorous set-piece plots and the domestic Downton plots. There is at least a little at stake for the main characters. The Earl of Grantham is faced with the possibility that maybe he's not the rightful Earl at all. The film plot may seem only an airy soufflé, but the film crew does threaten to unsettle Lady Mary's family life even as it provides happy endings for other members (and ex-members) of the household.
Yes, there are new characters unconnected to the series present this time around as well, but their interactions with the Downton crowd made it intriguing to follow their dramas. The friendliness of the French nobleman who is convinced that the Earl is his half-brother adds a layer of complication to the situation the Earl finds himself in. The troubles of the female film star whose common accent may bar her from work on the new "talkies" highlight Anna's diplomacy and Daisy's more no-nonsense approach, and which strategy works best in this particular instance. Overall, Daisy has a much more flattering role than in the last film, and for the first time, as we see a glimpse of their married life, I started to believe in her and Andy as a couple. You could argue that in the first film, Princess Mary's rocky marriage provided an opportunity for another Downton character – Tom Branson – to shine, but it had already been established in other side-plots what a good egg he is. He didn't need more to do in the royal set-up.
Downton Abbey: A New Era is by no means perfect. The plotting is sloppy in places, and there are inconsistencies. What happened to Carson's trembling hands (which we didn't see much of in the previous film either)? He retired for a reason, remember. Where did Molesley learn to lip-read? How can Andy be part of a long-term plan to ensure there's a butler at Downton when he's set to take over Mr Mason's tenant farm? Wasn't Henry Talbot done with car racing, and how is him attending races helpful for his and Branson's business? To be fair, an effort is made to provide an "in-universe" explanation for the absence of Lady Mary's husband (Matthew Goode was busy filming elsewhere) and milk it for dramatic effect. Even so, and although Mary insists that marriage is "a novel, not a short story", which leaves us hopeful she and Henry will get through their rough patch, it feels a little sad to leave her story in a less satisfying place than it was in the previous film. Especially, it provides those of us who still ship Mary and Charles Blake with plenty to shake our heads over.
In the end, though, the writing and characterisation is still recognisably Downtonesque, and the Dowager Countess's send-off is given its proper weight, with many touching moments between her and her nearest and dearest. I love the friendship between the Dowager and the former Mrs Crawley, now Lady Merton, and here it comes into play again. The film ends with an event – or strictly two – which have a real impact on life at Downton, and hint at what the future will look like.
I think the reason why the films don't reach the heights of the Downton Abbey TV series in its prime is partly that they are films. Downton Abbey was conceived as an ensemble piece with plenty of time to flesh out the story arcs of each of its main characters during hours of television. It's impossible to give all of the protagonists the same attention in a film, and so some characters slide into the background.
You could argue that the Downton specials did a better job of juggling its cast than the films, but they were part of the TV series context in another way. Stories that had been built up through a whole series of episodes – such as Mary's romance with Matthew and her ill-fated engagement to Sir Richard Carlisle – could get their pay-off in a special. Downton Abbey: A New Era more or less dispenses with the pretence that anyone who hasn't seen the TV series would be interested to watch it: that makes as much sense as if someone who hadn't previously seen a Marvel film would watch Avengers: Endgame. Nevertheless, by having external forces largely unconnected to Downton – the King and Queen, an amorous nobleman, a film crew – drive the plots, the films are more self-contained than the series specials were. I think it's a pity. I would rather have seen stories linked to unresolved plot lines in the TV series – like, say, someone threatening to make Marigold's real parentage known to the world – even if that would mean that newcomers wouldn't have a clue what was going on.
Oh, and the answer to the important question "Is Thomas getting any?" is yes. Thomas love interests are like buses – you wait for ages for one to arrive, and then two turn up at once, or at least in consecutive films. I would have been happy with Ellis from the previous film proving to be Thomas's endgame, but I'm not complaining; at least this way one of my Downton predictions partly comes true. Plus, Dominic West!
