Downton Abbey and the Grace of the Agitated Allegorical Swan
Depending on which version of the story you believe, the English started using the term “my cup of tea” sometime in the 1800s and always in the positive tense. It was only in the 1920s that the more negative “not my cup of tea” entered the lexicon as a rejection of something. Which is fitting, since the film version of Downton Abbey finds the story now well into the 1920s. With its widest audience and attention ever, folks are deciding again whether the trials of the Crawley family & staff are worth their time and attention. If taking the number one slot at the weekend box office — despite having fewer screens showing than its two main competitors — the return of the beloved show is still very much folks’ cup of tea.
Just how it is that machinations of English country life became an international phenomenon first as a TV show, and now as a feature film, is rather amazing. There was little chance the show would be a failure, with the pedigree of those involved, but few saw it becoming what it now is. Creator Julian Fellowes won an Oscar for screenwriting penning Gosford Park, and in it’s embryonic stages Downton was envisioned as being a spin off of that film’s success. Thankfully, that idea morphed into the stand-alone world of Downton Abbey. The ITV series debuted to UK audiences before it crossed the pond to America as part of Masterpiece Classic on PBS. Normally PBS is not a ratings juggernaut, but the show none the less worked its way into American homes through word-of-mouth, critical acclaim, and in later seasons awards and praise. By the time the show ended its run over the holidays in 2015, it was beloved. Talk of a movie started almost immediately, and now here we are.
That is the how, the timeline of Downton, from pen to page to screen to theater. Of course, what made Downton Abbey a success wasn’t just the expertise with which it was created, but the emotional chords it hit. Putting it on the big screen just amplifies what Downton Abbey is, and isn’t. It’s the anti-blockbuster, plot-wise the polar opposite of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Tony Stark and company find those little, quiet emotional moments, backdropped to the CGI assault superheroes need when saving the world and tying up the plot lines of 23 movies, that contrast all of the over-the-top loud with gut-wrenching emotion in key quiet parts. It is the secret sauce that makes those films, and any film really, successful in connecting with an audience.
Downton Abbey is the opposite. When the busy-as-can-be servants hear, along with the audience, the line “A royal visit is like a swan on a lake; Beauty and grace above, demented kicking below,” from one of the visiting royal staff, it could just as easily be about the series and film itself. Downton’s genteel primness is the outer layer of beauty and grace, backdropped with the splendid Highclere Castle and gorgeous English countryside that oozes from the screen as much as it’s watched. The lush visuals, and soaring musical score, make it almost too postcard-ish sometimes. All that quiet emotive stuff is on top, with the action furiously kicking below the surface like that agitated allegorical swan.
But that furiously kicking stuff is also where the human moments shine brightest against the grandeur and reel it all back in. You can watch the film as a standalone, and go into it with no knowledge at all of the characters and be fine. Fellowes is as a good a screenwriter as there is, and being in his wheelhouse here he makes sure most of them get their moments. But those who know the show get their own, extra layer to it all. There are not a lot of plot surprises, and indeed it teeters toward the predictable for the hardcore fans. The accusation of fanservice can fairly be leveled, but that rings hollow when it’s the fandom that propelled the need for more period drama from this ensemble in the first place. Those whose cup of tea this isn’t can find it all very corny. Those who think this tea is just right enjoy sipping with a smile as they raise a pinky, realizing the stuff and nonsense of Carson spouting lines like “Wherever my king needs me” while overtly puffing out his chest not as a metaphor but more as an in-joke to a thoroughly developed character, has just enough self-awareness to keep it on the endearing side of the ridiculous line.
That balance is maintained by the emotional strings that Fellowes manages to play, not unlike the strings the orchestra in the ballroom scenes used to bracket lots of dancing, lots of looks between characters, lots of drama that is more hinted at than exposited. Downton Abbey, even in the big screen version, is still best sipped and savored with enough self-awareness stirred in so that the over-the-top lushness of it all manages to hold to some semblance of level. Plenty will point out the class issues that get glossed over, and the romanticization of the upper class and royal families. But even that gets subtly poked at by the still insufferable Lady Mary declaring that the stopping of rain for the royal festivities is proof that God is a monarchist. Far from a religious statement, it’s more a statement of fact that things just need to be a certain way because they need to be, to keep everything just so.
Which is how revisiting the world of Downton Abbey feels; everything is how it needs to be because it’s the way it has to be to still be Downton. Fellowes trods the old paths because we need him too, because the story needs to, because it would be something else if he didn’t. Something lesser. Something that isn’t an escape from the current world, where the trials of modernizing Edwardians trying to survive both the visit of George V and the relentless march of time. Something that lets us obsess over their problems to forget our own for a while. Downton Abbey by the end of the film is vastly different than the one that received a telegram announcing the sinking of the Titanic at the launching of the series. The world is quite different as well. But with Highclere Castle playing its role perfectly, by just looking stately in the wide shots, lets Carson’s closing line about it all lasting another 100 years feels more like he’s talking to us than the house behind him. Some things pass away, like the grand living of the aristocracy in the English countryside and the trials and tribulations of those who propped them up, because they were unsustainable in a changing world. But the humanity of a struggle not against change — which even the characters of Downton have come to realize is futile — but of adapting to change as best you can whatever your station in life, is the plot of life. That is the eternal drama of the human experience regardless of your wealth or title, the same path from birth to death everyone trods whether they like it or not, whether server or served, whether they like tea or not.
Maybe a hundred years from now a talented writer will pen a series about folks in America who, during a turbulent time, enjoyed an English period drama that moved slowly, talked grandly, and kept the crazy below the surface and mostly downstairs. Mostly. Imagine doing that in real time in the real world, in our day and age, handling the ins and outs of life in a way that our friend the agitated swan could be an allegory for us. Some folks would find that kind of restraint corny, or old-fashioned, or even boring. But all that boring, old-fashioned, corny stuff is the number one movie in America right now, so the argument and audience for the Swan method of drama management wins the day at least for now. There are far worse ways of doing things than to be graceful to look at, calm on the surface, no matter how demented the kicking below gets. If only we could do the same for all the drama in our lives. Wouldn’t that just be everyone’s cup of tea, even if the Downton Abbey version of drama isn’t?
I have the minority opinion (though my stating it usually provokes some agreeing comments) that the writing is just terrible. The acting runs from OK to superb. The setting is gorgeous. But the writing would be embarrassing in an afternoon soap opera. Making the inevitable Upstairs Downstairs comparison, the cheesy Titanic story line was a low point, which they wisely moved away from. In Downton Abbey, the cheesy Titanic story line is the starting point. I watched the first season and started the second, but couldn’t take it anymore.Report
I was ok with the Titanic thing as a cultural touch point to start from, they didnt reAlly dwell on it and while a cheap pop does give the average person a reference point. My low point in the writing, criticism wise, was actually the main character of Mary, who is so annoying through most of the series. Where other characters got development and growth arcs she seemed to just wallow in the same flaws she started with and Mary Jane’d her way to greatness and hot husband, and so on and so on with no consequences or change. Report
I’m an even smaller minority who thinks that the (early) shows by Julian Fellowes that were attempting to present a sympathetic Lord Grantham as a principled Peer would have been far more interesting than the eventual bathetic Peer he became.
We lost interest somewhere in season 2 on account of all that.Report
I’ve never seen any of Downton Abbey, but have been curious how it compared to Upstairs Downstairs , which I saw quite a bit of. So, thanks for that comparison.Report
Downton Abbey has far higher production values, and hired some top acting talent. But Upstairs Downstairs had better writing. It was far from consistently good–recall when Mrs. Bridge’s kidnapped a baby–but it was generally pretty good, and I think handled the issue of class better. Upstairs Downstairs was appointment television for my mother–the one show where we were only allowed in the room on pledge of silence. I watched it about ten years ago, and was impressed at how well it stood up.Report
They did make a lot of episodes without Lesley-Anne Down. No idea what they were thinking.Report
I’m inclined to be one of the agreeing comments. I didn’t see the movie, but I watched all the episodes. There was so much more that the show could have been. But at least in America (don’t know about the UK or the rest of the Anglosphere), it seemed to mostly have the “they’re speaking in British accents, so it’s a masterpiece theatre classic” cachet.
On the other hand, I *did* watch all the episodes, so it must’ve done something for me.Report
I watched the first two seasons and then found it boring. The main fans for Downtown Abby are women over the age of 35 and this is not a group normally courted by movie studios. I took a film history course in college and the statistic I learned is that teenage and twenty-something boys have been the prime movie audience since the silents and therefore often the most courted to.
The notable thing is that Downton beat Rambo which is more of the traditional blockbuster movie.Report
This may be the best written review of anything ever. It’s superb Andrew.
That said, there are apparently people here who don’t know that later seasons of Downton Abbey have murder, car racing, infidelity, more murder, hidden bastard offspring, and electricity. They’re missing out.
For me, the lowest point of the series came when they botched the audio. I can’t remember what season or episodes it was, but the effect was jarring. Instead of having top notch, movie-quality scoring, somebody started cutting the orchestral music at the end of one scene, switching to a completely different piece of orchestral music to start the next scene, only a second later.
Normally one scene of Downton blends in to another as if Spielberg and John Williams sweated over the cut. But due to the audio change, it suddenly had a soap opera feel, as if scenes are being spliced together willy-nilly to rush them out the door. Instead of an immersive viewing experience, a lush, high-budget, top quality production that could lead on Netflix or HBO, it felt like some low budget rerun on TV Land. I’m sure other viewers must have noticed and complained.
But the movie we all really want to see is when Thomas and Arthur Shelby from the Peaky Blinders visit Downton Abbey, perhaps offering to buy it, perhaps seducing Lady Mary, or perhaps just killing everybody. Whatever happened, seeing them all sharing the same screen would be a brain twisting experience, since Peaky Blinders is Downton Abbey for thugs and retrobates.
*retrobate: A person who would have loved being a reprobate in the past. Retrobates underpin the economic viability of amusement parks like West World.Report
More crossovers:
Scored with Petula Clark songs: Downtown Abbey.
Scored with Beatles songs: Downton Abbey Road.
With Marty Feldman as Igor the underbutler: Downton Abbey NormalReport
They could make a fortune if the characters could do commercials for any of those bizarre UK brands. with one of the maids bragging about their sheets, one of the cooks talking up Kerrygold Irish butter, or Lady Mary sipping a particular English tea. Lord Grantham’s seal of approval would probably be as lucrative as the Queens.Report
I figured out my problem with the overall arc of Downton Abbey.
I did like it, quite a bit, especially at the beginning. Yes it was soapy, and the resolutions always a bit too pat, but as said by others above, the acting and (yes) the writing (as well as of course costume and set design) made everything greater than the sum of its parts.
The problem I have is that over the course of six seasons, everyone became a diggit lifer.
Now, I don’t have a problem with diggit lifers. *I* was a diggit lifer. But not everyone should be a diggit lifer. Especially those who don’t want to be diggit lifers *and* that have opportunity not to be diggit lifers.
I don’t really expect ( and definitely don’t want) a scathing Marxist critique of UK class structures as the Edwardian era passed into the war & interwar years – but for the golden age of television, the show was remarkably unambitious.
The inciting incident of the Titanic sinking was a great narrative and thematic hook, as it symbolizes the end of ‘innocent’ industrialization and the start of mechanized and social forces that would upend the world order over the course of the next 4 decades.
But after the war, they never went anywhere with it. The show ends with dumb luck allowing everyone to live in a manner (and in a manor) little changed from a generation before. When in fact everything was changing, and the transformation was ongoing.
Shorter me – I wish the arc of the show would see them through the Depression and 2nd World War and perhaps end with QE2’s coronation as the bridge to the ‘modern’ UK.
Shorter shorter me – a lot more people needed to go to America, one fewer person needed to die.
Nonetheless, will be seeing this movie this weekend (for almost certainly more than 6 bucks a ticket).Report
I guess my view is that the show was actually less than, instead of greater than, the sum of its parts. Maybe the writing is better than what Richard (and I) gave it credit for up above, but the show’s failure to do what shorter you (and I) would have preferred means, for me, that things just didn’t line up very well for the show.Report
My wife is a huge fan of the show, and I must admit it hooked me, too. She’s also a fan of The Crown, which I watch with her.
Both shows cause me to marvel that the British people put up with these aristocratic layabouts.Report
https://youtu.be/1khDR7yzZ0I
This SNL skit from last night is on point, but I still think in good fun.
There are tbf 2 ‘high stakes’ plot lines imo, one of which is executed well (Thomas’s) one of which is not (Branson’s)Report