The Gilded Age

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reviews are quite good, maybe it gets better?

Probably the reviewers are more interested in pretty costumes than watching a proper historical show.

We've lost the ability to capture the past mores and metaphysical relationships with their cultures and societies and that's why today's historical productions are so lacking. All you have to do is to watch the great BBC productions from the 1970s and 1980s into the 1990s to see how bad today's productions are. A big part of it really has to do with that today's directors are afraid to show the past as it was, including the pervasive social and racial discriminations that people took for granted as part of ordinary everyday lives and actions and thoughts and conversations. They'd rather invent an alternative history like Bridgerton. But even in Bridgerton they fail because such a society could only exist with stringent social and class divides that people wore as a second skin.

We can compare Downton Abbey to Upstairs Downstairs of the 1970s to see the difference. It's not a question of whether Downton is too nice and there is a risk, as some directors make, in treating the past as some sort of monster suffering and oppression porn and wanting to get their revenge by tossing in feisty feminists to teach people a lesson or two, but people genuinely did think differently and it affected how they related to just about everything. An excellent example would be Jeremy Brett's Sherlock series, made in the 1980s by BBC. They are not high budget productions like the recent movies, but capture the zeitgeist of the 19th century about as well as it's ever been done because it so accurately portrays the interplay among the classes and genders of British society in a way that is so natural and believable because it is done without exaggeration or attempts at moralizing or imposing a modern sensibility of right and wrong. When Brett's Holmes interviews a lowly maid, his mannerism and language are respectful enough, but it is still different than interviewing a grand titled lady. He is not servile to the latter, but he intuitively understands the expectations required of him by the context he lives in and it is reflected in the mannerism. Brett, and his fellow actors, understood the need to get into the 19th century skin without passing judgment. Today's actors can't - or aren't allowed to.

This is so spot on. Brilliant analysis.

Agreed. And can be applied to most anything in life now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like it. It's a slow burn, but we are enjoying.

I agree, and think it really picked up with episode 3.

Yes, finally it got interesting in Episode 3. And Episode was also very good. Finally looking forward to next episodes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like it. It's a slow burn, but we are enjoying.

I agree, and think it really picked up with episode 3.

Yes, finally it got interesting in Episode 3. And Episode was also very good. Finally looking forward to next episodes.

I will add, to me it's the dialogue. So stilted. I think in Downton they got away with more modern cadences and dialogue because just by virtue of the British accent it sounded sophisticated and/or old. Without that, they are relying on a older way of speaking. I hated it in An Age of Innocence too. Though it wasn't as bad there as it is here.

[Anonymous]

Renewed for season 2 already!

[Anonymous]

The governess in the bedroom was some of the cringiest, awful tv I've seen in a while!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The governess in the bedroom was some of the cringiest, awful tv I've seen in a while!

Talk about gratuitous nude scene. Even Mr Russell wanted her covered up when he threw the blanket over her

[Anonymous]

Cynthia Nixon in the pumpkin is lost scene is some of the worst acting I’ve ever seen. Terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cynthia Nixon in the pumpkin is lost scene is some of the worst acting I’ve ever seen. Terrible.

She's terribly miscast in the role.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The governess in the bedroom was some of the cringiest, awful tv I've seen in a while!

Talk about gratuitous nude scene. Even Mr Russell wanted her covered up when he threw the blanket over her

Agreed! And why he hasn't had her fired, really instead of lame excuse he gave, means plot wise they are going to do something underhanded with her. A man who is supposedly so smart would not make such a rookie mistake if the writers weren't setting something up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The governess in the bedroom was some of the cringiest, awful tv I've seen in a while!

Talk about gratuitous nude scene. Even Mr Russell wanted her covered up when he threw the blanket over her

Agreed! And why he hasn't had her fired, really instead of lame excuse he gave, means plot wise they are going to do something underhanded with her. A man who is supposedly so smart would not make such a rookie mistake if the writers weren't setting something up.

Yes, it was absurd that he didn't fire her! How is showing up naked in your boss's bed not a fireable offence?!

[Anonymous]

I just watch for the dresses and the dress game was in fire. Of course the red concert dress but also that blue and white bird dress. Gorgeous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The governess in the bedroom was some of the cringiest, awful tv I've seen in a while!

Talk about gratuitous nude scene. Even Mr Russell wanted her covered up when he threw the blanket over her

Agreed! And why he hasn't had her fired, really instead of lame excuse he gave, means plot wise they are going to do something underhanded with her. A man who is supposedly so smart would not make such a rookie mistake if the writers weren't setting something up.

Yes, it was absurd that he didn't fire her! How is showing up naked in your boss's bed not a fireable offence?!

Because he now has something for leverage over her. He’s going to force her to put Oscar or another suitor of Gladys into a compromising position to weed out unscrupulous motives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just watch for the dresses and the dress game was in fire. Of course the red concert dress but also that blue and white bird dress. Gorgeous.

Loved that too! I am now obsessed with figuring out what these people look like in modern day. Is it shiny clothing and non natural fabrics? From my modern context Bertha's clothes are pretty, but I know for the time it was likely gauche.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cynthia Nixon in the pumpkin is lost scene is some of the worst acting I’ve ever seen. Terrible.

She's terribly miscast in the role.

I am a pet owner, but she was so f8cking annoying I hoped the dog would never be found.

My favorite scene in the series was when their butler(?) went over to the New Money house. He basically did the southern matron's, "Bless your heart, you set that table in such an interesting fashion." Hope those two have more interactions, the New Money butler seemed open to learning the Old Way of doing things.

The servants are much better cast & written than the employers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cynthia Nixon in the pumpkin is lost scene is some of the worst acting I’ve ever seen. Terrible.

She's terribly miscast in the role.

I am a pet owner, but she was so f8cking annoying I hoped the dog would never be found.

My favorite scene in the series was when their butler(?) went over to the New Money house. He basically did the southern matron's, "Bless your heart, you set that table in such an interesting fashion." Hope those two have more interactions, the New Money butler seemed open to learning the Old Way of doing things.

The servants are much better cast & written than the employers.

The cook (gambler) is not a good actress.