"Gilded Age" Vs. "Downton Abbey"
I was a huge Downton Abbey fan back in the day, initially because of the presence of Maggie Smith and Penelope Wilton. Eventually, I was also won over by the costumes and Carson/Hughes and Mrs Patmore.
I saw the show's flaws, of course. The story lines were usually laughable, with plot holes big enough to drive a chaise-and-four through. The "themes," if they can be dignified with such a term, were simplistic and laid on with a trowel: a) the world is better when the upper classes are in charge and Everyone Knows Their Place, and b) the times, they are a-changin'. Just to be sure you didn't miss this last point, characters said words to this effect at least three times per episode.
In short, I recognized Downton Abbey for the weakly-written, reactionary Tory propaganda that it was, but I enjoyed it all the same.
So when I read about The Gilded Age, a new series by DA's creator Julian Fellowes, I was ready to watch it. It's set in New York City in the 1880s and is clearly intended as an American counterpart to Downton Abbey. I expected that, like its predecessor, it would have silly story lines, many anachronisms, conservative politics, and lots and lots of glorious costumes and wonderful actors. It's got Christine Baranski in the Maggie Smith part. So what's not to love?
A lot, it turns out. I watched the opening episode of The Gilded Age, and it's pretty damned stupid. I knew it was too much to hope for genuine smart writing, so I was prepared for DA-level mediocrity. But the writing in Gilded Age makes DA seem like Shakespeare. As my partner said, "It's as if they gave a bunch of 14-year-olds a two-hour lecture on the Gilded Age and then turned them loose to invent stories about it."
This time, the "theme" is "Old New York money versus New New York money." You know who is Old Money because characters are constantly telling us: "You are Old New York." "We are Old New York." "He is not Old New York." "She will never be Old New York." Oh, and also, Old New York is tasteful and restrained and has learned not to talk through its nose, while New New York wears flashy clothes and often talks like they have a head cold. (What is the show's point? So far, it seems to be, "Old New York is the past. New New York is the future." How do I know this is the point? Because at least two characters said so in the first hour.)
Now, it was clear from DA that Julian Fellowes doesn't know shit about Americans. He resorted to constant stereotypes: his Americans were mostly tacky and nasally; they acted like cowboys and said, "Ah reckon" and "that's real nice" -- no matter what their level of education or region of origin. To judge from this new show, he hasn't learned much about us since.
Given what I've said so far, you probably assume that I'll never watch another minute of this silly program. This conclusion is totally understandable -- except I'm not sure it's true. I mean, yes, the first episode was ridiculous and an insult to viewers' intelligence. Even the CGI was lame.
But. . .Christine Baranski. And a large cast of big Broadway names -- Kelli O'Hara, the fab Audra McDonald, Donna Murphy. And Costumes.
So I may give it one more shot.
I'll leave you with a fun quotation from the New York Times review of The Gilded Age (they hated it): "Julian Fellowes chased his new series, 'The Gilded Age,' for a decade. Call it his white whale. Beginning Monday on HBO, you can watch it drag him and a large, talented cast beneath the waves."
I saw the show's flaws, of course. The story lines were usually laughable, with plot holes big enough to drive a chaise-and-four through. The "themes," if they can be dignified with such a term, were simplistic and laid on with a trowel: a) the world is better when the upper classes are in charge and Everyone Knows Their Place, and b) the times, they are a-changin'. Just to be sure you didn't miss this last point, characters said words to this effect at least three times per episode.
In short, I recognized Downton Abbey for the weakly-written, reactionary Tory propaganda that it was, but I enjoyed it all the same.
So when I read about The Gilded Age, a new series by DA's creator Julian Fellowes, I was ready to watch it. It's set in New York City in the 1880s and is clearly intended as an American counterpart to Downton Abbey. I expected that, like its predecessor, it would have silly story lines, many anachronisms, conservative politics, and lots and lots of glorious costumes and wonderful actors. It's got Christine Baranski in the Maggie Smith part. So what's not to love?
A lot, it turns out. I watched the opening episode of The Gilded Age, and it's pretty damned stupid. I knew it was too much to hope for genuine smart writing, so I was prepared for DA-level mediocrity. But the writing in Gilded Age makes DA seem like Shakespeare. As my partner said, "It's as if they gave a bunch of 14-year-olds a two-hour lecture on the Gilded Age and then turned them loose to invent stories about it."
This time, the "theme" is "Old New York money versus New New York money." You know who is Old Money because characters are constantly telling us: "You are Old New York." "We are Old New York." "He is not Old New York." "She will never be Old New York." Oh, and also, Old New York is tasteful and restrained and has learned not to talk through its nose, while New New York wears flashy clothes and often talks like they have a head cold. (What is the show's point? So far, it seems to be, "Old New York is the past. New New York is the future." How do I know this is the point? Because at least two characters said so in the first hour.)
Now, it was clear from DA that Julian Fellowes doesn't know shit about Americans. He resorted to constant stereotypes: his Americans were mostly tacky and nasally; they acted like cowboys and said, "Ah reckon" and "that's real nice" -- no matter what their level of education or region of origin. To judge from this new show, he hasn't learned much about us since.
Given what I've said so far, you probably assume that I'll never watch another minute of this silly program. This conclusion is totally understandable -- except I'm not sure it's true. I mean, yes, the first episode was ridiculous and an insult to viewers' intelligence. Even the CGI was lame.
But. . .Christine Baranski. And a large cast of big Broadway names -- Kelli O'Hara, the fab Audra McDonald, Donna Murphy. And Costumes.
So I may give it one more shot.
I'll leave you with a fun quotation from the New York Times review of The Gilded Age (they hated it): "Julian Fellowes chased his new series, 'The Gilded Age,' for a decade. Call it his white whale. Beginning Monday on HBO, you can watch it drag him and a large, talented cast beneath the waves."