The short of it is: Who knows? If I had had to answer this question a couple of weeks ago, prior to Dave Itzkoff's (New York Times) interview with Julian Fellowes, I would have said that Downton would conclude after five seasons. After
( Read more... )
DA is his baby. Why WOULDN'T he continue to profit from it, if ITV wants to keep it running forever? I know he doesn't need the money, but if he's addicted to the ratings...
Do you think it's that, though, or is it that ... the fight has gone out of him? I mean it really isn't just his decision any longer and instead of getting embroiled in a long battle ala Matt Weiner and AMC he just ... capitulated? The wind has been taken out of his sails to some extent and yet he has these other exciting projects on the horizon (though I really will be so curious to learn how well he captures the American experience of the Gilded Age, since he's not an American himself). And, of course, as you say, he can continue to make a lot of money at it so why dig in his heels?
He made it clear he would be supervising DA scripts -- if he walked away from even THAT, I think it might make ITV nervous.
See, and I'm afraid it wouldn't make ITV nervous. DA is a proven commodity now; I really don't think they give two cents about the quality or caliber of the show any longer so long as it makes money. ... Carnival I think has more of an interest in the artistic integrity, but neither have as much as JF does (or did). ... My feeling is that the quality will decline significantly before it loses its popularity (there are many examples from network TV here to support this view).
I'm in a minority (which doesn't even include my husband) who thinks they'd continue DA if MD left.
I think you might be right. Not that I think they should mind you. But as you say, it seems to fit with JF's newly formed "tent poles" theory. (Though, LOL, except for Cullen's character, AG, and his valet [maybe a love interest for Thomas finally?], the new cast aren't exactly whippersnappers.)
But that's my post tomorrow.
Well, whenever you get to it, can't wait to read your thoughts!
DA is his baby. Why WOULDN'T he continue to profit from it, if ITV wants to keep it running forever? I know he doesn't need the money, but if he's addicted to the ratings...
Do you think it's that, though, or is it that ... the fight has gone out of him? I mean it really isn't just his decision any longer and instead of getting embroiled in a long battle ala Matt Weiner and AMC he just ... capitulated? The wind has been taken out of his sails to some extent and yet he has these other exciting projects on the horizon (though I really will be so curious to learn how well he captures the American experience of the Gilded Age, since he's not an American himself). And, of course, as you say, he can continue to make a lot of money at it so why dig in his heels?
He made it clear he would be supervising DA scripts -- if he walked away from even THAT, I think it might make ITV nervous.
See, and I'm afraid it wouldn't make ITV nervous. DA is a proven commodity now; I really don't think they give two cents about the quality or caliber of the show any longer so long as it makes money. ... Carnival I think has more of an interest in the artistic integrity, but neither have as much as JF does (or did). ... My feeling is that the quality will decline significantly before it loses its popularity (there are many examples from network TV here to support this view).
I'm in a minority (which doesn't even include my husband) who thinks they'd continue DA if MD left.
I think you might be right. Not that I think they should mind you. But as you say, it seems to fit with JF's newly formed "tent poles" theory. (Though, LOL, except for Cullen's character, AG, and his valet [maybe a love interest for Thomas finally?], the new cast aren't exactly whippersnappers.)
But that's my post tomorrow.
Well, whenever you get to it, can't wait to read your thoughts!
Reply
Leave a comment