S06.E08: Season 6, Episode 8

[ZoloftBlob]

I haven't really tracked all the hate Fellowes supposedly has for Dan Stevens, but I wonder if the uber Mary-centricity of post-Matthew Downton was Fellowes trying to prove that Mary/Matthew's success had been more Dockery than Stevens. He never really wrote another guy in his own right. Long arcs for other "upstairs" leads went down the toilet. All of Rose's romances were never meant to be long term, unlike Sybil's, for example, and when she did meet Mr. Right they rushed it through and her off the show. It wasn't a real story. And we all know what happened to Greggson. The show was always a lot Mary-centric, but there were longer term stories that were explored, and that disappeared once Stevens left.

 

Without getting too deep into it - I think a lot of the hate was fairly onesided. I get why Fellowes was angry - I really do, because it fracked the storyline, but shows do recover from such things. Fellowes's response went over board on several levels to where it hurt the show... and you outline exactly why. Season four five and six became all about Mary and her interchangable, essentially indentical man dolls. Tony is Charles is Henry - there's some *height* difference but you could put any one of them in the scene of "I've got the wedding liscence and I'll make your life hell until you agree to wed" because Tony/Charles/Henry was just a pole for Mary to slide on. You're right - Fellowes never wrote another male character seperate from "a suitor for Mary". It wasn't the actors to blame.

[MissLucas]

I've never heard of that (one-sided) feud before but given how badly things turned out writing-wise it does make sense. But what's a show-runner got to do if the male lead wants out? I was trying to think of similar scenarios where the show managed to course-correct. Unfortunately only TGW comes to mind and while Will's death sparked the show's best season what followed afterwards has so far been just a downward spiral.

[DeccaMitford]

 

No, no. I'd take the bitch over the sad one every single day. Life would be more awful, but definitely more interesting.

 

See, this I get. It's not my taste, but I know there are people who feel this way. The problem is this isn't what happened on screen.

If one of Mary's suitors was shown to see all of Mary's bad qualities and really relish them, and look forward to marriage to the unpleasant piece of work that she is BECAUSE she's that way and it's exciting to him, that would be one thing. People who love the drama of living with very difficult people exist, no question, and a guy like that could potentially be perfect for Mary (in a twisted way). But all of her suitors (really, including Matthew) either don't seem to notice Mary's hard edges, or they insist that that's not the real her, and that the real Mary Crawley is a lovely, soft, kind woman really.

The relationship with Richard Carlyle was a bad one, but he was the only person who seemed to want Mary for all of her, including the bad parts. When she asked why he wanted to marry her, he replied that they were alike, both hard and sharp. Cold and careful. If he ever found out about what Mary did to Edith in this episode, he'd probably say "well done."

I also think that Edith's mopiness gets really overstated. Why wouldn't she be worried about telling Bertie about Marigold? Illegitimacy and sex outside of marriage was a huge deal at the time. It seems like a pretty reasonable thing to worry about to me.

[Andorra]

I agree, that it was not seen on screen. It was just my personal explanation why I can't get excited over Edith and love Mary more, even though she's bitchy. The whole suitor spam was ridiculous. Did you watch the spoof Rob James Collier did? Downton Wars 1 and Downton wars 2? You can find it on the tube. 

 

There's one scene with Mary sitting on the bench talking about her many suitors and Thomas keeps looking on his watch, because it is so boring, LOL.

Edited November 13, 2015 by Andorra

[SusanSunflower]

 

No, no. I'd take the bitch over the sad one every single day. Life would be more awful, but definitely more interesting.

This is why I compare Mary to Scarlett O'Hara ... just not nearly as entertaining ... Melanie was the saintly one ... To expand on the parallels, it would have been entertaining if Mary had "fallen hard" for some saintly but spineless man, like Ashley Wilkes ... 

[shipperx]

Sybil was the Saint of the family, though.

Mary was the Scarlet, though not the fiery type. She is a bit like Katherine Hepburn's Tracey in The Philadelphia Story, always playing the untouchable goddess, but without a Carey Grant to both call her on it and love her while recognizing she wasn't as flawless as she likes to think. (That would leave Edith as Dinah, Tracy's sister who was left observing but mostly ignored).

Edited November 13, 2015 by shipperx

[sark1624]

I dont want to sound offensive to the womans on this thread (please consider that english its not my first language), but i think that the majority of Mary´s fan are womans who would like to be like her, i mean, a woman cold a "bitchy" that all the men fall in love and finally always have a happy ending. The reality (as a man) that kind of woman are striking only in the first moments but in the end after knowing her a little more, you probably fell dissapointed because any thing that you do never is enough and you always risk being hurt in a very cruel way, also i am not talking about the "macho ego". An example is when Mary mocks about Bertie being boring to an olympic degree, or that is bad enough beeing a estate manager, or that Matthew is only a country lawyer, etc. Could you think if your partner says and thinks about you, your career, is your vocation without feeling hurt? The normal thinking of a men is like: who does that b*tch think she is to treat me in that way? 

 

Please, with this i am not defending a misogynistic point of view about how a relation should be, but in the end if you love some one the quesstion is not so romantic is like: can be this woman be my partner for the rest of my life? In the case of Mary my answer is no, she can be to much hurtfull to anothers, i would feel terrible embarrased if my girlfriend do or say  things motivated by jelaousy or her ussual snobbery in her usual talks to anothers or to me. In the other side Edith is more warmer, sure is more pasive and can say or made stupid things but is the exception not the rule like Mary. And even Bertie recognized that she can help him to be a better man and Edith made some comments about that him is not a failure as a person, that talk is heartwarming to both sides. Mary has too much pride to prise her partner or to say something like that to others, even Matthew seems to be in test every day of the relation. 

 

I think that Mary is supposed to be the next Violet, but the are thousands of differences betwen them, Violet really show a "grand lady" facade but in reality is the member of the family who moore do things for anothers and not only the direct people who knows,  and when she do that she always tries in a way that nobody knows that is her. example: let molesley father win, keeping out molesley and william from conscription, bringin William to the house when he was wounded, talking with Travis to allow him be married with Daisy, help molesley son to find job and money later, hiring the young gardener and apologizing to him. In conclusion that your left hand does not know what your right hand is doing. Mary many years far away of that.  

[skyways]

The relationship with Richard Carlyle was a bad one, but he was the only person who seemed to want Mary for all of her, including the bad parts. When she asked why he wanted to marry her, he replied that they were alike, both hard and sharp. Cold and careful. If he ever found out about what Mary did to Edith in this episode, he'd probably say "well done."

 

*clapclap* He would probably go on to say ( with tongue-in-cheek reproach), 'Although you would have warned Bertie it was coming. Poor chap!'. And then opened his newspaper. lol. I can definitely see that.

To be fair though, Blake at least confessed that 'he couldn't work her out', once he understood her type was the type to keep men in thrall even when she was not really into them as she leads them to think. He at least ran for dear life.

I think Season 4 was the beginning of what I thought was a chance to move Mary forward, if indeed Fellowes was stubbornly insisting that Matthew leaving did not sink his series. She now had a baby and part of the Estate to run (did she not basically fight a proxy war in Season 1 with Matthew over this?) Now he's gone I wanted to see what she was made of (and what I saw was not pleasant). The suitor or suitors should have been introduced late Season 4 and whoever Fellowes intended should have been made to sign the 2yr contract to remain to the very end and written IN HIS OWN RIGHT. Some say that because Blake and Tony were also landed peers it made them ineligible but it could have worked FOR ANY OF THEM, if written right especially with Blake who didn't actually live the aristocratic life and had a job.

By the way if Fellowes was really into the suitors line for Mary, just 2 would have worked just fine. Just one even better.

Edited November 13, 2015 by skyways

[skyways]

Love your whole post Saki. I was just about to type ' can the guys on the board weigh in on the Mary trait so-called attractiveness?' Thanks for your thoughts. Yes I'm a lady and I do prefer Mary but I stopped caring for her character after her cruelty and unfeelingness to Edith in the haircut scene and subsequently to Tony for leading him on. Yes as a dramatic character she's more interesting to watch but the over- coldness and harshness is not interesting for me to watch.

I see Edith having a happier life than her life with Talbott. I completely see her waking one day and saying to him ,' I do love you in my own way but I was harangued into actually marrying you. It's not turned out the way I had hoped because we have nothing in common'.

Edited November 13, 2015 by skyways

[Andorra]

I don't think Mary is far away of doing that. Right out of my head I can find many instances where Mary was helpful to the people she loved. In season 1 she saw that William knew about his dying mother and sent him home, she spoke for Tom Branson when Robert wanted to sack him over the bielection disaster,, she helped Lavinia in season 2 even though Lavinia was her rival for Matthew, she went to Carlisle and told him about Pamuk so the Bates could no longer be blackmailed by Vera, she kept Sybil's secret even though she didn't approve of Sybil wanting to marry Tom Branson, she nursed Matthew when he came home wounded, she tried to cheer him up and keep him entertained when he was depressed in his wheelchair, she visited Carson when he was ill, she tried to mend fences between her father and Sybil, she supported Sybbie being christened Catholic, she supported Tom when he brought is brother at the Abbey for the Christening, she talked to Jack Ross about Rose and ultimately saved her from Scandal, she supported Tom wherever she could, she told Tony to sack Greene, she told her father to let Thomas go to America instead of Bates, so he could be there for Anna, she destroyed (what she thought was) the evidence for Bates being the murderer of Greene, she went to visit Anna in prison, she helped Anna when she found out that Anna had trouble having a Baby and even paid for the doctor, she went with her to London when Anna was in pain, she wanted to help Carson to have a beautiful wedding (even though it backfired) she visited Thomas after his suicide attempt.

 

All just things that just pop into my head. 

[RedWolf]

Sybil was the Saint of the family, though.

Mary was the Scarlet, though not the fiery type. She is a bit like Katherine Hepburn's Tracey in The Philadelphia Story, always playing the untouchable goddess, but without a Carey Grant to both call her on it and love her while recognizing she wasn't as flawless as she likes to think. (That would leave Edith as Dinah, Tracy's sister who was left observing but mostly ignored).

IMO Tom is her Carey Grant even if his love is only platonic.

I don't think Mary is far away of doing that. Right out of my head I can find many instances where Mary was helpful to the people she loved. In season 1 she saw that William knew about his dying mother and sent him home, she spoke for Tom Branson when Robert wanted to sack him over the bielection disaster,, she helped Lavinia in season 2 even though Lavinia was her rival for Matthew, she went to Carlisle and told him about Pamuk so the Bates could no longer be blackmailed by Vera, she kept Sybil's secret even though she didn't approve of Sybil wanting to marry Tom Branson, she nursed Matthew when he came home wounded, she tried to cheer him up and keep him entertained when he was depressed in his wheelchair, she visited Carson when he was ill, she tried to mend fences between her father and Sybil, she supported Sybbie being christened Catholic, she supported Tom when he brought is brother at the Abbey for the Christening, she talked to Jack Ross about Rose and ultimately saved her from Scandal, she supported Tom wherever she could, she told Tony to sack Greene, she told her father to let Thomas go to America instead of Bates, so he could be there for Anna, she destroyed (what she thought was) the evidence for Bates being the murderer of Greene, she went to visit Anna in prison, she helped Anna when she found out that Anna had trouble having a Baby and even paid for the doctor, she went with her to London when Anna was in pain, she wanted to help Carson to have a beautiful wedding (even though it backfired) she visited Thomas after his suicide attempt.

 

All just things that just pop into my head. 

And this is why I love Mary even if she is a nasty scheming jealous b****

I see Edith having a happier life than her life with Talbott. I completely see her waking one day and saying to him ,' I do love you in my own way but I was harangued into actually marrying you. It's not turned out the way I had hoped because we have nothing in common'.

And this is why I don't think that Mary's wedding was a 'happy ending'

[sark1624]

I agree with you about Mary helping others, but if we see careful, most of Mary helping others was in season 1-3, after season 4 the characther had become in a cartoon of "cold lady". And many of that actions are related to her also (please, i am not saying that she is a troll), but in the end the i would like to have a evening with Tom, Edith, Robert that in comparison with Mary or Carson. Violet helping others is a constant throw the all seasons. 

Edited November 13, 2015 by sark1624

[Andorra]

 

she talked to Jack Ross about Rose and ultimately saved her from Scandal, she supported Tom wherever she could, she told Tony to sack Greene, she told her father to let Thomas go to America instead of Bates, so he could be there for Anna, she destroyed (what she thought was) the evidence for Bates being the murderer of Greene, she went to visit Anna in prison, she helped Anna when she found out that Anna had trouble having a Baby and even paid for the doctor, she went with her to London when Anna was in pain, she wanted to help Carson to have a beautiful wedding (even though it backfired) she visited Thomas after his suicide attempt.

 

These incidents were all season 4, 5 and 6. 

[sark1624]

Sorry my mistake for not explaining enought myself, but i was trying to explain her way of behaviour. Also i never said on this or another posts that Mary is completely selfish and Edith is mother Theresa. But the attitude of Mary after season 4 until now is more nasty, those are good examples of her good nature that she has, but her constant bullying of Edith or negatives comments about other people are also there. And as a man i find hard to believe that all the man fell in love inmediatily with her, in fact i think that the show should had been explored the side of at least one man who likes her in the beggining goes away after seeing some of her bad behaviour to others. 

[Andorra]

I think people are different and search for different things in their partners. I think Matthew was very happy with Mary and I think Tom would have been happy with her, too. Tom has been her best friend for years now, she has supported him and he has supported her. They have treated each other with honesty and - as we saw last episode - even can fight very passionately without it affecting the base of their relationship. We didn't see Mary sulk afterwards or refusing to talk to Tom. The fight had cleared the air, but it didn't destroy their mutual love for each other. 

 

IMO Tom and Mary is written as a good and healthy, loving relationship. Unfortunately the best "marriage" in the show isn't a marriage and I doubt the real marriage between Henry and Mary will ever compare. 

Edited November 13, 2015 by Andorra

[sark1624]

That´s true, i am not mary hater, in fact the ideal plot it would have been wait a little in the history and in that time Tom could have been "washed up" by entering to politics. For that reason i also wanted that he lived with Isobel and be the replacement of Matthew in that sense, and also it could made him more stronger, beeing the bff of Mary was a waste. Even Tom looked to another site when Mary did or said nasty things to others, i think the last one with Edith was the breaking point.

[DianeDobbler]

Honestly, as to the last couple of episodes, I have never seen more WTF since Mad Men had Betty get cancer in the penultimate episode, while Don is on the road, his daughter carrying the burden. Don had spent most of the season being Don, with an essential difference - he was showing up for his kids. He may have been wanting to go on the road, but when he did, his kids knew where he was and he knew the details of their lives. It set up for him to come back and step up after Betty's diagnosis, finally be a grown man and real father. Instead, in the finale, his growth was dismissed, and the writers were all,  well yeah, Betty's diagnosis was a thing, and his kids forlorn situation was a thing (faced with the prospect of living with Betty's misery-guts brother and sister-in-law), but, well, there's this big finale with Don, an EST seminar and coke on the horizon, so we'll blow past that. If you read even the most astute reviewers of Mad Men, EVERYBODY read the penultimate episode as setting up Don and his kids. It had been earned. 

 

But pfffft. It wasn't really a story the showrunner was telling at all. He was filling time, preoccupied with the same existential stuff that had preoccupied him all along.

 

Likewise, everything here set up for Mary, who truly had been softening this past season, even towards Edith, coming to learn that even those closest to her feared the damage she'd do to Edith if she learned about Marigold, and they ALL kept it from her, down to her personal maid. Turns out to be nothing but cheap misdirection. Perhaps there was a way to play it so that we really felt Mary's misery over Henry, so that we saw that it wasn't really the Mary she is today, but a momentary regression out of heartache. That would work. All that damage, and she didn't mean it. She really really didn't. But, the pain was not authentic (the Henry relationship satirizes itself and is well-satirized in that Robert James Collier/Michelle Dockery "Downton Wars" bit), and Mary's take down of Edith was done with calculated cruelty. WTF.

[Ravenya003]

don't think Mary is far away of doing that. Right out of my head I can find many instances where Mary was helpful to the people she loved. In season 1 she saw that William knew about his dying mother and sent him home, she spoke for Tom Branson when Robert wanted to sack him over the bielection disaster,, she helped Lavinia in season 2 even though Lavinia was her rival for Matthew, she went to Carlisle and told him about Pamuk so the Bates could no longer be blackmailed by Vera, she kept Sybil's secret even though she didn't approve of Sybil wanting to marry Tom Branson, she nursed Matthew when he came home wounded, she tried to cheer him up and keep him entertained when he was depressed in his wheelchair, she visited Carson when he was ill, she tried to mend fences between her father and Sybil, she supported Sybbie being christened Catholic, she supported Tom when he brought is brother at the Abbey for the Christening, she talked to Jack Ross about Rose and ultimately saved her from Scandal, she supported Tom wherever she could, she told Tony to sack Greene, she told her father to let Thomas go to America instead of Bates, so he could be there for Anna, she destroyed (what she thought was) the evidence for Bates being the murderer of Greene, she went to visit Anna in prison, she helped Anna when she found out that Anna had trouble having a Baby and even paid for the doctor, she went with her to London when Anna was in pain, she wanted to help Carson to have a beautiful wedding (even though it backfired) she visited Thomas after his suicide attempt.

 

 

 

The interesting thing about this list is what I find interesting about Mary: she is utterly devoted to a small handful of people (namely Sybil, Carson, Anna and Matthew) and doesn't really give two shits about anyone else. She's not heartless, as she's really really devoted to these people. 

 

So I truly hope that the CS will have at its heart the relationship between Mary/Edith and Mary FINALLY bringing Edith into that little circle of people. That would go a long way to rectify some of her behaviour in this episode, which I hope (in hindsight) was just clumsily making Mary do something truly awful so she can get a big redemption arc in the Grand Finale.

[DianeDobbler]

Well, two of the people Mary was devoted to are dead, and the other two are in service, an extremely unequal relationship and Mary never does forget that (sending Anna to get her birth control, no matter how Anna later decided it was all right, she was initially uncomfortable).

 

Thinking about post-Matthew casting. If I were a show runner I would actually do as Fellowes did. I most definitely would not settle on ONE actor and write him for two years in his own right. So much depends on chemistry. I know we all like or dislike individual actors and have opinions about what would have happened with the candidates if Fellowes had picked one, but I thought they were all weak beer, or whatever the expression is. IMO none of them looked right, they were all the same sort, they could have played each other's parts. That's more than writing. They were all pallid masculine versions of Mary. I do think that has to do with the casting, even though the writing was bad. I keep remembering how absolutely, terrifically horrid the writing was for Matthew when he was in the wheelchair (and then had to experience a tingling in his legs and I think use the word tingling), he had to walk into a room and join Mary in song, he had to mope about like an idiot over Lavinia guilt (none of this was wrong in itself, but as written, was cartoonish). Hugh Bonneville is no hearthrob, IMO, but he's a good actor, not cookie cutter, and manages to keep his ballast for all the nonsense with Robert. I think maybe a lot of the leading men in the right age group are working elsewhere and weren't available to do Downton, and Fellowes ended with a lot of journeymen who weren't really going to break out vis a vis Mary. t's actually difficult to find a truly legit classic male romantic lead - they got very lucky with Stevens. Conversely, he could have taken a shot with an unknown, and that way get all the qualities, only not fully fledged in the industry yet. But I guess he didn't go that route or never found that guy.

 

You know when Richard E. Grant showed up as a quasi-suitor for Cora - all the men brought on for Mary, including Henry, remind me of him. I don't think all the writing in the world would have made me care. I believe Fellowes fished in the casting pond available to him, took his chances with guys that already had made some sort of splash in other shows, in hopes it would transfer, and then watched for chemistry and there was none. You don't need two years to find chemistry. You can watch a couple of scenes and know if it's clicking. Fellowes himself has done that with actors on the show, given them a contract when they started short term. I know some people believe Charles Blake deserved more of a shot, I do not. I think he got plenty in the pig/scrambled eggs scene; it was no more absurd than anything else on Downton.

 

The more we saw of him, the less romantic chemistry he had with Mary, and the more brotherly the chemistry got - even more so than with Tom. They were amusing together, but in a sort of sassy best friend way.

 

I guess now I think Fellowes realized there was no chemistry with Henry pretty early, but the end was nigh. So, Fellowes Cyrano'd Tom, and then swiftly switched the men out at the last minute. I guess that was one way to do it.

 

Also, there was something about their faces. Handsome, but off. That can work on a lot of guys - the off part can give them interest. I can't help remembering most of these guys as googly eyed - literally, that's how they looked - big foreheads, big eyes, small jaws and chins. All very skinny. If they'd gained an ounce, any pretense at handsome would have flown - they were hanging onto their decent bone structure by the knuckles. And Charles Blake was distractingly short. It's mentioned upthread that Allen Leech was too stocky to be a romantic lead. Eh. I think he would have romanced Rose very plausibly, and stayed married to Sybil plausibly. I think the writing is pretty appalling, but they got the B team for post-Matthew suitors, and Dockery REALLY needs the A team to warm her up. She's SO dry. Carmichael can take somebody like Greggson, or Bertie, and warm them up, bring out their charm.

 

One last thing (sorry for the length). Robert James Collier has said he wasn't supposed to be on more than an episode or two of Downton, but he gave it his all anyway, and look what happened. If you DO look at when we first see Thomas, he's simply one of the servants doing servant stuff as the camera swoops around, but even so, it's absolutely clear that there's more than meets the eye with that guy - you can see how practiced his routine is, and how his inner life is a whole other deal. The Mary suitors came on and performed exactly as they were - actors hired for a gig, phoning it in (sort of - I don't mean lazy about it, but it's a J-O-B and not much more), and then onto their next thing. That's another reason I wish Fellowes had found an unknown for whom Downton would have been a real break.

Edited November 15, 2015 by DianeDobbler

[skyways]

Ian Glen, Richard E Grant, gave life to their performances too. But I agree with the last part of your post. An unknown might have worked better as Talbott to give life to the whole 'Kiss me, Kate' dance I think Fellowes was trying to attempt. Or maybe not. Who knows? But truly looking back either Gillingham or Blake could have worked. There was really no need to bring in a new person. I say this because there was no difference between Gillingham and Talbott's approach to romance with Mary. It's strange.

[Andorra]

 

I say this because there was no difference between Gillingham and Talbott's approach to romance with Mary. It's strange.

 

I think that is exactly the problem. I think Julian Fellows desperately wanted to make the romance between Mary and her new man different to her romance with Matthew and that was the big mistake. He didn't recognize that the people loved just that: Mary/Matthew. Matthew the gentle, charming smart man who charmed Mary and brought out the best in her. He should have tried the same recipe and I bet it would have worked better with each actor he brought in and more viewers would be happy than they are now. 

[MissLucas]

Both courtships (Gillingham/Talbot) were creepy. It's clear that Sir Julian wanted to go for 'Kiss me Kate' dynamics but that's really not in his wheelhouse. He can write classical romance (Tom and Sybil/Anna and Bates/Mary and Matthew/Edith and Bertie or Greggson) but as soon as he tries to go for a more antagonistic approach things fall apart.

 

To bring up a classic movie 'The Philadelphia Story': Katherine Hepburn plays a character who's close to Lady Mary and during the movie she's paired with Jimmy Stewart and Carry Grant. Both pairings work and she has of course tremendous chemistry with both actors. Jimmy Stewart's character is the sweet charming introvert guy who manages to bring out her warm and soft side - the Matthew to her Mary. Carry Grant on the other hand plays much more of an extrovert leading man type (of course he's charming too) who immediately gets her riled up - he's what Talbot (and probably Gillingham) was supposed to be like. Both men manage in their own way to break through her shell and get to the vulnerable part of her hiding behind the ice queen act (the movie script uses Diana goddess of the hunt as reference) and so it's clear from the get go that she will end up with one of these two and not the boring guy she initially planned to marry. Both characters are equally well written and so it's hard to decide who you should root for. Had Sir Julian written that script the audience would have rooted for Jimmy Stewart because Cary Grant would have come across like a character from a Hitchcock script who somehow got lost in a screwball comedy.

 

The idea to pair Lady Mary for her second marriage with a man who's very different from Matthew and basing that relationship on a somewhat different dynamic was great - unfortunately the writing fell flat.

[DianeDobbler]

ITA about "Kiss Me Kate" being out of Fellowes' wheelhouse, also agree that a Matthew type was what Mary needed - in the casting, not simply the scenarios (a Leech, a Stevens). But I also think "Kiss Me Kate" was out of the wheelhouse of the guys they cast as Mary's suitors.

 

 

 

But truly looking back either Gillingham or Blake could have worked. There was really no need to bring in a new person. I say this because there was no difference between Gillingham and Talbott's approach to romance with Mary. It's strange.

 

Agreed except for "could have worked" would substitute "May as well have been one of them as Henry." because as you say, there was no difference. Don't think any of them worked. I believe the idea, if it had worked, was that Gillingham would be the stalking horse and Blake "the one", and if it turned out she clicked better with Gillingham, then Blake would play spolier a la the Turk or Sir. Richard. But they were all sort of meh, and I think at the time Fellowes was still ambitious to do better. But Matthew Goode really wasn't any better, there was no time to get yet another one, and I guess Fellowes absolutely wasn't going to do Tom, so there you go. It was all sorts of clear Fellowes knew the chemistry wasn't there - that was what was really going on with so much Tom/Mary material. To keep us watching. Not necessarily to trick "shippers", but simply Allen Leech is popular, and I believe people were a whole lot more likely to keep watching Season 6 if it didn't involve endless scenes of Mary with Interchangeable Suitor No. 5 (or whatever # he was). So I guess that's the big difference between Gillingham and Blake. The suitors got a LOT of screen time and the audience was bored senseless, I believe. A bit too late to use strategems on one of them, so Fellowes just grabs a fourth guy (or a third, depending if we count Napier) and this time tells the story without even using him.

 

It reminds me a bit of a cultishly popular version of "Persuasion" starring Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root. A year or so before, they'd co-starred in "The Man Who Cried", displaying no chemistry whatsoever, according to most fans whose comments I've read. Many fans of "Persuasion" think there's terrific chemistry, but if you actually watch, through 90% of the movie they're not even in the same shot. He enters, we see only him (not over her shoulder as is the usual). She reacts - it's tight on her, filmed separately, he could be in his trailer for all we know. The camera did all the work and then it was stitched together. In Downton, Tom did all the work. :)

[Andorra]

 

It was all sorts of clear Fellowes knew the chemistry wasn't there - that was what was really going on with so much Tom/Mary material. To keep us watching. Not necessarily to trick "shippers", but simply Allen Leech is popular, and I believe people were a whole lot more likely to keep watching Season 6 if it didn't involve endless scenes of Mary with Interchangeable Suitor No. 5 (or whatever # he was). So I guess that's the big difference between Gillingham and Blake. The suitors got a LOT of screen time and the audience was bored senseless, I believe. A bit too late to use strategems on one of them, so Fellowes just grabs a fourth guy (or a third, depending if we count Napier) and this time tells the story without even using him.

 

 

Well, he tricked us for a while and there are many who don't thank him for it. I definitely wasn't a shipper of Tom/Mary before season 6 and I really got into that relationship during the season. I felt a bit fooled that he didn't go there in the end. And as a Tom fan, I'm still mad that he used Tom that way and gave him (and us) nothing at all in return. 

 

I think (I hope!) he will get a little bit of compensation in the CS, but it is too late really. He wrecked up my favorite character's storyline again and again and this time  there' s no new season to fix it. I completely understand why Allen Leech is not happy about it. He was sacrificed on the Mary-altar and it was a shit Goodbye for Tom's character. 

Edited November 14, 2015 by Andorra

[DianeDobbler]

Well, I won't disagree Tom was ill-used, and the fans of Tom ill-used. I wonder though, if Fellowes had the birds-eye view enough to realize fans would be logical about the way they noticed how Mary and Tom were paired together in such a husband-and-wife, team way, and suspect we were headed towards a union. Or if Fellowes simply thought he was using a camera trick, a chemistry-dodging trick. I've seen chemistry dodges in other films (not just the example I've used of Persuasion) where the romantic leads hardly ever interact but the story is structured and the camera is used to sort of distract you from that fact. OTOH, Tom and Mary had a lot of long tracking shots, so who knows. Maybe he did know he was tricking us.

 

Anyway, it's shallow, but since looks have been discussed here, this image of Henry and Mary:

 

 

Michelle Dockery is ridiculously fine-boned, but this guy has a smaller head than she does. And unimpressively shaped - look at how the lower part of the face shrinks. He's got bird-head. Puny shoulders, puny chest, actually a rather long neck which adds to the bird-like effect. I am sure that with artfully mussed hair and contemporary clothes he'd look far more appealing with that lanky build, but here, he looks dreadful. I was truly amazed that Mary seemed to think Henry was hot stuff compared to Bertie.

 

Whatever happened to the days when Matthew would be eyeing her with interest but then in would blow someone like the Turk? Where were actors like that when it was time for widow Mary to look round again?

Edited November 15, 2015 by DianeDobbler

[ZoloftBlob]

Whatever happened to the days when Matthew would be eyeing her with interest but then in would blow someone like the Turk? Where were actors like that when it was time for widow Mary to look round again?

 

Its a small island. I mean, they had to import Matthew Goode. And psst... they can't reuse the hottie that played the Turk because Mary's Vagina Curse killed him,

[DianeDobbler]

You know, I'm sure American television has a type (I don't watch that much of it anymore), and via seeing 4 examples of what's on offer for Mary on Downton Abbey, PLUS one guy who was rumored to be cast but it turned out he wasn't (the actor was a bit of a Gillingham lookalike), AND via watching BBC's "Episodes" , it appears to me that among the toiling actors in the 30-40ish crowd in the U.K., Stevens was an outlier and the Matthew Goode type is a popular type. Weedy, goggle-eyed, a bit deficient about the chin and jaw. Steven Mangan of Episodes fits right in, BUT, nobody is trying to claim he's dashing and loaded with sex appeal (a la Robert's "sex appeal" remark about Henry). Mangan's Sean character is smart, funny, good-natured and self-effacing MOST of the time, but with his back to the wall and enough pressure or justification, he can be hilarious and quite strong. It's appealing enough to not only keep his wife in love with him, but to plausibly attract the leading lady of the show for which he writes (she's not obsessed with him, but they did hook up). Yes, Fellowes didn't want Mary/Matthew redux (which, I agree, was a mistake), but he also cast these guys and then insisted on writing them as if they were saturated in sexual energy and the last word in dashing. They just weren't. Maybe write them in their actual wheelhouse (as he did the guy who played Bertie) and then their actual appeal could have surfaced, and things would have been better. I DON'T think more time for any of those men would have helped in the least if Fellowes had persisted in writing them as sexually charged hearthrobs who created automatic sexual tension with Mary.

Edited November 15, 2015 by DianeDobbler

[SusanSunflower]

They're actors ... they need to be given something to do to be sexy ... there's only so much desire or affection that can be "telegraphed" without some sort of dialog or even just 'business'  or expression ... and a response (which in Mary's case was not forthcoming) ... 

Look at Benedict Cumberbach ... an elfin, often slight figure with a great deep voice, not physically imposing, very young looking ... king of the world, catnip .. because he was allowed to ACT ... to deliver lines with pregnant pauses and significant expressions ... oh, and he was allowed to be smart, even brilliant, and observant, and aticulate, even teasing ... and the same is true for the adorable, very sexy and utterly ordinary looking Martin Freeman ... Goode was allowed to act in Dancing on the Edge and he acted up a storm in Death Comes to Pemberly (outshining the leads) ...  Oh, and Ovendon is 5'10" according to IMDB, I think Tom Cullen must be 6'3" or 6'4" -- Hugh Bonneville on IMDB is 6'2" .. Dockery is 5'8" (but then she is likely taller ... heels). 

Goode has also been dressed badly for a romantic lead -- a bit of padding and style would have helped a great deal ... (going the other way, into casual or bohemian wouldn't work at all. )... (My personal taste would favor Ovendon for both looks and sassy ... )

eta: Bonneville must be so eager to drop 20 years and 30 pounds of padding when this series ends .. his photo over at IMDB is utterly cute, adorable.  IRL, he's 10 years younger than me ... I'm utterly shocked

Edited November 15, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[saki]

Its a small island. I mean, they had to import Matthew Goode. And psst... they can't reuse the hottie that played the Turk because Mary's Vagina Curse killed him,

Matthew Goode isn't imported, I think he's English.

Its a small island. I mean, they had to import Matthew Goode. And psst... they can't reuse the hottie that played the Turk because Mary's Vagina Curse killed him,

Matthew Goode isn't imported, I think he's English.

[Brn2bwild]

Look at Benedict Cumberbach ... an elfin, often slight figure with a great deep voice, not physically imposing, very young looking ... king of the world, catnip .. because he was allowed to ACT ... to deliver lines with pregnant pauses and significant expressions ... oh, and he was allowed to be smart, even brilliant, and observant, and aticulate, even teasing ... 

 

Oh man, I know this never could have happened, but I would have loved to see Cumberpatch as one of Mary's beaus.  He's someone I could actually believe her ending up with.  Not classically handsome at all, but just has that something to make him stand out.

Edited November 15, 2015 by Brn2bwild

[shipperx]

I think the problem, if there actually is one, is not the actor or his looks. It's a matter of preferences, biases, and material. Goode was indeed quite good in Dancing on the Edge, Pemberly, and Brideshead Revisited (?). Nor is the problem British men. While Cummerbunch's appeal always eluded me ( see: preferences) the British guy in Sleepy Hollow is incredibly easy on the eyes. Once upon a Time got their British Capt Hook (though I think he may be Irish). And the seeming interchangeability of Mary's suitors is definitely a writing problem. I remembered after the premier of Game of Thrones there were online complaints about being unable to tell apart Rob Stark, Jon Snow, and Theon Greyjoy (??!) and that was not an ongoing problem as the three characters are quite distinct (I'm still surprised anyone would ever think Theon ever looked similar to Robb or Jon. It must've been the effect of their being introduced as a group).

[MissLucas]

Yes, I really don't think the actors' looks are the main problem (and for the record part of the recent discussion here has made me feel uncomfortable) or that there are not enough British actors around to cast as potential love-interest. The main problem was the writing and to a certain degree the directing. Henry/Mary veered into creepy territory because the relationship lacked playfulness. The dynamic Sir Julian was trying to establish requires a careful balance between powerful and playful but we did  not get enough of the later. That horrible line in the last episode where Henry veered right into serial killer territory thanks to Goode's delivery is not the only example of that. At the race tracks Henry asks Mary to cheer for him whenever he comes around the stands. It's quite an innocuous line that could even have been sweet but Goode delivered it as an order - I wanted Mary right there to tell him where to shove his racing goggles and walk off.

[Andorra]

I agree,looks are certainly not the problem. For me it is mainly the writing, but partly it might be the lack of enthusiasm I sensed in Matthew Goode's performance. My impression is that he took it more like a convenient paycheck job, that would bring him and his family back to England, than a real opportunity. The least problem of the production has been the acting IMO. Especially the main cast was very talented and intent on giving their everything to the very few scenes they got over the years. With Goode I got the impression he phoned it in. But maybe it was a combination of bad writing and lack of dedication. The result was flat and bland anyway and not a huge credit to Goode's filmography. I also thought it telling that he didn't do any promotion for the show nor showed up for the BAFTA event nor the wrap up party, was a sign that he didn't really burst of pride about being on Downton. 

Edited November 15, 2015 by Andorra

[DianeDobbler]

Well, MMV on looks or talent, granted. Maybe Goode isn't part of the promotion because Fellowes didn't want to tip that Mary married him? After all, those Tom scenes may have kept fans engaged. Or maybe Goode was disappointed the role - the leading lady's love interest - was a big nothing? 

 

I don't know if it's customary with actor contracts in a British production, but in the U.S. part of the contract with featured and up contract players includes promotion. If Goode didn't promote, likely it's because he wasn't required/wanted.

Edited November 15, 2015 by DianeDobbler

[Andorra]

You can have a contract that excludes promotion. Dame Maggie Smith has such a contract, but even she was ready to do promotion at the very last press launch. And she was at the BAFTA award of course. 

They put Matthew Goode in the press pack after all. As part of the main cast! So his appearance was not a secret and they definitely used him to promote season 6.

They didn't include Tom in the presspack and he returned one episode earlier. His return was a secret but not Henry's. Michelle Dockery talked openly about Mary's relationship with Talbot at the press launch.

Also it doesn't explain MG's absence from the BAFTA award or the wrap up party. Obviously other things were more important. 

[DianeDobbler]

That being the case, it certainly does look as if he wasn't happy with his Downton experience. 

[photo fox]

Hey, all, can we please keep the discussion in here surrounding the episode? I want to keep the episode topics reasonably "clean" since viewers from other countries will be coming in later.

Just keep in mind the Downton spoiler policy... http://forums.previously.tv/topic/15036-living-with-spoilers-in-a-uk-first-downton-world/

Thanks!

[mirrorrim]

It's the same like in the scene between Edith and Mary at Sybil's deathbed. People were always accusing Mary for not taking the olive branch Edith gave her, but I only saw it as realistic. There was no chance in hell that they would ever get along or like each other more and Mary knows it. She knows she doesn't have it in her to not be annoyed about Edith and that they will have problems in the future.

 

This is why Mary is so much worse than Edith. Oh my God, get over yourself. It's your friggin' family but boohoo, Edith exists and waaaah, I just don't like her even though she's never actively done anything to hurt me like I have to her. The only thing wrong with Edith is she's needs to stop trying to become friends with Mary. so Edith is slightly annoying every so often (which I dont even agree with) and this is the entire reason why Mary actively tries to hurt her. I loved Mary's shrug and rolling eyes when she tried to explain why she dislikes Edith. I've been waiting and waiting six seasons to learn why Mary dislikes her so much, and there have been a couple times she's gotten close, but she's never actually expressed why. This scene proves she is just a mean person. It's not Edith, it's Mary.

She is a HORRIBLE person. I see no reason to appreciate Mary because she's "keepin it real." She's a bitch, plain and simple, and I love that Edith finally said it. Now I hope she finally moves on and stops trying to be the bigger person by creating some semblance of sibling love. Mary doesn't deserve it.

I also find it interesting that people say Edith is passive and that's why she is annoying and deserves Mary's snark. I say it's another case of bad writing. Mary whines all the time too, does nothing about things, and solutions magically fall in her lap. The only difference between her and Edith is Edith never gets the magical solution.

Edit edit: nvm cant find a sibling thread so I guess this should stay here?

Edited November 15, 2015 by mirrorrim

[Starchild]

I also find it interesting that people say Edith is passive and that's why she is annoying and deserves Mary's snark.

That's a bully's perspective, no?

[Free]

That's a bully's perspective, no?

 

It's victim blaming, pure and simple.

[Cherpumple]

It's the same like in the scene between Edith and Mary at Sybil's deathbed. People were always accusing Mary for not taking the olive branch Edith gave her, but I only saw it as realistic. There was no chance in hell that they would ever get along or like each other more and Mary knows it. She knows she doesn't have it in her to not be annoyed about Edith and that they will have problems in the future.

I always saw Edith's behaviour in this scene and the one right before Mary's wedding as being completely realistic. She wasn't trying to be best friends with Mary or even ignore their mutual annoyance; IMO she was just trying to take a pragmatic stance and show that it would be best for both of them if they made an effort to be civil to each other and respect their connection as sisters and as the only two people who would one day be able to remember their shared history and tell Sybbie about her mother's childhood. This is a perfectly reasonable, and very mature, approach that many people adopt every day in their long-term relationships with people with whom they thrown together due to circumstance rather than choice- family, neighbours, co-workers. Mary may have been realistic in knowing that their relationship would never be smooth sailing, but I disagree that it could have never improved at all. She could have definitely made an effort to cut out the pointless snarky comments, eyerolls, and insults about Edith's beau. The fact that she wasn't even willing to make an effort to be more civil to Edith (not even friendly, just civil), even after the most tragic episode of their sisterly relationship, tells me that her attitude wasn't more realistic than Edith's, just more self-centred and cruel.

[Andorra]

 

I also find it interesting that people say Edith is passive and that's why she is annoying and deserves Mary's snark

 

 

I said I understand why Mary finds her annoying. I don't say she deserves Mary's snark. That's a big difference. Maybe most people here are perfect and only get annoyed at people who deserve it, but I don't. I know several people who get on my nerves who are in fact nearly saints. They probably get on my nerves because they're nearly saints! Edith is not a saint, but I totally understand why Mary finds her annoying. Her doe, brown, teary sad eyes alone would drive me up the wall if I was exposed to them too often. It's just a reality that there're people who are allergic to each other. 

Is it good? Nope. Am I a bad person for it? Maybe. But that's how people are and how the world is.

 

That's why always enjoyed the dysfunctional relationship between Edith and. Mary. It's realistic, it happens. 

[saki]

I said I understand why Mary finds her annoying. I don't say she deserves Mary's snark. That's a big difference. Maybe most people here are perfect and only get annoyed at people who deserve it, but I don't. I know several people who get on my nerves who are in fact nearly saints. They probably get on my nerves because they're nearly saints! Edith is not a saint, but I totally understand why Mary finds her annoying. Her doe, brown, teary sad eyes alone would drive me up the wall if I was exposed to them too often. It's just a reality that there're people who are allergic to each other. 

Is it good? Nope. Am I a bad person for it? Maybe. But that's how people are and how the world is.

 

That's why always enjoyed the dysfunctional relationship between Edith and. Mary. It's realistic, it happens. 

But does Mary get annoyed when Edith is sad?  I don't think that's true - I think she gets annoyed when things go well for Edith.  That's certainly what happened in this episode - it was Edith looking happy that caused Mary to lash out.  And, previously, too, it's been when - say, Robert is proud of Edith for getting out the magazine issue, that Mary is sulky and upset with Edith.

Edited November 16, 2015 by saki

[MissLucas]

Her behavior when Greggson's death was confirmed was just as bad - the question is not whether Edith is sad or happy. As soon as Edith gets any form of attention she gets annoyed.

There has been a lot of talk how Matthew's death derailed the main narrative of the show but I think Sybil's death had huge ramifications too. Sybil was the uniting force between the two sisters. I think the only time we saw them working together was when they helped Sybil and Branson elope. With Sybil gone the saving grace of their relationship had disappeared too. That's why I was hoping Gwen talking about Sybil and Mary's reaction to her words would finally bring some closure. But nope. I don't really care for Mary's bridge-building efforts in the CS since the carefully constructed momentum throughout the episodes following Gwen's return was destroyed in this episode.

[DeccaMitford]

Her behavior when Greggson's death was confirmed was just as bad - the question is not whether Edith is sad or happy. As soon as Edith gets any form of attention she gets annoyed.

Right - I don't think it's happiness or sadness, or even the appearance of it, that bothers Mary about Edith. Frequently Mary accuses Edith of being mopey or dramatic when Edith just...expresses a thought or opinion. That's why I think a lot of people say Mary is annoyed with Edith for breathing: she reacts in exactly the same way when Edith is upset, when Edith is glowing with pride over her magazine, when Edith says "I used to go to the Criterion with Michael, I have a lot of happy memories there," when Edith tells her family that her boyfriend is dead, when Edith tells her family that her new boyfriend is a marquess. There's something tying all of these situations together, and it's not Edith's behavior or Edith's feelings. It's just Edith. I think if you asked Mary why she hates Edith so much, she probably couldn't give you an answer, besides something vague about how Edith is pathetic.

 

I don't think anybody is calling people who sympathize with Mary bad people - and if I did, I'd have to include myself since I sympathize with her quite a bit. I just don't admire her. That's the frustrating thing about this show and this character, which starts with the blueprints for so many interesting, complex things. Mary is a very well drawn portrayal of a sad, bitter bully, who has learned from her own suffering only how to be less kind and more closed off, rather than the opposite. I do find this sympathetic, and sort of tragic - but then the episode ends with Mary getting married, and the people she's wronged smiling wistfully. When I watched it the first time, I was reminded of nothing so much as the end of Rosemary's Baby, or the original Wicker Man, and the weirdly dissonant happiness was all the more chilling because it clearly wasn't meant to be.

Edited November 16, 2015 by DeccaMitford

[ZoloftBlob]

Mary is a very well drawn portrayal of a sad, bitter bully, who has learned from her own suffering only how to be less kind and more closed off, rather than the opposite. I do find this sympathetic, and sort of tragic - but then the episode ends with Mary getting married, and the people she's wronged smiling wistfully. When I watched it the first time, I was reminded of nothing so much as the end of Rosemary's Baby, or the original Wicker Man, and the weirdly dissonant happiness was all the more chilling because it clearly wasn't meant to be.

 

I agree with this - that I do have sympathy for Mary because she is tragically denied what she wants and that the ending of this episode was oddly off key and dissonant....

 

I'm just pretty convinced this wasn't Julian Fellowes's intent. I think we were supposed to think this is Mary's happy ending, not Mary's tragic downfall. I am certain  (not spoiling just guessing) that the CS special will have a LOT of Mary insisting how happy she is and I am genuinely curious if Dockey can pull that off.

[DianeDobbler]

I kind of think the CS will skirt over Mary's marriage, at least as far as really showing husband and wife interacting. I expect Mary will be a busy bee using her formidable froideur to bring Bertie's mother into line where Edith and Marigold are concerned, and she'll generally be the heroine of the piece, as she was when she spoke to Rose's jazz singer boyfriend. I think the show will do its best to make the point that Mary is happy in her marriage, once the obligatory "adjustment" drama is past, but the show won't go to Matthew/Mary type lengths lest the lack of chemistry belie the point they're making.

 

Really curious what on earth there is for Tom to do in the CS, save dance with Edith's editor at Edith and Bertie's wedding, maybe.

[Roseanna]

This seems to be such an interesting forum with many-sided viewpoints that i decided to write also.

 

I think that Mary's behavior is simply no longer "normal". Even if you dislike your sister and there is constant hard words between you and her, there are some circumstances when any normal person does not behave like Mary did f.ex. when Gregson died. Most people feel then that "a family is always a family" and can rise above their differences. Even if they can't, they can play civil manner - or at least shut their big mouth.

 

As for Edith "annoying" Mary who "can't help herself" - that kind of logic is simply not true. It's not other people's behavior that makes us react we do automatically. Once we understand the *reason* why we feel like we do, we can stop these automatic reactions.

 

As Edith is a younger sister and Mary earlier had "everything" (beauty, wit, charisma, love of parents, suitors), it was more natural that Edith felt envy and rivalry towards Mary. But it is a mystery why Mary who has  had an upper hand in everything, must constantly be cruel and belittling towards Edith.

 

Take f.ex. the part in the first season where Edith in the end writes the letter to the Turkish embassy. That happens after Mary *has* *four* times  shown how much better she is than Edith. Why in heaven's name Edith's question whether Mary is jealous of her because Strallan has shown interest in her, annoys Mary? Why didn't she simply say coldly: "I decide to leave that old man to you" but she must show that if she wants, she can take him, too - even after she and Matthew have just begun to attract each other?

 

Mary behaves like deep down *she* is the one who is more envious of Edith that she is of her. So Edith must never get anything - not a man or talent, nor parent's love. Her sorrow must be overlooked, her joy must be poisoned. And she must never, ever be a center of attention - that place in the family belongs to Mary alone.      

 

[SusanSunflower]

 

Mary behaves like deep down *she* is the one who is more envious of Edith that she is of her.

And we have seen that she would never remotely agree that she is envious of anything associated with Edith or admit that she was dissatisfied with her prospects ... the unsuitability of Gillingham, Blake and Talbot is theirs alone -- not even due to Mary having (arguably) excessively high standards (no, IMHO, that's not the reason they failed). Mary is the princess who must be wooed and in whom it is the worthiness test of the suitor to light a spark. Very passive, Arthur pulling the sword from the rock ...  Edith's "drab little life" is essential to Mary's belief in her own self-worth even superiority. 

 

Yes, it's possible Mary will next whine about how Edith's life is that of someone so easy to satisfy ... because she has such low expectations ... except Mary isn't "Emma" ... unfortunately, not that engaged or generous. 

Edited November 16, 2015 by SusanSunflower

[TheGreenKnight]

Emma is a good comparison. I love Emma Woodhouse even though she's a bitch. The difference being, unlike Mary, she faces consequences and learns from her mistakes. The only time Mary has ever suffered for her behavior toward Edith was when Edith made her suffer, by writing the letter about Pamuk.* I just can't imagine being Cora, Violet, or Robert, and not having interfered with Mary's vile behavior towards her over the years. Sibyl is the only one I remember ever trying to defend Edith. Matthew and Tom might have chided Mary (always with something verging on a smirk), but they never really did anything either. It's too bad Cora's mother or Rosamund weren't more involved in the family's day-to-day life like Violet, since I'm sure one of them would've done something.

 

* The thing about the Pamuk letter is people always say what a horrible thing it was to do because it didn't just affect Mary, and that's true. But, from the viewpoint of someone who is being constantly made to feel worthless by her sister and who receives a daily confirmation of those insults by her family's an obvious lack of compassion/interest (aside from Sibyl), I can imagine in that moment she had as little interest in their well-being as they'd had in hers. And after having watched endless scenarios of Violet, Robert, Cora, and Mary off and on doing their best to knock Edith down, I can't say she was wrong in feeling that way.