[ScarletCourt]

I had a lot of difficulty believing how happy all the Crawleys were by 3x08 which ought to be about 2-3 months max after LMB was born (since LMB was born in the summer, likely July and one doesn't play Cricket in Yorkshire in Nov). Two months out, I still occasionally cry about Sybil and what she will miss with LMB and what LMB will miss with her mother. I had trouble believing that the only time Sybil was ever mentioned was when someone evoked her name "because it was what she would have wanted".

[HarshBench]

Originally Posted by ScarletCourt (View Post) I had a lot of difficulty believing how happy all the Crawleys were by 3x08 which ought to be about 2-3 months max after LMB was born (since LMB was born in the summer, likely July and one doesn't play Cricket in Yorkshire in Nov). Two months out, I still occasionally cry about Sybil and what she will miss with LMB and what LMB will miss with her mother. I had trouble believing that the only time Sybil was ever mentioned was when someone evoked her name "because it was what she would have wanted".

I know the Crawleys are meant to come across as stiff-upper-lip, emotionally restrained Brits, but instead they strike me as cold and unfeeling.


Another thing: Sybil's character inconsistency in 3.05 was glaring. She was a nurse, she had worked in hospitals for several years, and yet we are meant to believe she would offer no opinion on her own medical state.

It's not because she was "muddled." She was not too muddled to talk about her baby's religion or her husband's job prospects. So she should not have been too muddled to be aware that something was wrong. It was a terrible injustice to her character and also to her husband's. There was no excuse for it. The most progressive, feminist character, the most independent, reduced to a victim.

Only a conservative man could write that. Never mind what "point" he was trying to make, he made it in a way that ended up undermining his point.

Spoiler:

meanwhile in the CS, Mary who was NOT a nurse seems to know instinctively that something was wrong and asks to be taken to the hospital. So they take everything away from Sybil, including her well-earned medical knowledge and skills, and give them to Mary. Favoritism at its worst.

.

I am also tired of how Violet is portrayed as a bamf who is always right when in fact she is a snobbish, cold, classist woman who only displayed emotion or empathy for about a week following the death of her own grandchild. The only thing that should have been important at that point was justice for Sybil, not whether her baby boy got back into the marital bed.

[bijou156]

I had a lot of difficulty believing how happy all the Crawleys were by 3x08 which ought to be about 2-3 months max after LMB was born .... Two months out, I still occasionally cry about Sybil and what she will miss with LMB and what LMB will miss with her mother. I had trouble believing that the only time Sybil was ever mentioned was when someone evoked her name "because it was what she would have wanted".

I was more disappointed and sad how the family were so jolly happy by 3x08. I also get sad thinking about BIB. It was a pity that Sybil was only mentioned as a sort of tool for emotional manipulation.

I know the Crawleys are meant to come across as stiff-upper-lip, emotionally restrained Brits, but instead they strike me as cold and unfeeling.

ICA, I felt let down by Cora bc she has always strike as this amazing warm mother but seems to have forgotten about her dead daughter by 3x08. I also fear that Cora thinks that by 'not going backwards' Sybil meant only for Tom not going back to be a mechanic. I know Cora was well-meaning of getting Tom the state agent position but I hope that she is equally supportive of him when Tom wants to pursue a different career such as journalism or politics.

Sybil's character inconsistency in 3.05 was glaring. She was a nurse, she had worked in hospitals for several years, and yet we are meant to believe she would offer no opinion on her own medical state. It's not because she was "muddled." She was not too muddled to talk about her baby's religion or her husband's job prospects. So she should not have been too muddled to be aware that something was wrong. It was a terrible injustice to her character and also to her husband's. There was no excuse for it. The most progressive, feminist character, the most independent, reduced to a victim.

I hate how Sybil's character was reduced to a weak "muddled" victim and how all her years experience as a nurse were thrown out the window.

Originally Posted by HarshBench (View Post) Spoiler: meanwhile in the CS, Mary who was NOT a nurse seems to know instinctively that something was wrong and asks to be taken to the hospital. So they take everything away from Sybil, including her well-earned medical knowledge and skills, and give them to Mary. Favoritism at its worst. . I am also tired of how Violet is portrayed as a bamf who is always right when in fact she is a snobbish, cold, classist woman who only displayed emotion or empathy for about a week following the death of her own grandchild. The only thing that should have been important at that point was justice for Sybil, not whether her baby boy got back into the marital bed.

Spoiler:

I hate the unfairness and favoritism shown in this show, it just ruins the joy of watching it.
I also feel that this aspect of the CS, shows some character inconsistency for Mary since how is it that suddenly she is savvy about the symptoms of knowing that she is ready to give birth. I find it hard to believe unless this CS show me that Mary being a good girl and done her homework researching about pregnancies. I would still find it hard to believe bc I would think that some of the details would totally gross out Mary.

The more I think about it, I begin to believe that even Violet had not forgiven Sybil for her sin of marrying 'below'. Violet's mention of LMB sounded so cold and it seemed that she was worried that if Tom was the only influence in Sybbie's life that it may taint even further the Crawleys name. Unfortunately for the Crawleys, LMB is part of Sybil thus related to them and they seem to be only interested in undermining Tom's parental role.

[ScarletCourt]

Originally Posted by bijou156 (View Post) The more I think about it, I begin to believe that even Violet had not forgiven Sybil for her sin of marrying 'below'.

This is in direct contradiction to what Violet said when she forgave Mary her indiscretion in S1, which is Mary "has the trump card, she's family." I guess that doesn't apply to Sybil when she publically married Tom.

Still hoping that the Pamuk scandal comes to light in the C/S and see what Violet's reactions are to it.

[Patano]

I just can't. I'm still far, far too angry, upset and heartbroken over what happened. I've never seen such an unjust, cruel and meaningless development on a "quality" TV show before. I will always need to stress to what HUGE extent Sybil's death was an example of simply VERY,VERY ****ty, inconsistent, meaningless, unjust, purposeless, destructive, low quality writing. I will never forgive Fellowes this or accept what happened.

Season 4 and actors' departures

If Matthew leaves DA in s4 then making Tom the estate manager would make more "sense". Someone needs to stay at DA to ensure that Robert does not spoil things again. Tom is family, which in some way legitimizes him to look into DA's business matters.

In that case it would also mean that JBF's and Dan's departure directly influenced Tom's character destruction. I hate when behind the scenes developments affect character and the narrative to such an extent. If such situations aren't a signal to stop, then I don't what else is.

BTS developments affecting storylines and characters means soap opera for me, where everything is random and triggered by what happens off-screen. DA creators and JF himself wanted to make quality drama, not a soap opera. Sorry, but quality drama needs to have its proper beginning and ending. Prolonging things indefinitely always leads to a situation that we can observe at DA currently. No one knows how many more seasons Downton is going to have and thus what to with the characters, their storylines and directions. Now everything is going to be random and triggered by who stays and who leaves. JBF's departure helped JF in a way - he got an opportunity to invent a development that shocked DA and provided plots (or excuses for plots) for a few next episodes.

I may sound boring, but Downton should have ended with 3 seasons. S3 could have been the best season if JF had decided to stick to the original plan. I'm so, so disappointed . I expected a good season and the comeback to s1's tone, but I lost the whole show instead.

I trusted JF. As I said earlier, he wasn't a perfect writer, but certainly a good and solid one. He also seemed to be very reasonable to me judging by his interviews and seemed to know where he was heading with his characters previously.
I did not expect a perfect show, but a show displaying certain level quality. Judging by what was earlier, I think that my expectations were legitimate. The destruction that happened in 3x05 was unprecedented. It was no longer just a mistake, but a complete destruction of characters, storyline potential, build-up and narrative. Yes, it was not just a mistake, but an offence. It was a complete offence to narrative and character integrity and consistency. Such an offence cannot be forgiven in my book. The fact that JF is capable of more also does not help.

IMO JF completely lost it because of those further seasons. He does not know what to with his characters anymore. Add such things as actors' departures and it all became a complete mess. I still remember him worrying about keeping M/M interesting after their marriage. I suppose that in the original plan, the show ended with Baby Crawley's birth (and perhaps Robert's death and Matthew becoming an Earl + all the Pamukgate stuff being dealt once and for all), S/T settling somewhere and creating their life there (with jobs that fitted them) and Bates being released from prison and settling with Anna in this cottage (my, what will JF now do with A/B?).

Tom's character destruction

I remember Tom saying that he won't always be chauffeur and that he will make something of himself. Now we know that his journalistic career didn't go swimmingly and is basically forgotten on the show. Tom gets a job only because he is the Crawleys' son-in-law and the father of their grandchilld, so because of his aristocratic "connections". He advanced because he married the Earl's daughter. He advanced through marriage. It's a disgrace for this character IMO.

Sybil's character destruction

It's a disgrace for Sybil to die in ignorance about her Dad's true character. It's a disgrace to see Robert practically not caring about her at all. I would love to see Sybil having complications in childbirth, but making it and Robert realizing how close he was to losing her and consequently changing his attitude. Another wasted opportunity.

What kind of writer then takes his most feminist character and just kills her off in childbirth (something that he could introduce with respect to any female character on the show). What sort of writer introduces build-up and character development for such a character and then reduces her to a baby provider for the further plot + the "dying sweet cliche" (which was already covered two times on this show before BTW).Plus, sacrifice her because you have no ideas for other plots so you need fill the spare space with something. Even if this something are only cliche, melodramatic plots connected with aforementioned "dying sweet cliche". Again, it's only destruction, nothing more.

How cruel you have to be to kill off a young woman who's finally found her place in life. A woman full of life and with many plans for the future? Who still needed to experience and accomplish many things? Plus, to kill her off at the beginning of an epoch that would suit her perfectly? How cruel you have to be to kill her soon after she held her "joy of joys"? How cruel you have to be to kill her off after only a year of marriage when she and her husband waited years to be together and fought hard for their relationship?

Sybil's awful death

That's why for me such a horrific death on this kind of show is not doing the character any justice IMO. It was so jarring with the rest of DA that it was clearly there only for sensationalism and shock value. Graphic death for me only makes sense when a given death sends some kind of message. That's why I wouldn't have been apalled if William had died a graphic death - it would have at least sent a message about the cruelty of war. In Sybil's case, the cruelty was certainly not needed and I think that her character deserved to be spared that. It was for me more of a soap-opera trick to create an uproar in media.I really think that when JBF decided not to sign the contract for s4, she expected S/T to be written off somewhere at the end of s3.

S/T destruction

I really think that JF would have done justice to them both by giving them more screen time in s3 and then writing them off. If JF had wanted to make him a big player, he could have done so in s3. Then some mentions plus maybe guest appearances. What JF chose was the easiest, laziest and most destructive option for the narrative and the characters.

****, even them not appearing at all in s3 would have been much, much better than what happened. 2x08 would be a fine closure for Sybil and Tom both separately and as a couple. Darn you, JF!

IMO killing off any character only because an actor wants out should be only an option when nothing else can be done or when this fits the storyline and the characters. See e.g. Hugh and Robert. If Hugh wanted out, kill off be really the only option. If Maggie wanted out, killing off Violet would make sense. But Sybil, really?

Now there's only Sybil's memory that forces the Crawleys to integrate with Tom. After Sybil's death, both sides have to integrate for the sake of the baby and Sybil's memory. It's again the easiest, laziest option. Tom being integrated into the family would work and make sense for me only with Sybil being alive. As such, it's only cliche melodrama again, not a tale about crossing social boundaries.

Prior 3x05, the plot of Tom integrating into the family was well done. And only after 3x05 the real conflict would have actually started.

What kind of writer reduces his most interesting pair of characters into a clliche melodrama only because an actress couldn't sign a contract for the next season? Forget even for a moment that DA does not need 4 seasons, but you'd think that what a writer should do in such a situation is minimizing the damage, not opting for a total destruction (even if that is the easiest way). IMO killing off a character only b/c an actor wants out should be only a final option if really nothing else can be done (which definitely wasn't the case here). The Bransons could have been given more screen time and a closure in s3. After all, in the original plan with 3 seasons they had to receive the closure in s3. Then it wasn't any problem? Plus, to add to the destruction you contradict yourself and change your previous direction for the couple and turn the non-dramatic ship into a tragic one.

[bijou156]

Originally Posted by ScarletCourt (View Post) This is in direct contradiction to what Violet said when she forgave Mary her indiscretion in S1, which is Mary "has the trump card, she's family." I guess that doesn't apply to Sybil when she publically married Tom.

The more depressing to watch just knowing the obvious favoritism by the writer. (ie. Mary gets forgiven all her sins while Sybil is unforgiven and branded the black sheep of the family.) Can I point out that this favoritism is also another example of how hypocrite the family is bc they want to be seen religious and proper but in reality are willing to forgive the daughter that committed adultery before marriage than the daughter that always kept her emotions in check and was a virgin when she married.

The same goes with Robert .

I think the unforgivable fact that Sybil openly went against her family's wishes that she instantly lost any chance of the family forgiving her. The fact that the family are now stuck with Tom ("the chauffeur") and most importantly that they feel the moral obligation to look out for Sybbie. Remember how elated Robert and Violet were knowing that they could go back to calling Tom , the state agent, Branson. It seems they quickly disregard any facade they put up for Sybil.

[ScarletCourt]

Originally Posted by bijou156 (View Post) Remember how elated Robert and Violet were knowing that they could go back to calling Tom, the state agent, Branson. It seems they quickly disregard any facade they put up for Sybil.

I thought that was very OOC of Violet who in 3x01 sent money to Ireland so that Sybil and Tom could come to Mary and Matthew's wedding as well as my earlier quote about having the trump card. But then Violet seemed very OOC to me this season esp toward the end of the season.

[HarshBench]

Violet was quite supportive actually in the beginning of the season, for her anyway. I mean, she was still classist and couldn't really accept Tom but she tried to think of him as "family." I just found it very odd that at the end she wanted to go back to calling him Branson and was so appalled at the thought of him influencing the baby too much.

I think that it is just a matter of one step forward, two steps back. Not just because that's how people behave (as disappointing as that may be), but because it makes the writing easier. He can show a "happy" moment of acceptance, then go backward and start again to create more tension.

I am also furious that Sybil was portrayed as so loving toward her father when she returned home. I know she loved her family, but the way he behaved about her marriage was terrible. She should not have been so forgiving, it made her seem like a sap. And sweet as she was, she had backbone and was no sap. I have no problem with Robert behaving in character for himself, but Sybil should have been in character too. Otherwise it just feels like he is getting away with it......again.

I guess we were meant to believe that she knew his flaws but still loved him. But I was still disappointed we never got a confrontation. It was the least they could have done. Even Matthew got to confront Robert this season and Robert worships Matthew. Although I was glad to see him defend Tom, I'd rather see Tom defend himself.

By the end of the season I got the sense Tom didn't care enough anymore to argue with them. He is just going to keep his opinions to himself. Hopefully, he still has them and will act on them in the future.

So instead of having Sybil defend herself, we had Mary defending her and Tom both. It's fine that the main couple get most of the screen time, but they should NOT be given storylines and conversations that 100% belong to other characters.

[Patano]

Fellowes' laughable attempts to justify himself

Time for another rant. This time it has a topic, though. The man has spoken about why he killed off Sybil during the event he attended with AL and Jessica Fellowes.

Actually, it’s nothing new - Jessica wanted to move on. JF proposed her fewer episodes if she returned for s4, but she refused. JF then killed her off because he wanted to keep Allen on the show. All that new info does not change anything for me. It’s just a confirmation of something that we’ve already known - that Sybil was killed off because JBF wanted out. I will never go back to the show, I’m no longer DA fan and I won’t recommend the show to anyone anymore. If anything, I’m only angrier because of those petty excuses and trying to put all the blame on JBF. No matter how hard JF and Jessica Fellowes (who tries to not to lose profits from her books, yeah) may try to placate us, it is not going to work with me. Killing Sybil off wasn’t the only option.

Firstly, we don’t know what those “negotiations” with Jessica really looked like. It’s only one side speaking. Jessica doesn’t need to care anymore. On the other hand, JF and Co. need to save the image of the show and try to placate the viewers and encourage some of them to return to the show. Putting blame on Jessica does not hurt her, but it does help the image of the show and JF. And now they organized an event with JF and AL of all people. It’s all suspicious to me. I mean it is confirmed that Sybil’s death was triggered by JBF’s leaving and it was not just JF’s whim. But we’ll never learn what the situation was really like and whether Sybil wasn’t simply killed off so as to punish JBF for disloyalty and remove any possibility of her coming back.The whole treatment of JBF and AL in s3 screams to me that JBF was the bad one that got punished for wanting to move on (they even removed nursing scene!), while AL was rewarded for loyalty.

Secondly, I don’t think that they owed Allen anything. He was promised three seasons originally just like the rest of the cast. He got a lot more than he had expected at the time he had joined DA anyway. He started as recurring with just 3 episodes, but was moved to the main cast in s3. If the Bransons had been written off after s3 and had been given a substantial amount of screen time, he would have still got a lot of exposure. Compared to his previous amount of screen time, that would have been a lot for him too. I do care about Allen and wish him all the best, don’t get me wrong, but I’m sure he got enough exposure on DA to have his career going well, even if not the extent Jessica’s career is blooming. If it’s all just business and there is no place for sentiments, it should be also about actors, not only viewers.

I don’t believe in this keeping Allen BS. Firstly, they didn’t owe him anything. It’s a TV show that wants to be seen as a quality drama, not a soap opera or an Actors’ Support Programme. The most important thing is to maintain the quality of the show. JF’s first responsibility is to maintain the narrative and character integrity, not to provide employment for actors. They wouldn’t have broken any contract with Allen, because there was none, it was all about future contract. Allen is young, attractive, talented and much-liked by the viewers - he would be ok even without DA. Especially since he gained a lot of popularity thanks to this show. I’m sure that much more than he initially counted on, because he started as a very secondary character. Thomas Howes was in a worse position than Allen and could count on being in s3, yet he was written off because JF needed that for plot reasons. Allen is an actor so he perfectly understands that it’s a natural thing that his character’s storyline may come to an end at any moment. What if JF had decided to kill off Tom in the Irish troubles for plot reasons? Would JF have had any problems with doing that? Plus, if JF liked Allen that much, he would have given him more screen time earlier when the show actually had better publicity. What is happening now is just a desparate attempt to keep as much actors as they can. It’s just JF’s desperate attempt to save a sinking ship so that his regular income from it will not be endangered. If Dan leaves, Allen will be used to fulfil his role on the show. Yes, he will be basically Dan’s replacement, nothing more. Tom’s character will be turned into Matthew’s clone. The problem with the new Tom will be that he won’t be either “true Tom” or “true Matthew”, just some weird, impromptu constructed hybrid which neither Tom fans nor Matthew fans will buy. If they were so desperate to keep Allen for Allen himself or Tom’s character, they would work around Jessica’s departure to make him appear on the show nonetheless. But that would require more creativity. They could have invented some plot with Tom coming to DA for refuge/journalistic research, while Sybil would stay with the baby at their home. Of course it wouldn’t be a main role, but since when it is required for Allen to be a member of the main cast? Allen is just now used as a pawn in JF’s dealings with Jessica and the viewers. And I think that Allen would be better off if he had been written off along with Jessica. His character is in serious danger of losing his distinctive personality and may be from now only associated with the destruction that happened in 3x05. DA is a sinking ship right now and I think it would be better for Allen to move on from it as well, leaving behind a character who would have received an appropriate closure, not a destroyed character and a popular ship as welll as ruins of the old character. For me it’s harder now to enjoy Allen’s work because he reminds me of what happened in 3x05. It would be better for him to make use of DA and Tom’s popularity now instead of staying on a sinking ship with a character that is no longer the character that his fans fell in love with.

Plus, I refuse to be a victim of dealings between actors and the show. Viewers deserve certain quality and respect for their emotions. Compare this to a running of a company - if not prolonging one employee’s contract means delivering a higher quality product to the customers, no one will hesitate. After all, there’s no termination of a contract involved, just an expiration. JF’s first loyalty in such case should be to the viewers. Moreover, it’s thanks to us that this show still runs and that JF gets money from this show. Same about Allen. Allen’s high popularity is mainly the result of S/T’s fans support. The same fans that have been now simply screwed over.

It’s all screenwrites, actors, but what about us? Honestly, writers’ first priority is to be loyal to his characters and narrative. This requires some characters’ leaving and hence actors’ leaving. It’s natural. Keeping an actor on the show is no excuse. It’s a freaking TV show. Maybe now characters will not be killed on movies to give all the actors more screen time? Maybe even some characters that died in books will not die in movie adaptations of the same books just to give actors’ more screen time? Not prolonging a contract with an actor because it was time to give his/her character closure is a natural thing.

There’s no excuse for what happened. None at all. And I can bet that we will soon see to what lengths JF will go to keep Dan on the show/not kill Matthew off. We will soon see. Though it seems that if Dan had signed the contract for s4, Sybil and Tom would have been both written off. But since Fellowes needs a young upstairs man who will keep Robert in check and continue modernizing Downton… you get what I mean.

As I said - as a viewer who expects narrative quality and doing characters justice, I don’t care about all this behind the scenes stuff, especially since Allen has already gained a lot (definitely a lot more than he could initially bargain for) through his role on DA. He is in no danger of not being able to pay the bills.

I don’t see the future for the new Tom. I think that it would have been the best time for Allen to leave after s3 when S/T would have got an appropriate ending. Allen would have known how to use DA’s popularity to his advantage in that scenario. He would not receive the same opportunities as Jessica, but I’m sure he wouldn’t be in danger of unemployment. Now he’s just staying on a sinking ship and portrays a character that is being more and more destroyed. I don’t blame Tom for his present actions, but I blame JF for putting him in that position. He became again dependent on the Crawleys’ money and is again their employee. I don’t like how he was forced to do so by circumstances. Now JF tries to sell every **** about Tom by using the excuse that Tom has a little child. And I’m sure that Sybil wanted for him to pursue his dreams and his journalism, not to be stuck at a DA as its manager. Neither do Tom fans like to see him in that role.

Plus, Edith has become suddenly interested in women’s rights and her new suitor is a journalist… Does anyone have any hope that Tom will return to journalism in these circumstances? This show is just a joke right now.

[cute_kitten]

Is anyone going to comment last night's ending? And the way DS handled it all? I just have no words even though I suspected it could happen given from the Norwegian trailer.

[Kelly2790]

I have a lot of feelings and words right now that aren't appropriate for fan forum

They should have ended Downton at the end of season 3. It was perfect with Lord Grantham evaluating how far they have come.

I feel like they were running out of storylines even in the middle of season 3. Sybils death moved the plot along but for me if you need to kill a character to create a story then doesn't that suggest there really isn't that much story left to tell.

The same with Matthew. I was watching the christmas episode thinking what stories are they going to tell during season 4 because everything seems to be done. But now with Matthew gone it is going to be like a whole new chapter of the show. One I never wanted. It was always supposed to be 3 seasons. End it while it is still loved. Do the British thing and end tv series when they are on a high note and not drag them out like American tv series. Dragging the story is going to be Downton's downfall.

[Patano]

I have a feeling that JF is the only person that wants S4. Does he want to show Jessica and Dan that the show can go on without them? Maybe it can, but what kind of show this is? And what about the viewers?

I suppose that in case of Dan kill-off was the only option provided that Dan wanted to be written out completely. In case of Sybil, something else COULD have been done. But then - Dan’s departure made JF desperate to keep Tom on the show instead of writing him off with Sybil. Firstly, he would have lost even more actors. Secondly, he needs a young, upstairs male that will continue modernizing Downton and keep Robert in check. Tom is family, which makes him entitled to do so. Matthew leaves and what with the modernization of the estate and preparing it for another epoch? Baby Crawley, the next heir, is far too young. And we all know that Robert’s management can lead only to DA’s downfall.

S/T could have been really easily written off without destroying them as a couple and as individual characters. Jessica’s departure was not that harmful in itself, IMO, but combined with Dan’s departure led to the mess that we envisioned.

It’s sad (and a disgrace) that Tom is ultimately used as a pawn to ensure that DA survives. Indirectly, Sybil was also killed off in order to ensure that DA would be appropriately managed.

Anyone is allowed to do his/her job, but to do it properly. JF’s duty is to deliver to the viewers the product of the highest quality. The customers are never interested whether a company has problems with employees or organization - it’s only the final product that counts. Yes, in a way we paid him for that service by having watched DA for three seasons. SO MANY among those millions of viewers got hurt and disappointed. And I can bet that there will be more of them in the near future. We all signed up for a different journey with a different show. And also thanks to us this show is still running and JF is allowed to write.

I don’t think that writing DA is still that important for JF, BTW. This man’s mind clearly wanders more and more often to other projects now. He has other ideas in mind too. It’s not like he’ll be unemployed without DA. DA is right now just a stable source of income for him. If he cared about writing DA, he would strive to write less of it, but to write it well and in accordance with all the principles of quality writing.Now it’s not quality writing, but to quote the man himself “dribbling out”. It’s not fair to the customers (aka viewers) in the slightest.

It’s sad to see JF being so desperate to keep the show going no matter the costs. New characters? Really? Isn’t he aware that people mostly care to see old characters get their PROPER closure before they even CONSIDER getting interested in new characters? Remember how unhappy people were about so many additions to the downstairs cast this season, because they were afraid that those new characters would steal spotlight from the old ones? People started the journey with Matthew and wanted to see him become an Earl one day, with Mary at his side. People had also every right to expect S/T living an independent life outside DA together. Bringing new heir and even pairing him up with Mary is not the same. Similarly it’s not the same that he now makes Edith and her new guy into a new S/T (women’s rights + journalism). It’s just not the same. Most people watch DA for its characters, not shocking twists and turns.

It’s sad how much this man is willing to throw away to just keep the sinking ship going. He is actually throwing away his own previous work.

DA viewers started the journey with all those characters, thinking that it would all lead to somewhere. People didn’t sign up for an endless soap opera with random developments triggered by off-screen events. That’s also why people got so involved with those characters - no one cares much about soap opera characters because no one expects them to ever get an appropriate closure. Here the expectations were different.

If I were JF, I would prefer to leave people in the state of being satisfied than shouting “End this already!”. DA’s popularity could be then appropriately exploited through some specials or maybe even spin-offs. They wouldn’t require that much commitment from the actors and not all the characters would have to be present in a particular special. Now the fandom will be in a constant dread whether their favourite characters will receive their proper ending - right now nothing is certain, anyone can leave before the end of this show and anything can happen.

Especially since it’s mainly young actors that are leaving - so it’s harder to remove characters that have a whole life ahead of them. They are also the “face of the future”. Not to even mention that actors’ departures targeted two most popular DA ships and two popular, much-liked characters. S/T and M/M fanbases combined is really a lot of people.

JF did not write a TV series before. IMO it would be better for him to first start and finish a series with smaller number of seasons before embarking on something longer, especially since he had this plan for 3 seasons. But this man does not seem to set himself any limitations.

If there was no S4, we would ALL be HAPPY today. We would ALL get our HAPPY ending. Well, Merry Christmas to people from Uncle Julian.

S4 is only for $$$$$ - viewers have enough and there is no narrative or character integrity anymore.

I really, really don’t understand JF. Instead of giving us a great S3 (a great closure), he delivered us a season that could only be described as “preparing the ground for S4”. Chess pieces were removed, but Mr. Fellowes - people are not robots or idiots. You’ve destroyed two most popular ships in the fandom and killed off two much-liked, popular characters. Plus, you broke a lot of people’s hearts.

At least S/T and M/M fanbases are numerous - JF won’t escape uncriticized. I hope that now M/M shippers will help us in working against this show.

Oh, and ITV was cruel again. They advertised CS as a happy and fluffy episode. Similar case was with 3x05.

[HarshBench]

I want to give a shout-out to the Norwegian poster who gave everyone the news of that trailer. It was the ONLY one that did anything to prepare people for Matthew's death. Good on those promo monkeys in Norway, they have a heart. Too bad we didn't get the same for Sybil.

And on Christmas, too. Wow.

But I don't and never will fault the actors. They all do their jobs admirably, and if they want to move on after completing their contracts that perfectly fair.

[L i N d $ @ y]

I was excited for S4 but it's looking more and more like JF wanted more $$$$$$$ if they were only contracted to do 3. I understand Dan's decision to leave wholeheartedly (I may be the only few who does). If they had ended it with 3 then maybe we all got our happy ending. I have exhausted all means of defending Matthew & Dan so I'm glad he left the show. M/M was supposed to be Earl & Countess, at least I was led to believe that. That's all gone now.

[ScarletCourt]

I do not understand why JF had to bring such a warped character in Edna to bring out these feelings in Tom. I think that it could have been done much better without Edna.