The Borgified Corpse wrote:
But I fear that Matthew's death may be a crippling blow to the series. I felt that he was, for the upstairs portion at least, the key point-of-view character for the series. I mean, the show started with his arrival as the new heir. Theoretically, the show could continue without him but I think it would be rather like Northern Exposure without Joel Fleischman.
|
Or
Homicide, post-Andre Braugher. Which was still good, but it lacked something.
The Borgified Corpse wrote:
Also, without Matthew, I kinda see the family falling apart. He's the only one that even remotely understands where Branson is coming from. He's the only one that's been able to take the edge off of Mary's bitchiness. He's the only one that seems able to stand Isobel. He's the only one that likes & respects Edith. (Interestingly, he was also the only one besides Edith that knew that her new boyfriend is married.) And, I suspect he would be the only one with the right firm-but-fair temperament to be able to handle Rose.
|
QFT.
I really don't know what to add to this.
The Borgified Corpse wrote:
I'll still watch Season 4, if only because I still like most of the downstairs people and I'm hoping for a happy ending for Edith. (But why isn't Daisy living on the farm yet? Mr. Mason gave her a very generous offer and she bloody well better take it.) Plus, I have a morbid curiousity for how the show could possibly function without Matthew.
|
Perhaps the "Canadian" heir, Patrick, will return. Even though the new baby is the Earl's grandson, Patrick is still closer in the succession than Matthew was and his son will be.
I enjoyed the third season, but I didn't
like it. It felt too aimless, there wasn't a "Big Bad" plot element that affected everyone, and the storylines were all over the map. I hope that Matthew's death can actually shake the pieces up somewhat and get the series out of the ditch it seems to be stuck in.