<p>I am still suspicious of John Bates and wonder if, while they showed him proud and smiling at Anna’s dancing, he is going to show a jealous mean streak. Hasn’t that been set up in his character?
Rose will no doubt get drunk and make a pass at Tom. And we will all hold our breath.</p>
<p>I thought the scene with Anna was her honoring his Scottish ancestors and him loving that. They may not deal much with them next year. Shows have a tendency to move characters in and out of focus so we don’t get bored. </p>
<p>You can see they’re setting up possibilities downstairs with the one saying out loud he wants to cook, with Daisy having begun an arc with her father-in-law (and that was left open). </p>
<p>The process for a continuing drama like this generally is the show runner* - meaning the head producer or owner - sets out general arcs or goals for a season and then the other producers - who these days are writers with a producer credit - work out details, get research assigned, etc. Then they “open the writers’ room” and meet to go over ideas, outlines, etc. and nail down what they want to happen. They may have already assigned the first script but with a show like this with so few episodes and longer ones at that they may have broken that down even more. They may have a big chart of relationships, of open arcs. They’ll try to develop much more material than they’ll use, meaning they’ll come up with multiple story arcs, maybe even develop some of those and then drop them. Some will come back in different form and I assume they’ll be using some of those next year, etc. It’s a significantly more organized process than a guy with a typewriter turning out the next page while the actors are waiting. Sitcom writing is different. Writing hour long shows that have only continuing bits but which are essentially self-contained - like most police shows - is somewhere in between. </p>
<p>*Don’t know if that’s the term used in the UK.</p>
<p>Dan Stevens will do just fine. He was just on Broadway with Jessica Chastain.</p>
<p>I am with you oregon101. I am suspicious of Bates.</p>
<p>Another one who thinks Bates is hiding a dark side. Whether it’s a dark side he’s put behind him or one that could rear its head again, I don’t know.</p>
<p>David Caruso NYPD Blue>>></p>
<p>He has starred in CSI:Miami for years and years. Or did. I don’t know if it’s still running.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Plus his bum leg continues to improve. Seems like he hardly ever uses the cane any more. I guess his time in prison was beneficial to his leg function.</p>
<p>I suppose the cane has more or less disappeared really because it was initially a device to set up a conflict between the new Bates. who can’t pull his weight, and most of the rest of the staff. With the questions of Bates’s capabilities no longer in play the need for e cane has gone away and the cane with it.</p>
<p>But observant members of the audience notice things like the limp improving for no reason. I think that is a lack of continuity in the production. A war injury like that isn’t likely to improve for no reason. Maybe sitting around in jail and not having to stand up all day helped?</p>
<p>I don’t trust Mr. Bates entirely either. Vera Bates was such a mean person; why was he married to her? Wouldn’t she always have been so snotty and evil? I hope Mr. Bates is not a bad man at heart; I like Anna and don’t want to see her hurt.</p>
<p>Am I the only one that thought the trip to Scotland 8-month pregnant was unwise? You’d think they would have at least brought a doctor along…</p>
<p>Seemed to me the writers were setting up a story line in which OBrien goes to Bombay with Shrimpie and Susan.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Lots of good people end up marrying someone who turns out to be horrible. But I said much earlier in the thread that I thought it would be a pretty intriguing plot development for Anna to realize that Bates actually had murdered his wife… similar to the movie Jagged Edge, starring Glen Close and Jeff Bridges. When Teddy realizes that her client (and lover) is actually guilty of the absolutely brutal slaughter of his wife- for which he was acquitted-thanks largely to her-, she is absolutely terrified. Made for a real nail biter at the end!</p>
<p>I am either a really, really poor judge of character, or Bates is actually as good as he appears on the surface–which is quite good.</p>
<p>Am I the only one that thought the trip to Scotland 8-month pregnant was unwise? You’d think they would have at least brought a doctor along…</p>
<p>^^yes, but not that one from London, please.</p>
<p>I have a secret liking for Mary even though she is a mean girl. The best part about her–even she seemed to realize–was that the wonderful Matthew saw her as good. With him gone, who will see her as angelic? I agree with those who do not expect her to find Tom up to her standards of breeding. But I expect they will buck each other up. Expect the scene where Tom gives her some nugget of grief counseling that pulls her through.</p>
<p>Loved all stuff Scotland, too. The scenery!!! I actually watched this episode twice and liked all the going-to-the-fair bits, including Daisy winning the gold sovereign and that too-whirlwind-even-for-DA fling Mrs. Patmore had with the supplier. heh.</p>
<p>Am I alone in disliking Edith’s editor? Dammit, man, he is stuck with a madwoman/wife so shouldn’t Lord Grantham let him woo his virginal daughter whom he will never be able to marry? What??? I’m sorry. This guy does not have what it takes to be a great guy for Edith. I’m still holding out that she winds up with the happy life neither of her sisters has managed to hang onto. </p>
<p>I also loved O’Brien’s hairdo finesse, Tom’s allowing the new maid to flirt with him (ah, these helpless men!), the ridiculous turnaround where Jimmy is now quite willing to go into his seducer’s bedroom, no less, to sit around and gab, and seeing Mary preggers. However, after our discussion here I was a little distressed to hear 2 mentions of learning curves. Oh dear.</p>
<p>Did anyone else get a hint that we may see cousin Rose “come out” in London next season? I hope so!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Me too! That’s one thing the show hasn’t shown us yet, the London “season.” I’d love to see that.</p>
<p>Mary and Matthew have now produced an heir, but not the traditional spare. Presumably Branson will prove a capable caretaker, after Robert is gone and before the new baby grows up. But if I understand succession correctly, if the family is to hang onto Downton long-term, Matthew’s newborn son must survive to adulthood, and then marry and produce a son of his own. Untill that happens, they’re working without a net. Lots of story lines there.</p>
<p>Nrdsb4–yep</p>
<p>But, is Matthew really dead? Im not so convinced.</p>
<p>I think the blood on Matthew’s neck/face was put there to convince us he was dead.</p>
<p>They asked Dan Stevens to stay on at least one more episode, so they didn’t have to kill him on Christmas, but he refused. So I think he’s really dead. </p>
<p>I, too, thought they were setting it up for O’Brien to go to India, but I’d hate to lose her.</p>
<p>Would the Downton funds be used to pay for Rose’s season, if her parents are so broke? I loved Shrimpy’s explanation of their marital problems…they just don’t like each other. No demonizing, just a marriage of the “right” people. But never grew to like each other.</p>
<p>Yeah, Matthew really is dead.</p>
<p>Here’s a good article (which made me feel really bad for Julian Fellowes):
[‘Downton</a> Abbey’ Season Finale Recap: ‘I Just Can’t See a Happy Ending’ | Movies News | Rolling Stone](<a href=“http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/downton-abbey-season-finale-recap-i-just-cant-see-a-happy-ending-20130217]'Downton”>‘Downton Abbey’ Season Finale Recap: ‘I Just Can’t See a Happy Ending’ – Rolling Stone)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought it was flowing out of his ear. Not a good sign. Anybody remember?</p>