Maîtres et valets

I tread lightly when I anticipated this new series of Upstairs Downstairs. I was delighted that it was a continuation and not a remake. When I saw Rose walking down Belgrave Square towards Eaton Place I didn't tear up like I thought I would, but instead I was swept over by a warm tenderness. The great Jean Marsh (co-creator and whom played Rose in the original) was indeed perfect casting. All in all, it was a warm-hearted quality production. I just thought it could and should have been longer. It was like a cherry on top to the original. It completes a set, so to speak. The whole time I was expecting to hear ghostly voices from the past, but maybe that's just me.

I was hesitant at first to watch the new Upstairs Downstairs, knowing that it would be impossible to equal the quality production that was the original series. However, with the paucity of decent shows at present (and the fact that Downton Abbey had finished for the time being) I decided to give it a try with as little prejudice as possible, determined not to make comparisons.

Impossible of course. Although this new series is entertaining TV, pretty on the eye, fast moving (not something all that necessary in a show such as this) and relatively well cast, it just is not in the league of its predecessor, or its current "competition" Downton Abbey.

I found it hard to relate to most of the characters, of which there are way too many for comfort. Although the production falls short of using modern language, it certainly has an unsuitable modern way of depicting an era where royalty was revered, where shortcomings were either hidden or not mentioned. Instead we get a "boots and all" depiction of a class of people who would have never related to their servants the way they are shown to do and of servants who would never have behaved the way we are led to believe they might have done. Maybe if all the drama had been stretched out over a long series it would have been believable, instead of being thrown at us will nilly, one thing after the other in each and every episode.

Taken only for entertainment value, this is a watchable soap opera set a century ago - but, as the quality production it is presented as, it falls down on the job.

Oh for Mr Hudson!

It was with much trepidation that I watched this series on BBC over the Christmas break, I was sure that it was going to be a major disappointment as a remake of the classic 1970s TV series. However I am glad to say that I was very wrong.

Rather than a remake, this is a continuation of the story of 165 Eaton Place in Belgravia, the scene of the original series.

Jean Marsh, who appeared in and co-created the original series, returns as Rose Buck, and helps the new tenants assemble a new retinue of housekeeping staff.

The new series is set in the late 1930s and to add to the trials and tribulations of the new servants, we see initial interest in British fascism and the ensuing riots, Jewish fugitives from Germany and evidence of aristocratic flirtations with Nazi Germany.

The three episodes were very poignant and involving and included much humour also. The entire cast were uniformly excellent and I can only hope that the episodes were successful enough to result in a full blown series.

I watched Upstairs, Downstairs while suffering from "Downton Abbey withdrawal symptoms" and was pleasantly surprised. If they do do another series, and I personally think they should, what they can improve on is perhaps make the episodes longer-and a little slower too so that we have a tad more room to breathe- so that the characters and situations can be developed a little more.

That said, I saw potential. It is not as good as Downton Abbey- which was one of the better programmes airing last year- or the original Upstairs, Downstairs which was full of class and elegance and still one of my favourites, but actually this was one of the more pleasantly surprising(if not perfect) programmes over the Christmas break. While not among the best(Eric and Ernie), it wasn't among the worst(Whistle and I'll Come to You).

As it was with DA and the original US/DS, the production values are wonderful. I always love a series with beautiful scenery, skillful photography and wondrous costumes and US/DS had plenty of those. The music is also pleasant and very well composed if sometimes overdone, the dialogue in general is good and flows well with some both humorous and poignant moments, the stories are interesting(the 3rd episode had the most heart) and the characters are likable.

I think the acting is quite good. I personally don't have a problem with Jean Marsh, and while I am not a Keeley Hawes fan strictly speaking I thought she was good and fitted in with the period more than adequately. Ed Stoppard, Claire Foy, Anne Reid and especially Eileen Atkins were even better though, and while he could have done with more to do I quite liked Art Malik too.

All in all, it wasn't perfect, if they bring it back I think it has potential to grow and be better, but even with its flaws I quite liked it. If it comes back though, please can it more than 3 episodes? 8/10 Bethany Cox

The first season is exciting to watch - the characters, the costumes, the story, the humour, the pathos... it's great! However, season is a mess. Eileen Atkins refused to return because she didn't like the scripts for season 2, and she was right. The first couple of episodes are okay, but when the writers ran out of ideas they dredged up some non-sequitur throw-away stories that include a lesbian affair and a boxing match that have no overall impact on the story. The last two episodes are dark and depressing and rush towards an unsatisfying conclusion. My advice is watch season one as a movie in three parts and pretend season 2 was never made...