![]() There are a couple dozen others the film’s tracking. Of course, Smith’s not the only actor they’ve got to worry about aging. They handle it well, probably franchise trailblazing it’s just inherently somber, the character and the actor’s fate so entwined. It “works,” with Smith getting in some great scenes, but it’s… a lot. Well, she didn’t pass away, so they’ve got an entire subplot about her waiting around to die. Because Smith was eighty-five and they didn’t want to recast if she passed away before the next movie. The previous film set up Maggie Smith’s character, the family matriarch, not returning for the next film (this film). New Era takes place a year after the last film and has a profoundly requisite morbid plot line. Thanks to the acting, some of Fellowes’s callbacks would probably work without context, but New Era’s not interested in being a jumping-on point. Obviously, relying on competent writing and acting will limit its potential as well, which doesn’t even get into whether or not A New Era’s going to be comprehensible to viewers who haven’t seen the previous sixty hours of content. The film’s got a cast of thirty capable actors so long as Julian Fellowes’s script keeps their material interesting and the plotting straightforward, New Era can never be particularly bad. ![]() Another of the franchise’s traits is the low bar they have to clear. When the end credits come up, they’ve got a title card any capable intern wouldn’t have shipped, but it doesn’t matter. Thanks to those demographics, A New Era can get away with a slightly disingenuous subtitle-it’s more of a “sure, maybe, come next to see if anything’s changed”-and lazy title design. Downton Abbey, the film franchise, has some singular traits (they’re not all problems) most of them related to it being an immediate sequel to a television show, but also the television show’s viewer demographics.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |