studioAT The BBC bringing back ITV's classic period drama 'Upstairs Downstairs' as a rival to ITV's new big period drama hit 'Downton' was big news when this show first aired over Christmas 2010.It had a lot going for it in terms of cast (Keeley Hawes in particular) and Heidi Thomas involved as writer but sadly could never live up to the high expectations audiences had for it when comparing it to the original show, and of course 'Downton'.It's never going to go down as the best show ever made, but it was a lot better than people made it out to be. Sadly though the second series saw a decline in ratings (nothing disastrous though) and the BBC quietly shut the doors on the house once more.

Robin Redbreast I chose to watch this series because I loved Downton Abbey and Gosford Park, but Upstairs Downstairs misses the mark completely. For some reason the writers don't allow you to like or even care about any of the characters. It's not because of the large cast. Both of the ones I mentioned before have large casts. But, even though this series has really good actors they seemed to be miss casts. Many of the downstairs cast members seem as though they should be upstairs.For example: Laura Haddock and Jean Marsh should have been upstairs. Although they are both fantastic actors I (because of their looks) I didn't buy either of them as downstairs staff for one minute. They both have the look of quality breeding and high born.Eileen Atkins (who did such a great job downstairs in Gosford Park) and Jean Marsh should have switched rolls.Ed Stoppard (although a very good actor) has the face of a villain and much of his character is written as a nasty cuss of a man. So, why would I care anything about what happens to this man and his family? This roll was miscast and poorly written if this was intended to be the lead male character.Adrian Scarborough (also from Gosford Park) did a great job as did all the actors in the series. They did the best with what they were given. Too bad they were not given something better to work with. For this I blame the writers and the director.

BKTrayner It's really not polite to directly criticize other reviewers -- they are certainly entitled to their opinion. But it would be interesting to know the ages of the various people who have given this series a high rating.While it is probably true that the younger, twittering crowd would not sit still these days to watch the original Upstairs/Downstairs, PBS and the BBC have made a serious mistake abandoning the core audience. It's like a farm stand selling Grandma's Homemade Apple Pie that decides to increase business by switching over to sell Grandma's Fastfood Fries -- with the result that after a year or so there is no more Grandma's anything. They've established a trust fund to "save" MPT, but why bother? Use the money to Save the Whales instead.So here we have Masterpiece Theatre producing a potboiler soap opera in 3 episodes with gorgeous costumes and absolutely nothing else.To begin with, the series shares nothing with the original except a name. The 20 minutes wasted in the first episode that goes to opening up the old house is simply an attempt to trade upon the original franchise. It is unbelievable that the place would have been vacant that long, and how does it advance the story in any way at all? The maudlin long gazes out the window by Rose accompanied by violins -- the wine cellar key with Mr. Hudson's name being replaced -- what is that all about? Each episode has improbable plot twists. The new servant in the first episode who turns out to be on parole and ends up back in jail. The servant in the second episode who conveniently has asthma and dies in the final reel. The sudden discovery of a long lost sister with Down's Syndrome in the third episode who is conveniently in the same facility as the conveniently troubled daughter of the deceased maid. (This particular chestnut is inherently improbable as you would think that mom would have put the child in a different facility to avoid her son discovering his sister.) The head butler who moonlights as an obstetrician. The seamy love scenes. All trite stuff.And where it isn't trite, the material points more to today's concerns than to creating the world of the 1930's. We have the special needs child that was shut away, the refugee from Nazi Germany foreshadowing the Holocaust, the ethnic minority, etc.In the original series, there were a couple of times when something from the "real world" popped up in an episode as a plot devise. One time Prince Edward came to dinner, and the whole show revolved around staging such a dinner party. And, of course, Mrs. Bellamy went down on the Titanic. Here, we get Moseley in one episode, Wallace Simpson in another, and the Abdication thrown in for good measure. So much for subtly.In contrast, the original series revolved around the slow development of a group of complicated characters: Richard Bellamy's role as an MP combined with his uncomfortable position at home where his wife had all the money; and the subtle relationship between the servants downstairs and the gentry upstairs culminating, I suppose, when Richard came to the bedside of Mr. Hudson when he was sick; and the problems when Richard married his secretary because the servants would not accept someone who didn't know her place; and the long, slow decline of the brother following WWI; and the cast of characters who made occasional appearances like the family lawyer who would eventually show up to resolve difficulties or Prudence ("Pru") who would stop to see her friend Lady Bellamy and who later thought Richard would be a good match (and so did the audience) but Richard didn't show interest.So this failed effort is simply a sad parody of the original and inadvertent commentary on how dumbed down MPT has become.

Yuusaku Godai I'm going to go out on a limb here and NOT compare this series to the original. I've never seen the original, so I really have no basis for comparison.IMO, the new US/DS is an enjoyable, if flawed, production. Yes, the musical score _can_ be a little overbearing at times. The acting ranges from fair to good, with no real standouts but nobody really dragging things down either. And as a whole, the servants seem a highly unlikely bunch, even considering that they are being hired "on the cheap." (The exception here was Adrian Scarborough as cruise line Steward-turned-Butler, Mr. Pritchard). The show's saving grace, for me, is that it depicts a part of British history that is usually overlooked - the nation's flirtation with Fascism and the rise and fall of Mosley's British Fascist Party.I understand and agree with (to a point) those who complain about characters entering and leaving the series too quickly. What must be remembered, however, is that at the time of production, there was no certainty of ever having more than 3 episodes to work with, so plotting was necessarily going to be a bit rushed. I would hope, now that a second series of 6 episodes has been ordered (and possible additional series seem likely), that they will be able to relax the plotting a bit and give the characters time to develop before killing them off.Overall, I'm looking forward to the next series, but see a considerable amount of room for improvement.