Never the New

Things have been set up for two mega-rich families and their courts in late eighteenth century New York City. This time the Capulets and the Montagues are the old and the new rich and there is the conflict. The Russells build this enormous house with garish furnishings and throw down the gauntlet. Unfortunately, wealth is not the answer to everything for the old families, a who's who of robber barons, hostelers, industrialists, and so on. Names like Astor and Rockefeller are the old families. Things revolve around Mrs. Russell trying to run things and causing sparks to fly, insulting those she desires as "new" friends. This series looks quite promising with the Julian Fellowes touch of excess.

The old and new money families of New York face off in the new series The Gilded Age. The Gilded Age, I believe, is also set in the same universe as Downton Abbey.

Set in 1882, the pilot episode introduces us to the Russells, a nouveau riche family in NYC which consists of railroad tycoon George, his strong-willed wife Bertha, their college-aged son Harry, and their naive daughter Gladys. Meanwhile, penniless young woman Marian Brook move into her wealthy aunts' home without a choice. Affluent families like the Astors and Roosevelts also appear.

The production design is good, but I'm more in awe with the elaborate costumes. The storylines are entertaining and is also upstairs-downstairs like Downton Abbey, but this new series focus more on these prominent families. The actors are great, particularly Carrie Coon, Christine Baranski, and Morgan Spector. A few of the others seem wooden, I dunno. Louisa Jacobson seems to struggle a little bit here.

But still, I'm excited to watch the next episodes.

I liked this premier episode. I didn't love it. It left me interested enough to want to watch at least one episode more and see where it goes. At times while watching I was bored and wanted the pacing to pick up.

Carrie Coon has been one of my favorite actresses since The Sinner and I enjoyed her performance in this episode. Christine Baranski has been another one of my favorites for over twenty years and her perfectly snooty delivery had me chuckling.

I liked the gorgeous interiors and colorways. The dog Pumpkin was cute.

A lot of the dialogue seemed too formal and the acting seemed forced and unnatural. I have to agree with the other reviewers about the disappointing lack of a seductive character or anyone sexy.

I don't think this will be as fantastic as Downtown Abbey but I think it will be enjoyable enough to watch.

As with many things, it's jarring to many to think of Americans really having an "Upper Class" that was positively aristocratic... The Gilded Age shows off wonderfully that we were just as snobbish and put on airs and graces almost more so than the British Aristocracy. And to watch them speak of "Old Money" is fabulous, when comparatively, they would be considered "Nouveau Riche" to our favorite Dowager Countess! And on that note, to those who say there is no Hollywood "Royalty" in the show, please note that the actress who plays Marion is the youngest daughter of Meryl Streep, who many would consider the current epitome of Hollywood Royalty... we merely have a crown princess showing her chops rather than the Queen herself...

There's just something so jarringly absurd, hearing eloquent dialogue that's clearly written by an eccentric, British writer (who crafts jokes with an identifiable British wit / sense of humour) for very American characters who enunciate lines through equally peculiar, English sounding American accents? "The Gilded Age" therefore is adapted to the screen by Americans, filmed in America, featuring Americans who somehow sound like they're not from America... Because of an English showrunner?

It's akin to an SNL sketch, spoofing classical period dramas... Except this one's hilarity is unintentional, taking itself far too seriously, not realising the ridiculousness of its own premise.

Of course, the logic of this creative venture makes perfect sense; following the profitability of ITV's critically acclaimed series "Downton Abbey", HBO & creator Julian Fellowes have brazenly tried to replicate that success here by taking the basic template & applying it to a historical piece set in the US (so blatantly, they may as well have clicked copy & paste)... But considering the fact that Downton Abbey's quintessential Britishness is part of why the franchise thrived, it seems as though nobody considered how things may be lost in translation, when bringing that format stateside?

What worked in one country, may not work in another etc. Hence, this feels like a derivative rehash of something that was previously done before - & although glossy, boasting impressive production values, full of impressive grandeur... None of that compensates for the lack of uniqueness or sincerity.

Moreover, it's also distracting seeing this new age of clinical & sterile looking period dramas where everything's visually pristine, clean & immaculate... At first, I noticed it with "Bridgerton" & now that inauthentic, meticulous aesthetic has spread to yet another, "The Gilded Age". Need I remind people - this is an era where most citizens didn't have access to frequent baths, diseases were rife & yet inexplicably, streets are spotless, outfits are unblemished & they all look hygienic?