Logo

Show: Cranford Christmas (BBC)

Director: Simon Curtis

Starring: Judi Dench, Imelda Staunton, Julia McKenzie, Lisa Dillon, Jonathan Pryce.

Plot: We return to the town of Cranford in 1844, a year after the wedding of Dr Harrison and Sophy Hutton.

Among the newbies are Mr Buxton (Jonathan Pryce) a wealthy owner of a local salt mine, his son William (Tom Hiddleston), who longs to be an engineer, despite his father’s wishes that he go into politics, and Mr Buxton’s wealthy ward Erminia Whyte (Michelle Dockery). Also debuting is local widow Mrs Bell (Lesley Sharpe), her good-for-not-very-much son Edward (Matthew McNulty) and daughter Peggy (Jodie Whittaker), who's trodden on daily by her mother and brother.

Lady Ludlow’s son Lord Septimus (Rory Kinner), makes is long awaited appearance, if only to stir up trouble for a few of Cranford’s residents. He seems to have inherited all of his mother’s snobbery, without any of her humility.

As too be expected, the railway features heavily in Cranford Christmas, tying all the plot points together. The railway plot is particularly well handled. One of the show’s finest moments is when Miss Matty realises that the railway MUST come to Cranford, or the town won’t survive. It is moments like these where we see the woman Miss Matty might have been had she not lived under Miss Deborah’s thumb for all those years between William Buxton and Peggy Bell fails slightly, mainly because Peggy is far too bland to be of any real interest.

There is something wonderful about the scene where the ladies (and a few others) ride in the train for the first time. For us to day, trains are such commonplace objects that you forget what that very first experience must have been like.

Cranford Christmas allows more development for characters who were relatively minor players first time around, particularly Jim Hearne and Mrs Jamieson. But the romance falls flat, mainly because Peggy is far too bland to be of any real interest.

 

 

I must confess myself disappointed in the development of Miss Smith. Perhaps that’s because I always considered Miss Mary Smith to be the sort of unofficial narrator of the first series, a role which has passed onto Miss Matty, so it seemed strange to be arriving in Cranford without her. But the thing that annoyed me most of all was her determination to be a writer. Why must every ‘forward thinking,’ ‘independent’ woman in period dramas must always want to be a writer? I confess, I have not read the novellas on which the television series is based, so I don’t know whether this is true to the book, but on screen it just seems like a bit of a lazy use of a well worn cliché.

Performances are as strong as ever. Cranford’s ladies are, of course, superb. Judi Dench does excel herself. And i wuld like to take this opportunity to recognise Emma Fielding (Miss Galindo), who is always wonderful. Of the Newcomers, it is the males who stand out. Jonathan Pryce is as fabulous as always, Tom Hiddleston has an endearing youthful eagerness, and Matthew McNulty clearly relishes playing evil.

What Cranford Christmas really brings to the fore is that Cranford (the town) is not a place for married women. Newly married Sophy Hutton has left the town. Caroline Tompkinso, who was engaged to the town butcher at the end of series one, is in confinement and is absent for the entire series two. The story cannot even contain Martha, Miss Matty's maid, who married Jem Hearne also in the last series. The show clearly prescribes the power to the single ladies of Cranford. Even in terms of basic narrative power,  if the married women aren't there, then the can't have a story. (for a more academic reading of the first series of Cranford, particularly in relation to he rol of women, see here.

Technically, theoretically, Cranford Christmas achieves what it’s predecessor did: a mixture of laughter and tragedy and social commentary. But there is something missing. It doesn’t have the same ease about it. It feels slightly forced and doesn’t flow as well as the original. It’s almost as if it is trying too hard to capture the magic of the first series, which is is impossible to do, since season one was so near perfection, there is no way you can top it.

Should I See It?

If you enjoyed the first series, than yes it is a lovely companion piece, but don’t hold your expectations too high.

After re-watching Cranford on ABC2, I feel compelled to write a review, if only just to spread the word on this fantastic miniseries from the BBC.

I would expect nothing less from the producers of the 1996 miniseries Pride and Prejudice, which gave every woman around the world Colin Firth as the dreamy Mr Darcy. Up until now, Pride and Prejudice has been the shining jewel in the BBC crown. However, a charming script and an ensemble of wonderful performances, suggests that the BBC might have a new crowning glory.

Instead of the usual straight forward page to screen adaptations, writer Heidi Thomas and producers Sue Birtwistle and Susie Conklin have combined three novellas by Elizabeth Gaskell- Cranford, My Lady Ludlow and Mr Harrison's Confessions- into a seamless story that enchants.


Often period dramas seem to descend into merely who marries who, but somehow Cranford manages to escape this by engaging with social issues of the time. Cranford does not shy away from the harsh realities of Victorian living. Death and illness abound. Poverty and the underprivileged lower classes are explored in what is perhaps Cranford’s most touching storyline involving a squatter’s son Harry Gregson (Alex Etel), Lady Ludlow (Francesca Annis) and the manager of her estate Mr Carter (Philip Glenister).


The emerging technology of the day is regarded with fear and suspicion. There is great disapproval of new doctor Frank Harrison’s (Simon Woods) methods. The reaction to the news that the railway is coming to Cranford tells you everything you need to know about the characters and the world in which they live.

What separates Cranford from a lot of other period dramas is the role of the women in the story. In Cranford, the woman ARE the story. Even though they are either widows or spinsters, or maybe because of it, the power of the town rests firmly in their hands. That their power is, for the most part, a moral and social power as opposed to monetary says something about both their time and ours. Out of that display of power springs a feminism that never seems out of context.

Cranford does explore the plight of the unmarried woman in Victorian times. It is dealt with both comically (Miss Pole) and with reverence (Miss Galindo). In this respect a character such as Miss Pole demonstrates idiosyncrasies that come out of her situation and the time in which she lives. In less careful hands, Miss Pole could have been an absurdity. But it is a credit to writer Heidi Thomas that she has taken such skill and care to create these characters.



Of course it wouldn’t be a period drama without a love story, and in Cranford we have two. The young blossoming romance between Dr Harrison and Sophy Hutton, the rectors daughter, is juxtaposed with the older, more staid, yet unrequited love between Miss Matty and Mr Holbrook.

I must admit that it does help that the cast list of Cranford reads as a who’s who of British Film and television.

At the core is a wonderfully warm performance from British stage actress Lisa Dillon as Miss Mary Smith, a newcomer to Cranford, who discovers the town much at the same rate as the audience does.

Imelda Staunton is a particular standout as the aforementioned idiosyncratic Miss Pole. And I have to admit I was relieved to see Judi Dench do something other than just the Judi Dench thing in her role as Miss Matty.

While it was Eileen Atkins that won the BAFTA for her role as Miss Deborah Jenkins, the moral compass of the town, my favourite performance would have be that of Francesca Annis as Lady Ludlow, who despite have the iciness of the aristocracy, is able to engage the audience’s sympathy with the recognition that the aristocracy is fast becoming obsolete.

Though I have singled out a few cast members here, it really is unfair to do so as it is an ensemble piece and everyone is terrific.

Cranford creates a wonderfully vivid portrait of Victorian living with a creativity and an elegance that we could use more of in on screen entertainment.

Should I See It?
Definitely not to be missed. I dare you not to like it.