MovieChat Forums > The Edwardian Country House (2002) Discussion > Fake or Edited?

Fake or Edited?

posted 20 years ago by GarryQ
15 replies | jump to latest

One of the user comments complains that the series was faked. But why comment when s/he admits to barely remembering anything after over a year since seeing the programs?

Obviously in the editing the more interesting bits where chosen, who wants to see three months of the scullery maid cleaning pans?

And I was fascinated by the "If nothing else it educated the viewer on some (though not always accurately, and not always thuroughly) of the particulars of an Edwardian household." … So not only was this faked it wasn’t faked very well.

He also complains about the two servants winding up in bed together. Apart from this happening as the series wound down, I agree, this could have been set up. What happened in my family would have been far more likely: son of the master has his way with servant girl and dies before making an honest woman of her. Result: my great grandfather adopts baby, and servant carries on living as a member of our family. If I didn’t have the birth certificates I’d think it was a soap opera

[–] Blueghost 20 years ago

Several shots were lock downs, which typically do not occur in documentaries. The matriarch having concerns for the staff, then heading down stairs to see the living and work conditions of the servants, and then doing nothing, seemed odd (to say the least). And let's not forget the "French" chef's performance, which seemed excessively over the top. I also remember seeing a number of scenarios that smacked of being staged, or if not staged, then "preconditioned" as to solicit a response or series of events and reactions.

Let's put it this way, if you can believe the part about the couple in bed being a set up, then how is it possible not to consider the very same for the rest of the series?

Years back I worked on a documentary, and one of the jokes with the crew was that the more things were setup the more "real" the film looked. It was entirely unintentional, but occasionally we had to reset for missed footage. And in the second take things always seemed to be more convincing than in the first take.

True, it's been a while since I saw this mini series, but I distinctly remember sitting on the couch and smirking at aspects that I thought were absoloute setups. No, I don't claim to be an authority on the Victorian era, but I do have knowledge enough to have noticed a couple of minor innacuracies. But like I said in my comments it's been a while since I've seen the show, so I can't recall much of those particulars.

I hope this explains my position.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Blueghost 20 years ago

I'm sorry, but I simply don't believe it. :-) I stand by my previous statements.

[–] klkitchens 19 years ago

I think the bed thing WAS faked, but the two servants. I think they planned on getting caught by the others and piled clothes. I believe they were both clothed under the covers.

Other parts, I do feel were staged -- the news articles, etc.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Blueghost 15 years ago

You folks are wrong; the whole thing was staged.

Accept it.

[–] jo979 15 years ago

No it wasn't. End of.

[–] Blueghost 11 years ago

ROFL

So you buy into the two servants trying to escape punishment, and thought it real. You thought the French Chef was real. You thought the elder gentleman who narrated the thing was real and conventional, or rather he was giving his real reactions and not a performance.

Man that makes me laugh.

[–] harlot-2 10 years ago

If you find that hilarious you really need to get out more. This was filmed in 2001 before reality shows were heavily faked. I think some parts were probably redone but other parts were real. Get over it.

[–] donnaber 10 years ago

Blueghost, no one could fake the kind of snotty comments made by the lousy family (not even a middle-class family) they got to move in there. I mean what a bunch of losers.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] aasoloway 10 years ago

I don't really if some things were faked as long as they were thing that could have happened.

Reality would probably be really boring - if they punch it up to show things that we might not have imagined it's kind of educational.

[–] dsrtrosy-1 10 years ago

I'm not sure I understand the question when this was NOT real, but an experiment. These spoiled, modern day people agreed to recreate the life of an Edwardian family, down to the hall boy. Of course it's "fake"--this didn't happen in 1906, but in 2001. It's a faulty presumption to wonder if it was faked.

I normally like these experimental "back in time" shows, but this one was awful and I had to quit watching because the people who agreed to it didn't take the experiment seriously. What a bunch of idiots! It wasn't about trying to force their modern day perceptions on the past. It was about experiencing what it would REALLY have been like. Most of the staff would have lost their jobs by the second episode, and all but the most senior staff by the fourth. What felt fake to me was the fact that the people who were playing the game and trying to have an authentic experience kept having to make allowances for a bunch of pampered babies whining about their damned rights.

GIVE ME A BREAK!

[–] cookiela2001 8 years ago

the people who agreed to it didn't take the experiment seriously. What a bunch of idiots! It wasn't about trying to force their modern day perceptions on the past. It was about experiencing what it would REALLY have been like.

This is an example of how for some people, something can seem doable in theory, but then feel intolerable when actually experienced. They kept losing kitchen maids because few 21st Century white (by which I mean relatively privileged, all things considered) people will agree to scrub pots and do heavy cleaning for 16 hours a day for 3 months. Physically and emotionally, they just weren't up to the task.

Most of the staff would have lost their jobs by the second episode, and all but the most senior staff by the fourth.

I think you can only push the experiment so far. In real life, those servants would have "made it work" by any means necessary, because if they lost their jobs they'd be sleeping by the side of the road. The participants couldn't really go whole hog in accepting the reality because it was not the reality.

What felt fake to me was the fact that the people who were playing the game and trying to have an authentic experience kept having to make allowances for a bunch of pampered babies whining about their damned rights.

To have basic human rights and courtesies, a safe 8-hour work day and modern hygiene (such as hot baths) doesn't make someone "pampered". This is probably the main lesson all the participants came away with (except for Sir John, who was unchecked at the top of the heap, and basically got a nice vacation.)
.

[–] safenoe 7 years ago

Reality TV is what it is, but ironically, towards the end of the final episode of Edwardian Country House, you see Dr Avril Anson ("Miss Avril" to us viewers) driving off in a red sports car after reality wraps up. But it turns out Avril didn't own the car, and she only had use of it for about 30 minutes.

Then, much to the surprise of the "downstairs staff", Dr Anson returned dressed in modern clothes to say thank you to all the staff, something which the staff were excited about. This of course wasn't filmed, but good to know Dr Anson appreciated the services of all the folk playing the servants.

You can read more here:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/19/1032054870370.html