[Newshound47]

In 2010 the BBC tried a sequel to the ITV drama Upstairs, Downstairs set a while after the original.

Although very well made, I think it only lasted two series.

It was only six years later from the final episode. A sequel to Downton with a new cast would have to be 1950’s set or later and the programme would feel very different

[Brekkie]

I think the biggest problem that had was Downton got in first - aired in September 2010 with Upstairs Downstairs airing at Christmas.

[Stuart]

I think the biggest problem that had was Downton got in first - aired in September 2010 with Upstairs Downstairs airing at Christmas.

I think the reason why Downton stopped making episodic series was because that lifestyle of a stately home and plenty of domestic staff had largely disappeared by the time period they'd reached.

It was difficult to continue forward into the 1940s. It would become rather depressing without as much interaction between the staff and the family. The films seem to work well, and are still very enjoyable.

[Flux]

Thanks - a third movie always seemed much more likely. I think if it returned to TV it would either have to be a prequel or set a generation or two on rather than a continuation of the series and filmed.

I think it’s likely we’ll see young versions of DA characters pop up in the Gilded Age (there are rumours Bertha’s sometimes-mentioned sister might turn out to be Cora’s mother Martha) effectively solidifying TGA as a sort-of prequel.

A sequel would probably be quite a depressing affair with an elderly Lady Mary turfed out of a now National Trust-owned Downton and mourning the slow death of the artistocracy.

[TMD_24]

Here's another classic show that is still going strong in the states being brought back for the UK. Hell's Kitchen.

www.thesun.co.uk 

Iconic cookery show returning to screens with reboot 15 years after it last aire…
GORDON Ramsay is cooking up a reboot of Hell’s Kitchen — 20 years after he last …
  Source: www.thesun.co.uk

[tellyblues]

ITV may as well have brought back Hell's Kitchen instead of Next Level Chef. It probably would have performed better because of the more level playing field. The concept of some contestants forced to make do with scraps while others have the very best is seen by programme makers as some ingenious allegory to real life, politics and class structures but viewers see right through it and shows which try to be clever in that sense fail because of it.

[Neil Jones]

Doesn't Hell's Kitchen just basically down to being Masterchef in new colours with more colourful consequences whichever way the cookie crumbles?

It basically seems to boil down to don't screw it up in any way whatsoever or you get a torrent of abuse thrown at you,

IIRC we stripped it schedule wise, and since the US picked the format up it airs weekly and self contained (I seem to remember we did it Big Brother style and voted people out), and a lot of the international versions of the show follow the US version.

I mean I know Gordon Ramsey isn't exactly everybody's cup of tea and makes Roy Chubby Brown look family friendly by comparison sometimes, and I was very surprised to learn Ramsey does Masterchef Junior of all things in the States!

[tellyblues]

Hell's Kitchen is different in that the show is set in a kitchen of a restaurant (or at least, a pretend one) whereas with Masterchef it's just a kitchen and there's more interaction between contestants and multiple dishes having to be served up so a lot more time-critical moments.

Yeah, Ramsay going nuts is one aspect that sells the format and the original UK show only had that for the first series as he was replaced by Gary Rhodes and Jean-Christophe Novelli for the second, which was also different in that it had ordinary members of the public as contestants as opposed to celebs. They returned for the third and fourth series with Marco Pierre White as the chef so maybe the constant changing of the format and the talent is why it didn't last particularly long. It didn't outstay its welcome so there is that and 15 years is probably long enough to be away in TV terms.

[JAS84]

I think the reason why Downton stopped making episodic series was because that lifestyle of a stately home and plenty of domestic staff had largely disappeared by the time period they'd reached.

It was difficult to continue forward into the 1940s. It would become rather depressing without as much interaction between the staff and the family. The films seem to work well, and are still very enjoyable.

Heck, if they've reached the 1940s, wouldn't they lose some of the staff to conscription? You'd basically have to drop all of the male cast aged between 18 and 40 because they'd logically be off fighting in the war.

[JMT1985]

Heck, if they've reached the 1940s, wouldn't they lose some of the staff to conscription? You'd basically have to drop all of the male cast aged between 18 and 40 because they'd logically be off fighting in the war.

If you remember the second series, which focused on World War One, they had conscription there too - Thomas the footman off to war, but returned when he got him self injured on purpose - William the footman joins up only to get injured and the inevitable story ends - so they had done this before, so more conscription wouldn't be an issue for the plot.