View Full Version : Eastenders- What does it need?
Reading an article about how Eastenders has failed to be nominated for BAFTA best continuing Drama made me think today. We know that Eastenders is having a difficult period at the moment and last week's episodes were incredibly dull. This breaks the hearts of many viewers who have watched the soap fo many years to see it in such a state compared to the glory days of when Eastenders was at its best which IMO was between 1998-2002. Beyond there things went downhill. But why and whats needed? For the bad stuff first....
Firstly what I believe to be one of Eastenders major sticking points at the moments is the writing or the lack of any goodness in it. You really get a feeling that writing is currently under par significantly. You get the strong feeling that scripts are rushed and are not to be best standard I presume this is due to the big-wigs at Eastenders wanting quick snappy storylines to give to the cast. When your on 4 days a week you need to have everything plaanned well in advance. You simpily don't get the feeling that this is happening at the moment. Look back a few years ago when we had the "Who shot Phil?" Storyline which was obviously a fantastically written and just as importantly, planned out. Eastenders obviously hasn't got the latter and is therefore hasn't got the right formula so it will undoubtedly continue to struggle on and make 0% progress you'll stay level. eastenders eems to want to just keep above board it doesn't have the appearance of a soap that wants to challenge for "best soap".
The next general problem IMO is that Eastenders isn't governed by the Executive Producer or the Drama Controller but by the cast members. A prime example is Nigel Harman leaving for three months. I remember at the time I was shocked that us the tax payers were paying for him undoubtedly to go onto paid leave for 3 months. He, if you remember. had regular breaks before hand for exampel when Sharon and Zoe were fighting he went off for 3 weeks. Now since then he had 'Shannis' which i'm sorry but does not warrant a three month break! And his storylines previous to 'Shannis' weren't massive either namely Dalton murdergate and Child Abuse storyline. Which leads into other places: Why was the Dalton murder storyline left closed? There was no proper ending. Next the Child Abuse storyline: What was that all about? Where did it go? It could well have been an excellent storyline to follow but instead it was cut-off. One more recent storyline was the demi baby storyline and Leo. What was that and again the point? These pointless storylines which fill tempory gaps to lead to something else, seems to be a general problem Eastenders suffers from. Are these little storyline points are just put in place for a dramatic effect, for example it lead to Sharon being punched or are they there to satisfy Eastenders within their need to continue a storyline to the fullest dramatic possible effect? I see the later sadly. But back to the main part and the stars who seem to think they're in control. We know about webcamgate and the general stir that caused but what about Jessie Wallace's wild nights out and the younger cast members such as Joe Swah who we seem to see every other day in the newspapers falling around drunk. Now i'm not saying go out and have good time no but to remember that they have a job and responsibilities and if they look bad in the public eye (which Eastenders has put there and probably gained you acces to the exclusive bar your falling out of) then you should tone it down. These peopel are the faces of Eastenders and certainly need to behave less wrecklessly otherwise we'll be left with an even worse public image than a year ago.
Now next is the general problems with how the cast has changed in the last three or so years. The cast has increasingly become dominated by younger characters and also 'fit' men. This IMO is really squeezing Eastenders target age group to a samll majority. I believe now its main appeal is to those who are teenage girls or women 30 or younger and nobody more. How many cast members can you name in their 30's? There aren't very many and going above there there are few in their 40's and 50's. We have alot of older cast members and that includes the fabulous June Brown who is so under-used its shocking. Generally the younger cast members dominate in the storylines and the oldens are left with little. This means that the target audience only appeals to a smaller fraction (as mentioned) and therefore pushes out those in their 30's+ as they have no-one their age to relate to and enjoy.
Next is a more general problem- doom and gloom. Many of us associate it with Eastenders and like it but surely a bit of comedy wouldn't go a-miss. We currently have Juley for our most amazing comedy moments and they are just plain awful. I remember Mo and Micky being together as a double act and worke superbly. A return would be appreciateeed. Also the re-hashing of storylines is another problem. Take Little Mo rape #2. Why did we have it? What did it add to the previous one? Nothing, admitedly it was the Berridge era which we all have hopefully cast-off but I see no real progress being made since and I wasn't particularly shocked when Kathy Hutch was sacked. She hasn't moved the soap hardly anywhere. Another prblem is also disappearing cast mebers. Some seem to come and go as they please. For example where is Gus Smith or till recently Demi Miller? Admitedly Shana Swah is young but that doesn't mean she needs to disappear for over a month! Also why did she become a member of the Miller's? Was it because her brother was Joe Swah and they'd be soap + real life siblings? Well there was lots of press at the time and I certainly feel that it had a place to play within her getting the part. Not saying she can't act but was there someone better and more realistic for the part? Mabye....
Now I can't go on without mentioning the Moon brothers and their lack of acting. WQ and a few others will know what an issue I have with these and I simpily see know acting ability in either. Both cannot act and were only given their roles on looks (Danny Moon was a last minue appointment as well and boy does it tell!)
Now to move on to answers to these problems. Firstly we need a significnant over-haul of the writers. We desperatley need to get new and fresh writers in their to spark some enthusiasm into the writing. Also increase the number of writers so we can deal with storylines later on in time. Plan ahead and get some structure. Mabye evn feedback from the public to see what they want to see not necessarily let them choose the storylines there 'd be no anticipation in that no, but just so Eastenders can gauge characters who are popular and build these and the types of storylines we wat in our soaps as I said a moment ago, themes of storylines.
Tighten the grip on the stars who cause problems. Give nobody 3 months break and certainly keep leashes a little tighter on the booze, public image is massively important and with the constant defeats to Emmerdale (which have been co-ordinated by Emmerdale intentially to grab second place). Get that teetering second place to a stable one and then a first place.
Now to allow all the above to happen I think we need to go back to a 3 day a week Eastenders. Hopefully then the cast, crew and writers will have the ability to implement all of the above in successfully as possible. Eastenders went significantly downhill when the Friday episode was introduced so pull it and bring it back when Eastenders is flourishing a little more.
Next onto the axings!
There are a few cast member who need to firstly Gus- this character is a bore, has had no storylines and is never on-screen he's pointless and I see little potential.
Next is only gay in the village Derek (more on that sentiment in a mo). He is another useless character milling around. Time to flush I say!
Now for the most controversial one of all- Pauline. Now I know we'll have the outcrys of "She's been there donkeys years" "She's a legend in Walford" etc. Well i'm sorry but should we waut till she chooses to leave or pos her clogs? Should she say when she leaves? Is it her choice? O fcourse not and just because you've been there forever is no reason to stay on in the future indefinatley. Her character is grumpy and at times boring not what the viewer needs. Also how many married couples live with their mother in that sort of arrangement? Few I bet!
Finally the Moon brothers. Another contro one undoubtedly. These 2 cannot act full stop. Jake Moon has the charisma of a wet fish and no emotion in his lines and his brother is worse he has no acting ability at all. Does he have or choose to us the acting skills of a good actor? No!
Now for additions to the cast!
What I believe Eastenders needs is a family which is in their 30s maybe a replacement doctor for the wife's part (unusual) and the husband could be anything) runs a new business which could open up. They could have kids which would be around 14/15 with the goal to keep them on into their late teens and early 20's. Eastenders needs a teenage cast as they can do it very well. These teenagers could tag along with the Millers/ Ruby mabye. And mabye a few more kids could be incorperated in so we get a gang who can fac issues such as drugs, smoking and potentially child abuse which could work excellently nd give an active portrayl of life while still being excellent to watch
Next another couples this time mabye in their early to mid 30's. They could have no kids and one could work in Scarlet the other in the Vic. A rivalry could come about. Affairs could be a possibility or mabye something more sinister.... also they could be a relation to Pat and give her a greater purpose.
Now for something that Eastenders has never properly had. A gay couple. This is something they need to touch on. With 1/10 people gay how can Eastenders not have gay character(s)? Mabye one of the Moon Bros (if theyre still there), or somebody new who comes with a partner. No women needs to be involved (Corrie clone not needed!) And characters which go against the sterertypes. So no campery for a start. This would hopefully bring in a new audience from the gay sector and touch on issues that haven't been addressed in soap yet. Just a simpile coming out themed storyline.
Kareena. Mickey, Sasha, Chrissie and Jane all have amzing potential.
Now we also need to get people mixing together and becoming more community orientated. Add some happiness and enjoymnt to the Square!!
Well there are my thoughts. Comments are gladly appreciated.
JSW
Woah that's too much for me to read/take in until later. I've printed the topic off to read at my leisure :D
I'm glad EastEnders hasn't been nominated for a Bafta, it doesn't deserve one this year, a BBC spokersperson has said they expect to be back in contention next year.
Woah that's too much for me to read/take in until later. I've printed the topic off to read at my leisure :D
I'm glad EastEnders hasn't been nominated for a Bafta, it doesn't deserve one this year, a BBC spokersperson has said they expect to be back in contention next year.
I was wondering why I had no replies. I've spent alot of time thinking about the problems are and ways this could be tackled. I know i'm going to get blasted by some for things i've said in there :D
I'll read it though, thanks for taking the time to post it.
I'm just watching TV at the moment so can't view it in depth.
Don't worry take as long as you like. i'm not expecting an automatic reply ;)
WOuld be interesting to hear what the rest of you think!
Do you think EE needs improvement if so what and why? What would you add?
callummc
15-03-2005, 16:38
Yes i definatly think it needs to improve and fast,they need better scripts for a start,thev'e already just got a new producer so that might improve things soon,on top of that get rid of some of the boring charectors,bring back some of our old favourites and all work as a team,then maybe who knows EE could maybe end up back where it belongs in the number 1 spot.
I think EE need to look at other soap who have been nominate and see what they have.. but don't copy.. it gets boring...
Every soap needs a super bitch/villian, but there is too many middle of the road bitches.. Chrissie has potential to be one but we see her now been slapped down by Sam who is the mitchell wimp.. Since Steve Owen and Phil Mitchell left there has been no one to fill that roll.. Even Den made a lame attempt and so did Andy..
I like the two Moon brother, but I never saw the point of introducing them..Alfie has gone soft and not a crafty as when he first came.. Pauline needs to go.. she is boring and predictable.
Every soap has secrets and affairs so that become boring after a while and lately there has been too many murders.... The people that keep the soaps going are the likes of Gabriel and Katy in the Bill... and even Emerdale has Charity but also the comedy of the Dingles.. it is that sort of mix that EE needs
But that is just my opinion and I will keep watch no matter what..
callummc
15-03-2005, 23:56
well i think tonights eoisode was a good example of what EE has been missing latley,good interaction between Dot,jim,pauline,johnny,big mo,there was quite a few funny moments and dry humour,i hope they can keep it up,even biily and the ferreras were good.
Right yes I am going to blast you lol, you knew it :D but I'm not going to do it yet ok? I'm too busy.
Right okay,
Yes I agree with some of the points you've made but certainly disagree on a few points as well! Are you crazy, axing Pauline???!!!??? :eek: She really is part of the shows roots and provides some continuity atleast. Ken Barlow went through a patch where he was only cropping up occasionally for a drink in the Rovers and they didn't axe him. Sometimes it's nice just to know that character is still there. It's very unrealistic that everybody moves into an area to settle down but end up giving themselves so much upheavel in soapland by moving out again. Atleast Pauline and Ian etc have showed that some characters like to stick around. EE has been going through a bad patch yes but it's been through them before and always recovered and I have high hopes for it recovering again this time. I would say it's already on the road to recovery. Each episode still pulls in on average 11-12 million viewers which is great for the Beeb and it comfortably puts EE in the 2nd top soap slot. Emmerdale are usually atleast a whole million behind EE on a weeknight but I think this is partly to do with Emmerdales timeslot. Emmerdale are just greedy though and ITV are over exposing their soaps. Emmerdale have made no secret of the fact that it would like to topple Easties nor it's tactics for doing so. They have a one hour special every other week which eats into EE's time. Luckily us fans have the repeat on Sky and well established omnibus on Sunday. I usually watch Emmerdale but now EastEnders is becoming a choice again and it's getting better. Last weeks was dullsville but this week has picked up quite considerably with little realistic touches that I've enjoyed. Last nights episode was a corker, nothing spectacular happened but it focused on it's purpose - the real lives of everyday people in a London square.
Shannis was a borefest, we all know that and one of Louise Berridge's mistakes but we have to move on from those days otherwise there's no hope for the soap. It used to be no.1 yes and we're all perfectly aware of how bad it's got compared to what it was once upon a time but the best thing the bosses can hope for is tha tthey can turn it around with some loyal support. I don't know what the attraction is with Emmerdale!!! It's boring who wants to watch a load of rural farmers? It's been reinvented more times than I care to remember and don't forget it came close to being axed at one point which EE hasn't. They will never can the show because it's still the ratings winner for the BBC. If the beeb didn't have EE then BBC1 would be just like BBC2 and I'm sure they know how much the show NEEDS to be saved. It is and always will be their flagship soap. It's their only well established primetime show. They even have the BBC logo/label on the EE credits. They WANT that show. They have plans for it being there long term as well. They expect to be back in contention next year and back in the running for awards and stuff. Despite 2004 being one of the worst years in the shows history there was still some highlights. Janine being arrested for Laura's murder was one. There was also excellent casting with the actor Shane Richie to play Alfie Moon yes he's been destroyed now but when he first came into the show he was such a breath of fresh air! Dennis was another likeable character who I appreciated his screentime. The only problem is they bogged him down with Shannis and we had a yawnfest on our hands. I enjoyed the whole concept of the forbidden love because of Den etc and it was interesting once upon a time but once Zonnis kicked off etc it got worse and worse and then they gradually stopped the storyline and then came back to it again. It dominated MOST of 2004 and was pretty bad! It was never about Zoe coming between the two of them it was about their relationship and Den! Zonnis however did lead to bigger things the demise of Den for starters so we can actually thank LB for giving the producers something to build up into that excellent plot. Although if LB herself had been there she would not have bothered to develop the plot into what it became. Louise Berridge was ultimately the shows downfall she just didn't know the direction she wanted the show to go in and most of the time she led it down bad roads which led to dead ends. There was little or no continuity with each big event being forgotten the week after. She had a few gem plots up her sleeve, I thoroughly enjoyed Mad Stalker Sarah and thought the actress was simply superb at acting.
That final showdown for Stalker Sarah was another one of LB's finer episodes. LB just doesn't get nor deserve any praise for these because of all the drivel and dross we had in between.
They can't use June Brown anymore than they do already, at the moment she pops up on average once a week but you have to remember that June Brown is 78 so they're not going to overwork her. I read in a magazine that she would never retire but also read that she has to have a lot of time off to spend on other projects like her donkey farm. Betty in Corrie is 80 odd and rarely used and used less than Dot this is because they can't have all the really old cast overdoing it. June Brown is in excellent shape/health for her age but she does smoke and you have to remember that nobody wants June to fall ill. I remember reading in a magazine as well that what she does is come in once every 3 weeks (so less than all the other actors/actresses) and she films big blocks of Dot scenes so she doesn't have to be back at Elstree for another 3 weeks, that's really nice of the team to allow that.
Back to Pauline we know she's miserable with a face on her that could turn milk sour but she's never been one for smiling too wide has she? I like Pauline's misery guts attitude. She really is there to recreate history. We have a bit of Ethel and Willie in her with carrying Betty the dog around with her and of course Lou her grumpy mother. She hassles Martin & Sonia about the mortgage and this is very realistic. It's really good because it's like Pauline is turning into Lou which was always an eventuality basically. Wendy has just signed a new contract so I have a feeling she's going to be a part of the fixtures & fittings down Walford Way for some time to come which I have to say I'm pleased about.
Onto the subject of axings, Derek's already supposed to have been sacked and I can see Gus being given his P45 soon. The actor has said he's annoyed at having nothing to do. He did make a tiny non-speaking appearence at the club opening night/20th anniversay episode.
Even Juley gets more screentime so things must be bad but I have a feeling this is because Joseph Kpobie who plays Juley is leaving VERY soon. Basically Juley has been axed too.
They don't need to cull anybody else, they've already gotten rid of the Ferreiras, Derek, Juley, Kate, Paul, Den and Andy. That's quite a cast turnover in such a short space of time and if they're not careful they might run the risk of overdoing it. I did hear a rumour that the actor who plays Gus, Mohammed George has walked but I don't know what to make of that.
They really don't need to axe anybody else they need to make the current cast work. They can't keep on axing people when most of the blame should lie with the shabby production/writing that LB accepted in 2004. Axing people is only a shortterm solution they still have to bring in new characters to make up the numbers and make them work. The Square is becoming dangerously empty and they don't need that. I always worry when they start to trim a cast right down but luckily I don't think that's the case here. They have just gotten rid of some dead wood. Characters are still coming into the programme though we have the two new Moon brothers, we had the Millers in September, we have Tina, Ruby and Johnny as well and I have a feeling we might be getting a few more but to make sure the viewers can still identify with the show they have old favourites, Dot, Jim, Patrick and Yolande etc...People like Pauline, Ian even Lucy and Peter provide the viewer with a history. Then of course we have the fabulous Pat another long term cast member so it's still got it's fair share of characters we know and love. Billy is another one and I can't wait for him to turn bad again. Janine/Paul/Barry in Scotland was another gem belonging to LB but why couldn't she sustain the quality? I really miss the John Yorke days. That was when the show was at it's best in the modern soap era. Of course it was an excellent show in the early years and I still miss those days but as time as gone on EE has had to adapt to being a more modern soap opera and less nitty and gritty especially with the dialogue. Those days can't come back otherwise it would be like watching a period drama but I would like the dialogue to improve again to John Yorkes standard. I think we are in for a treat though with new plotlines, we have Kat returning and a big storyline involving Zoe and the Slaters which will eventually lead to Zoe leaving. We have rumours about Phil taking people hostage. We have this plot with Martin/Sonia and baby Rebecca/Chloe. Not really interesting but a decent plot for their characters considering they did get sidelined after Stalker Sarah. Natalie Cassidy is a great little actress and Sonia and Martin are another pair who the viewer can identify with. I can also identify with Stacey Slater it's like she's walked from real everyday life onto the set of Walford. I see people like her everyday. I hope her character is developed further. A lot of people are annoyed by the cliche of kids stealing etc I agree with this but we haven't had it for a while but I do hear Ma Miller steals food from the Minute Mart. The Millers weren't working to begin with they had stupid things to do like burning Arthurs bench which was miraculously sorted out in a hurry and then of course Rosie shouting at Pauline Fowler for fancying Keith.
It was all OTT and very forced but now I'm warming to them. KH1 has sorted them out and given them a realistic toned down plot that the viewe can identify with. I went through a really rough spell in the early nineties where I had little or no money and I know how they feel struggling to pay the bills. It's not easy to overcome such situations and they are portraying it really well IMHO. I feel that the show has turned a corner but still needs to turn another one. Luckily we have a great team behind the scenes now, we have Tony Jordan whose working on story production as well as remaining in his usual position as the consultant for the series, we also have Kate Harwood the new executive producer. Kate sounds promising, she has a good strong reputable record of work across the industry, has worked at the beeb for quite a while AND produced some excellent drama some of which I would rate 10/10. Of course we have John Yorke as well who took personal control of the soap after KH1 left so we have some JY episodes coming up although don't expect anything spectacular the man can't work miracles. Before the show wasn't in a slump so he could produce quality EastEnders but it will be interesting what he has done now with the current lot hopefully he'll have recognised what he needs to do and whose the stronger of the cast, I suspect he'll have used old favourites such as Dot and Pat a fair bit. Great for nostalgia.
Now JY has overall say/control over drama at the beeb so he can still work closely with EE to make sure it's getting results.
As for Kathleen Hutchison no she hasn't been a MAJOR saviour but she has pulled it back a little bit from the Berridge days. Interaction on the show has increased and she's given us some realistic stuff. The show is still missing it's spark and that's what it needs to get back on top again but KH1 did turn a corner. The new Moon brothers need to have a break. They have been in nearly every episode since they arrived. Luckily they are becoming a bit more bearable especially when there's no gangster stuff like the ferrying of dodgy packages. That bores the pants off me :rolleyes:
Jake and Chrissie have good chemistry. Danny and Sam did in the early days but it seems to have died completely now with no witty & flirty dialogue.
Johnny is a great character with a good sense of direction, he has history in the Square and knows Pat for starters so that could lead to something big and some more revelations about Pat's past. They also introduced Johnny more slowly. It will be interesting to see how both Tina and Ruby fair they were both cast by John Yorke so it should be interesting to watch them.
The gangster stuff needs to stop but to be fair Johnny is more like old school,he cares about the community, respects it and only wants to look after it. I think if they concentrate more on his personal life with Tina etc and his daughter and him being a buisnessman then they can stop the gangster stuff and just have Johnny as a man with the right contacts for when he needs to use them for something. Jake and Danny however have a lot less direction but can just be club staff/messenger boys as for anything they can do in their personal lives to develop a storyline I have no idea. Jake and Chrissie looks promising but might only be a quick thing.
Anyways I think I've typed enough if I think of anything else I will do another post. Thanks for posting this anyways, I've enjoyed it! :D
Right another post LOL... :)
I have a feeling the Laundrette is a bit behind with the times but they NEED that for all the intimate chat scenes etc but to be honest I wouldn't miss it if they scrapped it although that's unlikely to happen as it's part of what the show is.
LB also said in an interview how she enjoyed gaining feedback from the message boards and this is where she got the idea that Shannis was something big from. Well I'm sorry but that's just totally ludicrous. Thousands used that site, millions watch the show!!! That's a big difference and I certainly DID NOT want a borefest storyline shoved down my neck at every given oppurtunity.
Another point to make lol...
I am fed up with them destroying characters.
Alfie is a shadow of his former self.
Pat has been stripped of any family.
Billy is now standalone again as is Sam now the Mitchells have all gone and left her neither can help this though but they don't interact enough to unite against this. They are afterall family and it's so important to them although Billy has never been a proper Mitchell has he? :D
Jane is another character who seems to be looking more glum by the episode mostly to do with that cow Lucy but I have to say I don't mind her and am glad she's actually talking now :p
I remember the sarcastic feisty Jane Collins I loved it when she stood up to Ian and told him what was what.
Sorry about the long posts guys but if you can read what *JSW* wrote then you can read mine because he wrote more than me.
Thanks for taking the time to read it all.
A very good post there WQ and I do agree with you on some levels.
Pauline does have history but the writers have made her miserable. Change this around..now! A love interest would be perfect and would really ful-fill her character.
Blaming time slots isn't though an excuse. Emmerdale wouldn't attack it and target it in the first place if it was a strong soap. It would loose out but is it at the moment? Steve Frost as you've said always wanted to go all out for 2nd place and he knew of the bad press EE was getting.
Today has been the first day EE has finally taken the first encouraging sign of moving forward but its a mess KH1 created! We need to widen the target audience and get some characters in of a different standard.... Character development and worthy not celebrity additions are what are needed.
I think we both agree that shoody character casting and even shoddier writing have led to its current problems. EE hasn't moved on from LB its like a conveyer belt that had damaged goods (LB era) then the worker running the conveyer belt was sacked for damaging the goods (LB) and then someone else took over and didn't get rid of the damaged goods and added a few shoddy bits (KH1) finally we're left with our current situation- the real clear out.
What i'm interested is what would you add? I did mention bringing in new family for Pat as she is a bit of a lone star at the moment. I await your ideas with interest :D
I would go back to character based episodes or storylines to develop the characters a bit more and get the viewers to care about them rather than big bang storylines.
I don't think Pauline has been turned miserable though, she always was!!!
That's been the point i've been trying to make in my article. We need some 'tight knittedness' if you know what I mean? As I suggested a family in their 30s and a gay couple as well as mabye a few more teenagers would work wonders IMO. We need a sense of realism, drama, issues and comedy. Thats what makes a soap. And I hope EE will take that road now KH2 is about.
Pauline should have some happiness surely? It would certainly improve my mood!
Pauline will get happiness with the return of her granddaughter.
Pat needing a new family.. they could bring back Simon Wicks.. that would also bring Ian and Pauline back to the forefront as the longest characters there and give them a fight and cause so Fowlers and Beales can stand together again...
badactor
17-03-2005, 15:48
It seems to me, that it is suffering the mal young syndrome,
Gangsters gangsters gangsters and more gangsters.
Poor writing, unlikable charactors, and unbelievable plots.
A couple of solutions would be.
Cut it down to 3 episodes a week.
New but likeable charactors.
get rid of crissy, the hooker, and the younger moon brother.
And
Some humour. :) :mad:
But this is eastenders and the bbc we are talking about.
so it will be more of the same.
And if it does i see a brookside ending on the horizon.
what Eastenders needs is a good kick up the Behind and get back to how it was before it went down hill
what Eastenders needs is a good kick up the Behind and get back to how it was before it went down hill
Well thats obvious. But change what?
Change Pauline's hairdo she looks like an Ape!! :D
Mr Humphries
19-03-2005, 14:44
Listen to yourselves !
I have always wondered what is like to watch the death of something you love, and I know no. It is painful and you can understand why people do people in.
Nothing will save EE now. To much has happened the more and more you axe characters and bring new ones in and then axe them will just piss the viewers off even more.
I know you hate Den like a huge number of people do, but my good, how many GOOD storylines did his death rob of us.
Michael
Get over the fact he's gone and never coming back!
Mr Humphries
26-03-2005, 00:41
for **** sake, its bring characters in and then bring them out again, get real you made person :)
Please stop with the offensiveness I haven't been offensive to you! :)
harmaniac
26-03-2005, 01:13
thanks JSW and Walford Queen for posting. i must admit im rather tired and didnt have time to read everything you guys wrote but i agree that you both brought up some very interesting points. the main thing i agreed with JSW on is the fact that EE dont carry on with storylines. loads of potential storylines are dropped without being pursued fully. for example, dennis' childhood, the demi/leo storyline etc. there are big things there that people are interested in, but its all so bitty that you cant ever really get into anything anymore or so i've found.
i do like the comedy element of EE but although its not particularly funny right now, ive found it quite light. even though there are loads of 'baddies' they're not that convincing so its neither comedic nor gritty IMO. meanwhile almost all partnerships, whether comedic or romantic, seemed to have been destroyed, which just leaves lots of characters wondering around with nothing to do. eg, the tina/ruby thing is a little pointless one has to admit.
i personally wouldnt get rid of the older charaters- they just need storylines! there are lots of good actors who are underused. rather than bringing in lots of new characters they need to focus on the ones they have, involving them all. ian, jane, pauline, yolande, patrick, billy, derek are all underused. give them some storylines for god's sake. i think EE's main priority needs to get the audience connected to the characters again with character consistency and long-term storylines that build up gradually but effectively so that there are explosive storylines on the go all the time. this is one thing that perhaps (i say perhaps) corrie have understood better than EE writers.
look at me, ive gone on longer than anyone on here. sorry im not as informed as the others, but this is just my personal opinion. feel free to correct me...
Mr Humphries
26-03-2005, 09:08
Apologies to JSW or what ever the name is ! Sorry for being cross but having been an EE fan from the beginning, it is very hard to see something once so good, turn to **** very quickly. Quite upsetting and DD being killed or not killed was a very bad thing. The final nail (pardon the pun)
Unless they buck up their ideas and stop this dumbing down and employing actors for their looks rather than acting abilities then I fear it will never return to being Britain's top soap
Richie_lecturer
29-05-2005, 18:17
Unless they buck up their ideas and stop this dumbing down and employing actors for their looks rather than acting abilities then I fear it will never return to being Britain's top soap
Add 'has-beens' to that list as well.
EastendersRox
29-05-2005, 18:25
We need some lush couples, not boring ones like Molfie! BRING THE EREST OF THE MITCHELLS BACK AND AXE SAM N ZOE!!!!!!! Being Janine back too!
I have a better idea - Bring back Roni Ancona she does abetter Peggy Mitchell than Barbara GEERRRRRROOOOOUUUUUTTTTTTAAA MAH PAB Windsor and shes betterlooking :rotfl:
Richie_lecturer
29-05-2005, 19:32
How ironic it is that Babs has recently voiced some Tesco ads, talking about things past their sell by date. :hmm:
Firstly we need a significnant over-haul of the writers. We desperatley need to get new and fresh writers in their to spark some enthusiasm into the writing. Also increase the number of writers so we can deal with storylines later on in time. Plan ahead and get some structure. Mabye evn feedback from the public to see what they want to see not necessarily let them choose the storylines there 'd be no anticipation in that no, but just so Eastenders can gauge characters who are popular and build these and the types of storylines we wat in our soaps as I said a moment ago, themes of storylines.
Agree.
Tighten the grip on the stars who cause problems. Give nobody 3 months break and certainly keep leashes a little tighter on the booze, public image is massively important and with the constant defeats to Emmerdale (which have been co-ordinated by Emmerdale intentially to grab second place). Get that teetering second place to a stable one and then a first place.
Definitely.
Next onto the axings!
There are a few cast member who need to firstly Gus- this character is a bore, has had no storylines and is never on-screen he's pointless and I see little potential.
Agree:)
Now for the most controversial one of all- Pauline. Now I know we'll have the outcrys of "She's been there donkeys years" "She's a legend in Walford" etc. Well i'm sorry but should we waut till she chooses to leave or pos her clogs? Should she say when she leaves? Is it her choice? O fcourse not and just because you've been there forever is no reason to stay on in the future indefinatley. Her character is grumpy and at times boring not what the viewer needs. Also how many married couples live with their mother in that sort of arrangement? Few I bet!
Depends where you live. Agree the character has become dull but that can easily be changed. So sorry I again I disagree.
Finally the Moon brothers. Another contro one undoubtedly. These 2 cannot act full stop. Jake Moon has the charisma of a wet fish and no emotion in his lines and his brother is worse he has no acting ability at all. Does he have or choose to us the acting skills of a good actor? No!
Axing already been tried and failed due to popular, very popular demand and rethinking of producers who realised what a mistake they would be making. Again I have already backed this up and won't repeat again. O.K the Moons aren't everybodys cup of tea I note and accept that. I however do strongly disagree and see great potential especially for the character Jake, not just his sex appeal. He has the potential to provide a new family, one which could get into all sorts. Tag along with Bobby, Alisha, Freddie etc.
Now for additions to the cast!
Next another couples this time mabye in their early to mid 30's. They could have no kids and one could work in Scarlet the other in the Vic. A rivalry could come about. Affairs could be a possibility or mabye something more sinister.... also they could be a relation to Pat and give her a greater purpose.
Good idea re Pat. But Sharon and Dennis may already fill this part.
Now for something that Eastenders has never properly had. A gay couple.
There have been several gay couples over the years - Colin and Barry, Della and I think her partner was called Binny, then there was Simon and Tony. But I agree on this one. They could have the "Marriage Issue" and gay people having kids. Good idea.:)
Kareena. Mickey, Sasha, Chrissie and Jane all have amzing potential.
Agree:)
How ironic it is that Babs has recently voiced some Tesco ads, talking about things past their sell by date. :hmm:
:rotfl: :rotfl:
This is a really old thread but one I love to read.
Change Pauline's hairdo she looks like an Ape!! :DLol! I wondered if it was just me that had noticed her sideburns!? (Note capital letters WQ) :)
[COLOR=darkred][b] The new Moon brothers need to have a break. They have been in nearly every episode since they arrived. Luckily they are becoming a bit more bearable especially when there's no gangster stuff like the ferrying of dodgy packages. That bores the pants off me :rolleyes:
Jake and Danny aren't and never were gangsters were they. They just worked for one, like I keep saying they are just "bad boys" which are much better than gangsters. As for them being in every episode since their arrival on the square yes in the beginning but we haven't seen them, especially Jake for well over a month now. They haven't been given a chance to develop their characters or storylines. Hopefully with Jake returning that wlll change and we will see more of Jake's character, I would like to see his brutal and dark side as well as his soft and sensitive side. Definitely in my own personal opinion has great potential for some fantastic storylines and can be involved in lots. Offers all round potential.
[COLOR=darkred][b]Johnny is a great character with a good sense of direction, he has history in the Square and knows Pat for starters so that could lead to something big and some more revelations about Pat's past.
Agree. Again great potential for some cracking storylines.
[COLOR=darkred][b]Jake and Danny however have a lot less direction but can just be club staff/messenger boys as for anything they can do in their personal lives to develop a storyline I have no idea. Jake and Chrissie looks promising but might only be a quick thing.
I can see plenty that can be done. As for Jake and Chrissie if (and hopefully it will be), it's a long term thing then we will have another family to work on.
Nice post, I enjoyed reading it and agree with most of what you said, but not the bit about Emmerdale LOL! I love it and personally think that ITV along with C5 have a much better writing quality. Although Easties is picking up.
This is a really old thread but one I love to read.
:) Just noticed the date.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.