Eastenders is getting more boring with each episode!!!

I love Eastenders but sometimes when I watch older episodes I realise how boring it has gotten and is still getting. My favourite times in Eastenders was when they had real hardmen like Dan, Steve and Andy, but now it's just all 'she had an affair' or 'who is whos dad' no real compelling storylines just the same old recycled situations just happening to someone else.

They need a new gangster or something to put some fear into the locals and Johnny wasn't that person, my friends and I don't find it as tense as we use to for example when Steve use to meet Phil in the pub just waiting to see what happens was enough to make us think there's a climax coming.

Thoughts?

Ah yes, the good old days of Ricky and Bianca; Carol and Dan. Now that was a story line....sigh....
Not to mention the even better old days of Den and Angie...sigh again...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by instinct

They need a new gangster or something to put some fear into the locals and Johnny wasn't that person, my friends and I don't find it as tense as we use to for example when Steve use to meet Phil in the pub just waiting to see what happens was enough to make us think there's a climax coming.

Thoughts?

---

Heavens. No more gangsters.We just need belevable scripts and storylines and characters we actually care about. Oh for the glory days to return.

I must admit i have started to lose interest...i think next year the new producer should focus a lot more on character development and plot development..so many characters have come in this year, that new characters shouldn't really be added into the show next year. I think he needs to improve the show by making it more grittier but balancing it out with some comical storylines also. They need to bring in a new bitch and a new villian to bring some excitement back into the show.

I think part of EE's downfall is the number of producers that there has been in the last few years. They shouldn't bring back old characters, legendary characters should just be remembered and not brought back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santa's Little Helper

I think part of EE's downfall is the number of producers that there has been in the last few years..

---

And we were told each of them was going to be just fantastic when in actual fact they all turned out to be crap

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santa's Little Helper

shouldn't bring back old characters, legendary characters should just be remembered and not brought back.

---

Yes who on earth would bring back a dead has been into a totally unbeleivable story line

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parkerman

Ah yes, the good old days of Ricky and Bianca; Carol and Dan. Now that was a story line....sigh....
Not to mention the even better old days of Den and Angie...sigh again...

---

Not forgetting the Osmans, Mo Butcher, Mandy Salter, Janine, Mel, Cindy, Kathy, Pete, Arthur, Michelle, David/Simon/Joe Wicks, Matthew Rose etc. Great characters.

I was tuned in, watching most of the Pauline/Ian storylines this past fortnight, and my word, it is bad now. It's not normal for me to agree with Garry Bushell, but I thought he was spot on with his analysis of EE the other day.

You've brought a tear to my eye, Richie. I don't know whether it's through nostalgia or the thought of what is happening today in Eastenders.

And don't forget Steve Owen. Another great character (and actor I might add - they don't make 'em like Martin Kemp these days...)

I don't think it's nostalgia. I'm still in the ABC1 band and I think the show stinks nowadays. My friends and colleagues mostly agree. I can't see it ever returning to its halycon days now, it's been below-par for too long now.

Yes, Steve Owen/Martin Kemp was great, and a proper 'gangster' type, unlike recent creations such as Andy Hunter and Johnny Allen, who couldn't scare a dandelion, and when they did, the whole situation was pathetically storylined, i.e. the guy who was crippled just for spelling a name wrong on a cake. It was so awful, it was funny. EE should have watched some of the old stuff with the Firm to get an idea of how to get it right. With Steve they had the character just right.

It's funny, because I was watching a scene yesterday from 15 years ago. It featured the original (better) Peggy played by Jo Warne, and the rest of the Mitchells, characters who I don't really like. However, what was good in those days was that, no matter what the character, everything was held together by good tight scenes with believable characters and a good script, which really held my attention and made me want to know what happened next. Something that cannot be said about today's EE (IMO).

Like him or loathe him Gary Bushell sums up ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzenders very well an whats more Sir David 'Del Boy' Jason agrees

DEL-BOY star David Jason says EastEnders is aggressive, miserable, and unhappy.

Surely not. He should have added: Contrived, poorly written and over-the-top.

Most of Friday saw the Beales bawling and brawling in a downpour.

All together: Minging in the rain, they're minging in the rain, Ian and Jane, sharing their pain, just minging and mud-slinging in the rain...

It was cringe-worthy. Drama only works if it's built on truth. This was about as believable as, well, Kevin planning a December holiday in Dorset... Or Ian setting up a fake wedding, involving his own kids, in revenge for Jane's unlikely fling with Grunt...

Or Peggy laying on that megaspread in the Vic (Who kept the pig's head? Charlie! It's on his shoulders, there's not much he can do about it..


The BBC maintains that the soap is rooted in reality but their middle-class writers have clearly had no experience of life, let alone working class Londoners.


They're two-bob grief junkies, serving up a grim social worker vision of downtrodden Cockneys. Death and despair are like heroin to them. Dirty Bert's dying ex is up next, but we don't care much about him, so why should we care about her? Appalling Pauline, now a wicked liar and about as popular as trans-fats, will die or be killed on Christmas Day.


If OJ did that one, no one would mind.


Then there's more baby agony for Billy and Honey, and Max in the sack with Stacey...an affair which will no doubt push Tanya into bed with that self-satisfied creep Sean. It's all horribly predictable and predictably horrible.


Heartache is part of life of course, but so are joy, hope, ambition and redemption. No one is allowed to be happy here. No one stays faithful. Hardly anyone is likable - Jane's mum (nurse Gladys!) was like a toxic Mrs Toad.


The men are all wimps, cheats, thugs or fools. The dialogue is dreadful. Characters are absurdly rewritten. Even the non-morbid plots are pony. What would Whispering Phil see in Stella the scatty solicitor? (The theatre? Phil hasn't been in one since he had his tonsils out.)


DO the BBC governors ever concern themselves with the negative effects their wretched show has on the national psyche?


Probably not. They're unlikely to watch it. The soap desperately needs a new A lfie, Angie or Frank Butcher, but there's no sign of one. It's moribund, a stretcher case, dying a slow, agonising death. Even Donald Rumsfeld would view it as unacceptable torture.


SO Jane used to be known as Leslie. I thought I detected an Adam's apple...


WHO was supposed to be marrying Ian and Jane, anyway? Why did no one ask?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bah!! Humbug

Like him or loathe him Gary Bushell sums up ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzenders very well an whats more Sir David 'Del Boy' Jason agrees

DEL-BOY star David Jason says EastEnders is aggressive, miserable, and unhappy.

Surely not. He should have added: Contrived, poorly written and over-the-top.

Most of Friday saw the Beales bawling and brawling in a downpour.

All together: Minging in the rain, they're minging in the rain, Ian and Jane, sharing their pain, just minging and mud-slinging in the rain...

It was cringe-worthy. Drama only works if it's built on truth. This was about as believable as, well, Kevin planning a December holiday in Dorset... Or Ian setting up a fake wedding, involving his own kids, in revenge for Jane's unlikely fling with Grunt...

Or Peggy laying on that megaspread in the Vic (Who kept the pig's head? Charlie! It's on his shoulders, there's not much he can do about it..


The BBC maintains that the soap is rooted in reality but their middle-class writers have clearly had no experience of life, let alone working class Londoners.


They're two-bob grief junkies, serving up a grim social worker vision of downtrodden Cockneys. Death and despair are like heroin to them. Dirty Bert's dying ex is up next, but we don't care much about him, so why should we care about her? Appalling Pauline, now a wicked liar and about as popular as trans-fats, will die or be killed on Christmas Day.


If OJ did that one, no one would mind.


Then there's more baby agony for Billy and Honey, and Max in the sack with Stacey...an affair which will no doubt push Tanya into bed with that self-satisfied creep Sean. It's all horribly predictable and predictably horrible.


Heartache is part of life of course, but so are joy, hope, ambition and redemption. No one is allowed to be happy here. No one stays faithful. Hardly anyone is likable - Jane's mum (nurse Gladys!) was like a toxic Mrs Toad.


The men are all wimps, cheats, thugs or fools. The dialogue is dreadful. Characters are absurdly rewritten. Even the non-morbid plots are pony. What would Whispering Phil see in Stella the scatty solicitor? (The theatre? Phil hasn't been in one since he had his tonsils out.)


DO the BBC governors ever concern themselves with the negative effects their wretched show has on the national psyche?


Probably not. They're unlikely to watch it. The soap desperately needs a new A lfie, Angie or Frank Butcher, but there's no sign of one. It's moribund, a stretcher case, dying a slow, agonising death. Even Donald Rumsfeld would view it as unacceptable torture.


SO Jane used to be known as Leslie. I thought I detected an Adam's apple...


WHO was supposed to be marrying Ian and Jane, anyway? Why did no one ask?

---

OMG :eek: Ive just had one of those life changing moments.... of pure enlightenment! :eek: Its incredulous, but I agree with what's been written above. Ive tried so hard with EE, I really have :( but Ive found it hard going watching it lately. So much so Ive not bothered with EE this week, and I didnt miss it, not a bit!!! :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richie_lecturer

It's funny, because I was watching a scene yesterday from 15 years ago. It featured the original (better) Peggy played by Jo Warne, and the rest of the Mitchells, characters who I don't really like. However, what was good in those days was that, no matter what the character, everything was held together by good tight scenes with believable characters and a good script, which really held my attention and made me want to know what happened next. Something that cannot be said about today's EE (IMO).

---

I think that is the real problem, Richie. It is the ridiculous story lines and the poor scripting. We still have some great actors in Eastenders, but they just get dreadful stories. Give actors like Adam Woodyat, Wendy Richard, June Brown, Pam St Clement, John Bardon and Rudolph Walker something decent to do and it could get back to how it was....but I'm afraid it won't.:thumbsdow

The original Mitchells were brilliant. I much preferred the original actress who played Peggy unlike Barbara Windsor who I think is wildly overated. She was not even good in the arry On films. She just used her two assets.

Grant and Phil used to be scary but now I cannot watch either of the two of them without laughing out loud. They have some fine actors and actresses on the show who are continuiously let down by appalling scripts and ridiculous storylines. Other actors seem to be employed for their looks and because they appeal to a certain group of EE viewers.:rolleyes:

For me, it isn't the characters that are to blame, it is definitely the script writers. The storylines and scripts now seem to be going round in circles with plots being recycled.

Look at the Mitchells. What is going on with them these days? They are nothing like they used to be. Sonia used to be a gobby, feisty character who was loyal and trustworthy with the potential to be the next Michelle, but they have rewritten her this year. Pat is very underused, Dot and Jim have become caricatures of themselves. Pauline has always been controlling, but her hatred of Sonia to the point where she would hurt Martin and Rebecca is one step too far.

With the newer characters, the Foxes and Brannings have potential but they are already messing them up with the 'who is the daddy' and the ridiculous story of family cheating we are about to see. The Wicks' family are appalling and yet, Phil Daniels could offer so much more.

I don't mind if the odd character returns, because that is quite realistic to see a family member coming home after being away, but to raise the dead was a pathetic clutching at straws.

I don't know what I want from EE anymore. I'm not sure if there was another Steve Owen that they could write for him in the way they would need to. I know thinking about past characters, with nostalgia, they seem to be much better than the ones now but maybe it was simply because the writers could actually write then.

EE has made a lot of mistakes,the writing is mainly terrible but on reflection i think like many football clubs who sack the manager cos the fans are moaning and they are slipping down the table,ee make the same mistake with their executive producers,to be honest i am rapidly losing interest,i also beleive that a few more big names will go this year

I think that the storys need to be made far more cheery, i mean the other night i watched it feelingall jolly before hand and then after i wanted to top myself, it was depression all round, each story runnig through was one domestic after another. We had Stacey crying over Bradley, Honey crying over petal, It was all too much.

I think its started going downhill more since the beginnaing of 2006, whenere they basically had a new character coming in like every week! And i mean 2005 was a great year but they lost lots of strong favourite characters like Kat, Alfie, Chrissie, Dennis, Sharon, Den, Sam etc... Lets just hope 2007 can only get better!

I think eastenders would be a lot more interesting if Johnny Allen was still in it :thumbsup:

You never know they might bring him back from the dead

I still think with the death of Pauline, this will drag on for weeks.

I haven't watched much of Eastenders since around xmas day last year, i watch the odd episode every now and again. I didn't even tune in to see Dennis die. But i can honestly say Eastenders has gotten boring. I tuned in for Pauline's funeral to see the death of a legend and was disgusted how they did it. Pauline was not in character, and from what i've heard from my mum, she hasn't been for quite a while. I mean Pauline Fowler, a representation of strong women in this day and age, reduced to telling lies, begging and dying alone. It's terrible. The character i've always known is strong and would do anything for her family! I think it's pathetic of Eastenders, just because the actress wanted to leave not to give her a good send off. I mean it should be called 'Death Square' now, i mean if i was an undertaker i'd move to Albert Square, i'd make a killing (literally knowing the writers at the minute) I

I wish they'd get the old humour back. I'm addicted to corro and ED at the minute because they offer comic relief, you don't expect to turn on your TV and watch a show about misery and gloom, when there's enough of that in the world. :wall: They should stop painfully banging out the same storyline every 10 minutes, (Stacy seems to be Kat now) and go back to their roots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by parkerman

I think that is the real problem, Richie. It is the ridiculous story lines and the poor scripting. We still have some great actors in Eastenders, but they just get dreadful stories. Give actors like Adam Woodyat, Wendy Richard, June Brown, Pam St Clement, John Bardon and Rudolph Walker something decent to do and it could get back to how it was....but I'm afraid it won't.:thumbsdow

---

exactly, they are all terrific when they have good storylines, but now days they just mill around getting a bit of a story here and there.

I would love them to delve into jim's past some more and explore that whole relationship with his son. They just did an episode or 2 with some summary of the past...it works much better with the long term development. Look at what they did with Kat, she started off one way and they gradually added layers and she turned into one of the best characters they ever had...same with dennis, alfie, steve, sonia etc and I think they're doing it with stacy and it's working. It's too much about turnover now and they want instant impact all the time, there is no room to create strong characters now days because if they're not really a hit from the off they're not given a chance.

this thread sort of reminds me of sonia telling pauline off for changing her character so much and talking about the olden days when she used to admire her for her values and such and about how down hill she has gone :P It's sort of reflecting what has happened to the quality of eastenders over the years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by babyblue

I would love them to delve into jim's past some more and explore that whole relationship with his son.

---

Apparently they might well be doing that this year according to rumours. I hope so because I like Jim, who I think has been underused since marrying Dot.

Blimey they were only short clips, but even through a short montage of footage on Pauline's tribute show last night, you could make out the glory days from a mile off.

i'm in complete agreement with all of you - ee is dull rubbish at the moment, i often dont watch it from one week to the next and the plots dont move on

plus, many of the charcters are not worth caring about - eg, dawn miller, i cannot feel any sympathy for her - they got her wrong from thw word go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richie_lecturer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by babyblue

I would love them to delve into jim's past some more and explore that whole relationship with his son.

---

Apparently they might well be doing that this year according to rumours. I hope so because I like Jim, who I think has been underused since marrying Dot.

---

I hope those rumours are true. He's been used mainly as a bit of comic relief It'd be nice to see a bit of jim's darkside back again, especially since the odd flash of his deeper side have been brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bad Wolf

i'm in complete agreement with all of you - ee is dull rubbish at the moment, i often dont watch it from one week to the next and the plots dont move on

plus, many of the charcters are not worth caring about - eg, dawn miller, i cannot feel any sympathy for her - they got her wrong from thw word go

---

I have to agree, i wathced the other night for the first time in ages and nothing had been solved. It was dragging alot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bad Wolf

i'm in complete agreement with all of you - ee is dull rubbish at the moment, i often dont watch it from one week to the next and the plots dont move on

plus, many of the charcters are not worth caring about - eg, dawn miller, i cannot feel any sympathy for her - they got her wrong from thw word go

---

I have to agree, i wathced the other night for the first time in ages and nothing had been solved. It was dragging alot.

---

i watched pauline die - how long did that take!!!!!!!!

it grates on me now - i cannot sit thorugh 30 minutes of it now

Its like last night i watched the first episode and then i missed that second turned it over and they spent five minutes watching everyone cry, what was all that about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sarah21

For me, it isn't the characters that are to blame, it is definitely the script writers. The storylines and scripts now seem to be going round in circles with plots being recycled.

Look at the Mitchells. What is going on with them these days? They are nothing like they used to be. Sonia used to be a gobby, feisty character who was loyal and trustworthy with the potential to be the next Michelle, but they have rewritten her this year. Pat is very underused, Dot and Jim have become caricatures of themselves. Pauline has always been controlling, but her hatred of Sonia to the point where she would hurt Martin and Rebecca is one step too far.

With the newer characters, the Foxes and Brannings have potential but they are already messing them up with the 'who is the daddy' and the ridiculous story of family cheating we are about to see. The Wicks' family are appalling and yet, Phil Daniels could offer so much more.

I don't mind if the odd character returns, because that is quite realistic to see a family member coming home after being away, but to raise the dead was a pathetic clutching at straws.

I don't know what I want from EE anymore. I'm not sure if there was another Steve Owen that they could write for him in the way they would need to. I know thinking about past characters, with nostalgia, they seem to be much better than the ones now but maybe it was simply because the writers could actually write then.

---

I agree with everything you say. Nail on the head...............EE has some great characters at the moment - the best for a long time IMO (with the notable exception of Deano, Gus, Mickey, Honey, Charlie, Ben.........), but even the good ones end up being ruined by desperate storylines. It's mindnumbing how they do it. The latest is the new Doc, May, who seemed to be really good when she first came in, but is well on the way down that slippery slope now thanks to the stupid pregnancy storyline.

I just pray that they never tinker with Pat's character...........that would be the end!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobthechicken

I just pray that they never tinker with Pat's character...........that would be the end!

---

Lets hope they dont do to her what they did to Wendy Richards/ Pauline Fowler. I have to say that Pats character has mellowed over the years somewhat.

sorry to disagree with everyone but i think ee is improving a bit,its still to predictable and they are still making silly mistakes-like holding a funeral on new years day,buy at least its not sending me to sleep anymore like the whole of last year did , mind you we are not out of january yet ,so thers plenty of time left.

I think the problem with Eastenders is partly it being stuck with 'old family values', combined with bad script writing (the 9/11 episode, particularly) and its loss of touch with reality.

I think there's the potential for many kinds of storylines.

*it would be nice to see male victims of domestic abuse, or rape etc. for once to show the other side. They always have women as the victims.
*homosexuality - sorry to any homophobes, but it is much more accepted than it used to be, they can get civil parnerships. Having 'the token gay character' like Derek is not good enough, not when you can explore other issues such as coming to terms with sexuality, homophobia, relationships etc.
*im sorry, but not all teenagers are chavs! It would be nice to see some teenagers who are actually slightly alternative. Fair dos for Corrie on their goth phase storyline but come on! Hollyoaks seems to handle it better.
*mental illness/depression - they have Jean, but they really haven't explored it as much as they can do. The Joe Wicks storyline was brilliant, if they could grasp some of that creativity, then great. Although the rate Eastenders is going, everyone should be on Prozac.
*humor - eastenders currently doesn't have the same sort of variety of humor and drama that soaps like emmerdale and corrie have. Sometimes good things do happen to people!

Quote:

---

*homosexuality - sorry to any homophobes, but it is much more accepted than it used to be, they can get civil parnerships. Having 'the token gay character' like Derek is not good enough, not when you can explore other issues such as coming to terms with sexuality, homophobia, relationships etc.

---

That was already tackled with Sonia and Naomi. Very badly, I'll admit, but nevertheless, still done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CrazyLea

Quote:

---

*homosexuality - sorry to any homophobes, but it is much more accepted than it used to be, they can get civil parnerships. Having 'the token gay character' like Derek is not good enough, not when you can explore other issues such as coming to terms with sexuality, homophobia, relationships etc.

---

That was already tackled with Sonia and Naomi. Very badly, I'll admit, but nevertheless, still done.

---

It was tackled years ago very succesfull with Michael Cashman. Then EE WAS hard hitting drama not the tosh it is now

I thought last night's episode was really good - really gripping. It was an excellent twist.

not a bad episode,but no one could honestly say-i didn't see that one coming,thats one of ee problems they are to predictable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by callummc

not a bad episode,but no one could honestly say-i didn't see that one coming,thats one of ee problems they are to predictable.

---

Yes everything is telegraphed so as even the simplest of minds can understand it

I hope this year they really up the ante on the show and come up with some really great and challenging storylines. I don't think we need another carousel of characters just yet - there's a lot of potential with many current ones, so new additions seems unnecessary, but axing characters such as Gus and Naomi who have had their run would be good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cherryz

I hope this year they really up the ante on the show and come up with some really great and challenging storylines. .

---

2006 storylines were challenging enough. Challenging belief that anyone could write such rubbish and ill thought out nonsense

lol! maybe they should employ us to write storylines

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cherryz

lol! maybe they should employ us to write storylines

---

Judging by some of the scripts and posts on here that would be an excellent idea rather than the luvvies who are doing so now.