DRW50

The nighttime series did look like night in the original primetime airings. For some reason the process has never looked right on VHS or DVD.

Oh no Not Blanche :( I don't think those who haven't seen the show can truly appreciate how truly hilarious this character was. Here are a set of clips: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=blanche+coronation+street&search_type=&aq=f Here's the AA meeting one, which was seen as a legend:

They never said what the relation was between Pansy and Leticia. It's funny though because the real Pansy Faye was Kay Frye, not Nancy Barrett, so that means Pansy had an aunt or grandmother or whatever who looked just like Charity Trask. I guess it truly was fate that 57 years later, Pansy was killed and took over Charity's body! I loved that we never did see what happened to Pansy/Charity. They didn't even bother to give a line about how now that her work was done, Pansy left, or whatever. I like to imagine Charity as an old woman, running around Collinwood annoying the piss out of people telling them, "I'm gonna dance for you..." I didn't see Pansy and Leticia as being that much alike. Pansy seemed more fervent and crazy, whereas Leticia was more restrained, more of a con artist. 1840 also had the continuity bloopers of Edith Collins being killed, even though she existed in 1897, and Barnabas going into a trance in 1970 so he could take over his 1840 body, yet, when he went back to the present, he was still in his 1840 body, which would mean he never went back to the coffin and never would have been freed by Willie Loomis. I would have loved if they had gone back to a completely bizarre, unbalanced timeline with some sort of crazy people running Collinwood, people they don't know, and who are barely even Collinses, and then Julia and Barnabas and Stokes just go, "Oops." Seriously though, I know you can't take this stuff so seriously. The continuity gaffes just make me love DS even more! The costumes were great at this time. They brought in a costume designer to create new stuff for 1841PT so those are even more gorgeous and unique. I liked Joanna Going as Victoria, although I agree Rebecca Stabb was the most appealing. She also worked best with Joe. The later stuff with Joe does not work for me, and is very rushed and poorly written towards the end.

I remember how sensational and thrilling exits of characters like Sean and Danielle were supposed to be -- only to be a damp squib. Pointless killing off of characters and endless baby/dead baby drama seem to be Santer's only storylines.

Thank you for keeping this going! I haven't caught up on VL or AWZ in a while now. So is Vanessa gone from AWZ? I liked her, I wish they hadn't saddled her with that big mess of a story about Deniz turning straight for her.

Yes, he used to be on Doctor Who Confidential constantly in their first four seasons. Not too bad on the eyes.

Something definitely needs to be done. The only good story is the one with Tony, which is winding down, and was mainly saved by some of the actors. A lot of the stuff needs to be dialed down or dumped entirely (Kevin/Molly, anything with Michelle, more of David's feuds). I'm not sure if Collinson will have that much leeway, unfortunately. I hope he keeps the vets and continues to use them, and that he keeps focus on Peter and Leanne, and Hayley and Roy, and brings in some better gay characters. Collinson and Russell Davies are both big Corrie fans. Collinson was said to have gotten the position last year, after he left Doctor Who, but that didn't happen.

Emmerdale is such a mixed bag. Some of the stuff is just not good, other can be surprisingly real and on the mark. More than any other soap I watch it reminds me of what the American soaps used to be like, with a UK flavor. Hollyoaks is like no other soap, and I really liked a lot of the stuff from even some of the not good periods, but now the show can be so dark and empty and the heart (OB and Max) is gone. They also suffer from a lack of any strong couples.

The show is a bit inconsistent now, all over the place, mostly focused on young people. They are starting a hugely controversial new story soon. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/soaps/2744480/Hollyoaks-plot-storyline-similar-to-James-Bulger-case.html I'm enjoying Emmerdale, although it's far from flawless. Hollyoaks still has some good moments too, it can just be hard to find them. Eastenders is very plot-driven and baby-obsessed now, so I have mixed feelings on that. Corrie still has some good points but overall is also too plot-driven and a bit too thin, as it's hard for them to transition from what they used to be to today's soap world.

The main difference here for me is that the Mitchells have just been so played out as characters, or I don't care about their relationships enough to where I need to see her return. Phil has been married four or five times, and all of those relationships have ended badly. His last wife abused his son and committed suicide on their wedding day! If Peggy skipped the next wedding, I'd understand. Since Sam is gone, Peggy's only other relatives are Roxy, who is not worth bringing anyone back for, and Ronnie, who has such mental problems I can't see her settling down anytime soon. And Billy, but Peggy has never seen him as one of the family. Eastenders hasn't had a problem keeping some characters away in the past (we see nothing of Sharon now, even though Tish Dean has said she wouldn't mind a return). I don't see a point for Peggy, or most of the Mitchell family, now. Keep Ronnie, dump the rest.

I liked those, but I don't see those types of relationships with Peggy and the dead end Mitchells. I guess there's still Pat.

She certainly has a lot of power over her character. I don't see the point of special stories or appearances once she's gone. I guess she could show up for weddings or whatever but none of the Mitchells who are left on the show seem likely to have interesting relationships or weddings.

I'll miss him, he was a very underrated actor (and quite attractive - I like redheads). He was great during the Stax reveal. They never gave him much of a chance.

saynotoursoap put up an episode where Winter Austen stalked Nicole through the TV studio. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gl2TjV92H0

Here are two promos, one where Molly shoots Raven, or thinks she shot her, and another where she's trying to kill April. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqJUpVttoUo

I think it's shock value. The show is willing to sacrifice characters for a ratings boost, or more press attention. Lucas could have been a long-term character, especially with his conflicts between religion and his more violent impulses, but instead they just make him a knockoff of Richard Hillman. The woman who played Yolande Trueman complained about her firing, and how they dumped her as soon as they brought in several other black cast members, like they felt they'd filled their quota. Given the shoddy way they've treated Lucas, and the even worse way that his ex, Trina, and Bradley's girlfriend, Syd, were treated, I can see her point.

This type of thing is why I'm glad for the producer change, although I know this may be that Collins guy, not Santer, and Kirkwood may do the same stuff when he arrives. Anyway, it's just a cheat.

He's brought in a ton of new characters, although most of them are working out, at least so far. There's a big shift away from many of the characters who had story with Anita Turner. For now the ratings are stable, I'm not sure if gains were expected, or they just didn't want to see more losses.

Most of his time at Corrie wasn't exactly known for comedy. There were very very dramatic, hard-hitting storylines. But if this means the level of comedy will go above "Look at how fat Heather is," yay.

I think it depends on the handling. The first 3-4 years were quite dark and the ratings were great. They hit a rough patch when they started to become more lighthearted. I think the problem with darkness now is it does not feel organic, it's just there for the sake of it.

That's always been a part of EE. Even now they do dark stories, they just end up skirting the surface, which I think leaves an empty feeling. If they're going to do them I think they should get the most possible mileage out of them. It doesn't have to be like what Kirkwood did at Hollyoaks, with the long, depressing Niall storyline, or the Osborne debt story, but there's a way to make people feel moved, instead of just hoping they'll forget.

That's a good point. Eastenders is gritty in the sense that characters are often miserable but it's more where you can see it's just for drama. Everything is very safe, very cozy. The Jackson kids always look like stage actors who are told to pout on cue -- you'd never believe they're struggling for money, or from lack of a father. You know the Mitchells will never seriously be affected by their problems, you know Stacey will come in and out of sanity depending on the plot. The bad characters tend to be more sleek now, like an Archie, or even an Owen or a Lucas. The days of characters like Donna, slowly sinking into the depths, you wouldn't have that now, because of complaints. You'd certainly NEVER have a story like they had on Hollyoaks with Jack Osborne being so overcome by debt that he faked his death, ending in him being sent to prison. That was unremittent darkness and it destroyed the character. I do think there is more room for some darkness. The way it is now, the show is so obvious in wanting it both ways. Bury Max alive? That's OK, just send him away so we can't see his devastating psychological damage. Kill off Ronnie's daughter? That's OK, edit out any talk of her suicidal thoughts and just focus on her being a crazy baby-obsessed lady. Probably the one who reminds me most of the old days of EE is Jean Slater. That ugly rant she threw at Charlie after he told her he was sick of hearing about her and Stacey was magnificent. The change will be a big adjustment and I'm not sure if Kirkwood's up to it but I think a lot of the stuff he did at Hollyoaks in terms of montages and music was already part of Hollyoaks before he arrived.

I don't think he will have as much power at EE as he did at Hollyoaks. As Sylph has said, they need to get rid of this Collins person. Enough of these "shocking" stories. Hollyoaks also had a few too many of those, but generally they worked a little better. I wonder if Syed/Christian will still be going on by the time he gets there.

A lot of people don't seem to realize that Hollyoaks had those montages before he arrived. The show is a half-hour, edgy show. That was a way to get viewers hooked early and want to see what happened next. Obviously that won't work on Eastenders. Frankly the teens on EE are in need of help. When they get major stories the limitations show. Most of them are wooden and dull, and Jay, who does have some personality, is written like a dirty old man. Abi does seem to be getting better, and Lucy has her moments.

I agree about the Connors, especially Michelle. She is supposed to be the new Bet Lynch, but she isn't anywhere near as complex, or vulnerable, or entertaining.