DRW50

Come on, Josh always looked like a Muppet. Whoever convinced Anthony Quinlan to get his hair cut should get a raise. He has a very hot body and as the character has grown up emotionally it was mostly just that stupid hair which was holding him back. Kris worse a dress to Calvin's and Carmel's wedding.

Polly was awful. They used her to split up Simon and Tony, which annoyed me, but what I hated the most about her was her eggbeater hair. She looked like some sort of very rough version of Jessica Lange.

I'm so glad you agree with me, I really respect your opinion on Eastenders (you help me understand Roxy and what she could be) and I wasn't sure anyone would get through all my paragraphs of blather. And yes, I think you are totally right about people feeling like they needed to like Zsa Zsa, so they are upset about all this possibility. The problem is possibility is not reality, you can't just watch based on hype. Otherwise Callum Monks would have been a hot stud of the ages, as he was hyped as being. I think recasting Lucy quickly, within a month or so, might be a good idea. I don't think the part is beyond recasting. I do hope that whatever they do they finally start to really write for Lucy, instead of just having her as smirking and being a plot device. I think Gita went away for those months because she wanted to have another child. I think this was due to the actress going on maternity leave. It all seemed odd. I'm sorry that was their last story. I liked Sanjay, well I didn't like him but I understood what he was supposed to be and sometimes I felt sorry for him (the way I sometimes felt sorry for Ali Osman, another very underrated character, along with Sue Osman). They could have done so much with Gita. I really loved that actress, she was great with drama but also with sly humor. I haven't seen her in anything, beyond getting killed by a Dalek. I'm glad to see someone else who liked Ruth. I often hear people say Ruth was depressing or Ruth was boring but that worked for her character. The only time I got tired of her was when they had her become too obsessed with having a baby, which is lazy writing. She had some humor, it's just that people don't remember it. As they don't remember that Pauline had a lot of humor. I haven't seen the siege promo yet. This is what Wikipedia lists for Gita's exit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gita_Kapoor#IVF_and_further_adultery

The Mitchell sisters. Ronnie is so much more lively these days isn't she? Ricky and Bianca return. (I like this one more than the cringey Jackson 5 stuff):

I'm not sure what exactly happened with Lauren and Gaz. I didn't see a lot of that either. I think after he was put into a coma (I don't remember who did that), he changed his mind about being racist, or said he was never actually racist, I don't know. Then he and Lauren became close as she had no one else and they were both damaged. Gilly befriended Tom and helped to be what a father or older brother would be. Gilly began to fall in love with Steph but she was infatuated with the dance instructor Fernando. I guess that didn't work out, I didn't see their breakup, I just saw some silly scene with Fernando telling Tom that Santa didn't exist (how old is Tom anyway, shouldn't he know that by now? Does Tom ever age?). Anyway, Steph was touched by how kind Gilly was and she began to fall in love with him, but he had already moved on to Jem, as he thought Steph wasn't interested.

Yeah the promos were the best things in that story and the Danielle/Archie story. And Scott Maslen is better in that promo than he's been in his 3 years on the actual show... I still wonder where that hit and run story was supposed to go. It all just kind of fizzled. Emmerdale had a decent promo for Charity's return, although the story wasn't up to much.

This is the Max mystery promo from late 2008. It's very good. I love that smirk at the end.

I wonder if it's because the show had a heavy male viewership, and students, and they may have been less likely to participate in those polls. That TIME magazine article seems a bit out of whack for me. They lavished praise on DAYS when the show was starting a fairly serious decline.

That's fascinating, that Joan took publicity photos for the show with other actors. I knew she had taken some on her own. I really wish that was available. I think that the idea became so shocking that Joan would fill in for her daughter that people never bothered to find out whether Joan had actually done a good job in the part. So Joan with Keith Charles? Wow, I'd love to see that. He went on to play Nick Davis for years and years on All My Children. I love the story about Belle's daughter. It sounds chilling. Back then soaps seemed to be much more willing to kill off child characters, don't you think? I was wondering -- do you remember when the show moved from black and white to color, and also, did you feel like, in those later years, the show became more "socially relevant," as some soaps did, or if it stayed in its own format? Jada Rowland sounds great. I remember reading about some of the backstage stories of Secret Storm, when the crew would try to shock her when she was live on air. One time she had a scene in a bathroom and they had put her shoes in the toilet. She also talked about when a llama chased Gloria Monty around the studio. And one time when there was a kitchen scene and the entire shelf on the refrigerator crashed, and they had to carry on. Did you notice any transition from live to live on tape or to tape at that time?

Yes, they are. Viv was great then. I still like her now but she hasn't been quite the same, I think it's because she went so OTT when Anita Turner was producer, as Turner loved Val and Eric and their comedy stories. Since then the show has toned her down quite a bit. Did you hear that line from Bob about how Jamie was "sleeping his way around Spain." Does that sound like Jamie to you?

You're right about the show going through a lot of upheaval -- with the exception of the mid-90s, which were a little more stable, I would say it happens every five years. From my taste level the most damaging was the stream of exits in 1988-89, as these were superb characters replaced by, first, a lot of flop characters, and then the thug Mitchells, but the show survived. I think the show got a burst of energy from the new producer in 1998. I disagreed with some of the firings, and I still do -- I think you could have gotten a lot of story out of Gita -- but looking back, many of the characters did reach their natural end, even if I was very fond of them, like Simon and Ruth. The problem I had with what happened after that was more about those who took their place -- I thought they were very bland and took away from Eastenders uniqueness. Steve was very interesting but I just had little time for Mel or Jamie, and of course the horrible Dimarcos who stayed around (although apparently Robinson wanted to fire them). But certainly the show went up in the ratings and got a new lease on life. This time around it isn't even that complicated. Most of these characters are dead wood. Santer himself said he wished he'd fired more people earlier on. I don't think that means the characters who should have been fired but never were, more those he did fire (people like Yolande, who helped add to the fabric of Walford far more than Minty or Libby ever have), but it shows that a lot of producers are tempted to make big cuts. Sometimes they are right to do so. I really think it's all about image. People want to see the show as strong and in their mind a strong show doesn't get rid of so many people. I don't think that's true. I think a strong show knows when to cut losses, and these are losses. I just hope they can do some repair work on those who are left, instead of thinking new characters will be enough. What remains of the Brannings still has potential, I'm sure many feel Ronnie and Roxy still have potential, and even though I think they have been very badly damaged thanks to Syed's story, I think the Masoods still have potential.

If anyone wants to see it, someone was nice enough to put up all the scenes Marc Silcock appeared in as Bob's son. This was early 2006. He has a very unfortunate hairstyle...

I can't take Sean. Fiz is OK but she gets shrill. I like Julie but they seem to have given up on her. I like Izzy and I like Janice and I like Carla, but otherwise it's hard to care. And Nick makes my skin crawl. I've heard about that. Apparently he was at the party with Ryan Thomas and Adam Thomas, but she chose him? Odd...

I think that people are scared of change. Eastenders has had an influx of new viewers in the past few years, which is great, but also means they may not be adjusted to just how much turmoil this show has gone through. Eastenders has always been a big pop culture phenomenon but in the last 3 years it seems to have become even more of a "brand", if that makes any sense. A lot of fans online seem to worry about the brand, and the show has been riding high the last few years, so people don't like to face the idea that anything was wrong with the show. You always see this in posts that defend the show's down periods (oh well every show has slumps, the show is always like this in the summer/early part of the year, the show is fine, so and so show is doing worse), in posts that defend if the ratings ever decrease slightly. Even the incredible lull and lapses in continuity, filler, pointless stories, etc. that have gone on ever since February were written off as being natural, this is how it happens after a big episode, and so on. The show is almost always doing great and wonderful and anything which isn't can be shrugged off. The thing is that obviously someone at BBC sees the show as not being perfect, because otherwise why bring in someone who wants to make serious changes? Why not just do what happened when John Yorke left and have someone who had been with the show for years (Berridge)? The show has become a bit too comfortable recently and has been too dominated by certain faces, with the show no longer having any structure or heart or identity. You can't rely on faces forever. I think one of the reasons people are upset about Melissa, beyond her being an interesting performer, is that she was one of those faces. She wasn't a big player but she was easily identifiable and she was marked up as someone who would be a part of the future. I think that's a reason why some are also upset with Zsa Zsa going, because she was also getting marked up as some sort of typical Eastenders face. I am sorry this had to happen and I do think she had a lot of potential but the only bright spot in this is that it underscores how weak the show's teen set really is (hard to believe last year and the year before some were saying this show had the best teen cast on soaps!). Hopefully Kirkwood can improve that.

Do you think that her sleeping with Jack damaged the character? I like your ideas. I have a feeling they are going to just ignore the rape reveal, which is one of the reasons I was so bothered by the whole thing in the first place. People said oh well the show set this up, you could tell from the earlier scenes, but what does that matter if it's not even addressed. It's kind of funny seeing all the furor at Digital Spy over this firing. People saying Kirkwood is ruining the show, people saying that Eastenders won so many awards and why is this happening (all those awards they won in 2001 and 2002 didn't seem to help much for what was ahead), people saying Kirkwood is just firing any young character, people saying Lucy should never return without Melissa, that the Beales should all be fired because they are nothing without her. A lot of these firings have generated increased hysteria (Zsa Zsa was going to be a major female character, what will they do without her!) I guess a lot of those posters weren't around during years like 1998, with the mass firing spree. One of Gita was worth just about every character who has been axed this year. Even Simon and Ruth were.

What would you do with Roxy?

Yeah, Janine was played by several actresses. I think the girl who played her for most of Frank's first run on the show was somewhat popular, but then they replaced her. This is the Janine from 89-93. The problem I have with Lucy is that they have her do bad things because it helps move story forward and they just say, "She's a young Cindy!" Cindy, from what I have seen of her, didn't just go around doing awful things to people for the hell of it, or to get revenge. Cindy saw herself as a victim. She often only acted out against people if she wanted to protect herself or her children. Even hiring a hit man to kill Ian was, in her mind, a way out for herself and her kids. I really hope that Bryan Kirkwood moves away from the idea that the child of an established character has to be exactly like them. It is often very limiting, and, with the exception of Ben (who is nothing like either of his parents), has resulted in a lot of kids and teenage characters who either have one-note personalities, or no personalities whatsoever.

Is the show setting some sort of record for how many soap characters are in prison at one time? I thought Eastenders did that when they had Den and Nick Cotton in jail together but this seems to be three or four characters. I'm happy Tony is back, I just wish they hadn't painted him into such a corner. I'm at the point where there are only about two or three people in Underworld I wouldn't mind seeing get bumped off.

Paul and Ivan had a few kisses. Paul and Jonny may have had some before I started watching, but by 2008 they didn't even kiss at their own wedding! Paul and Grayson kissed once or twice.

If this is true then I can see them recasting within six months to a year. I also wonder if there were any stories planned for Lucy or the Beales which will now have to be rewritten, or was her storyline already winding down anyway, since Leon is going. Will this push up the reveal of the abortion?

There is no confirmation on this yet so it may not be true but the Daily Star is claiming Melissa Suffield (Lucy) was fired for bad behavior. http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/137530/Eastender-the-line-for-Beale-life-tearaway-Melissa/

What really got me was that the whole leadup to Ricky and Bianca getting married, there was little to no love or affection shown. SHE proposed to HIM, and yet everything after that was shouting, anger, and then the weird story where she suddenly wanted a huge wedding and where she was suddenly close enough to her father that she desperately needed him to be there. I was looking forward to their wedding but by the time it happened, Bianca seemed so angry the whole time, I didn't even care that much.

Few soaps have ever done returns as badly as Santer did. I am still amazed at how bad some of them were and how casually, and pointlessly, they took a crap on what had been done before...like Sam's return. I thought Bianca and Ricky were decent returns. Ricky fits in well as a part of Walford daily life. He is what the show seemed to see that pathetic braying jackass Minty as being. The problem with Bianca, besides all the annoying kids, is that they rarely show a more contemplative, quiet side of her character. If you watch her first run, that was always there. She didn't just shout. Unfortunately Santer just saw her as a gimmick, RICKAY!!! and the tired idea that she had to have as many kids as her mother had had. They had a half-hearted commitment to the story which could have made Bianca more complex (Tony), but they only seemed to do that story to get PR for being "brave." In no time at all the story was reduced to Whitney repeating the same scene over and over (yelling at Bianca and running off), and then they just gave up altogether and had Whitney turned into some brainless bimbo who has sex with her adoptive uncle only a few weeks after she meets him. They also had a chance to move both Ronnie and Bianca forward with yet another of their PR stunts, the episode with Dot, Bianca, and Ronnie. Many people responded positively to that friendship. Where did it end up? Totally forgotten. It's all about labels and PR for Santer. Ronnie has blonde hair and she's a Mitchell and she is dramatic, so she has to be Sharon. Never mind that Sharon always had a sense of humor, and had actual relationships with people. Ronnie just suffers, and suffers, and has no ties to anyone. 3 years on the show and she has a paper-thin relationship with Jack and a "bond" with a sister who DISOWNED HER FOR BEING RAPED BY THEIR FATHER. I think the problems with the writing for Bianca are problems which extend to the entire canvas. If Kirkwood can fix the aimlessness, the fear of character growth, and the awful continuity which are the hallmarks of Eastenders these past few years, then Bianca might have a chance. Ricky, I think he works well in a limited role and if they ever bother to give him a scene with Janine beyond her conning him. Carol, I don't think she'll be around much longer anyway, but if she is, they can do plenty with her. Based on his Hollyoaks stint I would actually say Carol and Bianca are very Kirkwood characters. I think, or hope, that the relationship with Ronnie and Jack will have to be significantly changed now. I think it was something which was very specific to the way Santer and Treadwell-Collins saw the characters, and their general fear of actually ending storylines. I wouldn't be surprised if they either stay together for good or break up for good, and if Jack becomes some Warren Fox type.

I hope you're right. I do think you are, because when I was looking for some promos yesterday I found two GL clips I had never seen before, they were on the CBS Youtube, they were of the final black and white scenes and an early color scene. So what did you think of Joan's daughter? And did you recognize Margaret Hamilton when you were watching Secret Storm at the time, or only later on did you put together that it was her? I agree with you about Joan. Her acting style was suited to daytime soaps of that era, and Faye played her as doing a decent job in Mommy Dearest.

Amello, here's what I found about the house, Dale Head, in my 2002 Emmerdale book. Dale Head Farm Dale Head Farm sits at the other end of the terrace from Pear Tree Cottage, on the same side of Main Street as the Woolpack. Whoever lives there (we've never seen them) also owns the barn next door. Is there a barn there now, and is the Woolpack nearby? I guess it at least has the same name. I'm not sure if anything has gone on there between 2002 and 2010. Sorry I couldn't be more help.