DRW50

I was, yes. I'll be more excited if he puts a foot each up the asses of his daughters, but I'm not expecting that. I'm glad the first scene was with Stacey, as it should be. I enjoyed the episode other than the Phil [!@#$%^&*], but unfortunately that is what sticks in my head. I was also embarrassed that Sharon got her own version of All My Luggage: http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/all-my-luggage/n9944?snl=1

There's huge amounts of repetition and heavy focus on generally loathsome characters like Phil. It all feels empty at the moment. But that may change now.

He meant someone who broke an embargo to leak the news several days before broadcast. But I did laugh at wondering if he meant trash sites like DS and Metro.

Sean O'Connor interview about Michelle's return. http://metro.co.uk/2016/12/25/eastenders-boss-sean-oconnor-reveals-show-vision-and-2017-spoilers-6343991/

I'm surprised that's seen as a big deal in Trumpland. Sadly it proves yet again how wary you should be when someone says they're stepping back because of their family.

I'll just repost what I wrote there: Finally managed to watch the whole episode. The writing seemed to go through the sentimental checklist, to varying degrees of success. As soon as I saw the black cat wandering through scenes just to remind viewers Something Is Coming, I wasn't sure how much to expect. The emotions of Dot's last day were marred a little for me by having absolutely no one make an appearance at her party, in spite of the markets likely having plenty of people who would at least want a sandwich and various residents who had no reason to not pop in for even a second unless they're just completely callous. Thankfully June Brown's performance and the wonderful scene where she found the mixtape, plus her final walk out of the launderette, overshadowed the cliches. Not so fortunate were the scenes with Phil, which jarred right from the start with Shirley telling Phil the man she'd loved was strong (the man she loved was broken, and she wanted it that way, which is why she encouraged him to drink, so he'd be in the gutters with her). Of course she isn't going to tell Phil what a loser he was, she wants to encourage him, but none of that sounded like her. This segued to the really terrible shoutfests in the cafe with Sharon and Kathy and Sharon and Louise. What "15-year old" girl would scream that her stepmother was a "selfish little cow"? Did someone get the dialogue mixed up? I see that Louise has also managed to get over her supposed grief over Phil to have more giggling with Bex over the great new life she's going to have without Shakil. There are two versions of this character, neither all that believable. More bad dialogue was on the way with Denise and Phil, as they went through the motions of his shaming her for being pregnant (oh the irony - it's his child) to her shaming him over his kids being beyond all hope (oh the irony - she's carrying his child). I remember during the terrible drinking-and-rutting scenes that started this story, people kept talking about the incredible chemistry between Steve and Diane. I didn't see it then, and I don't see it now. It's a shame, because another Christmas, when Ben gave her evidence of Phil's role in Kevin's death, I did see a good rapport between the actors. Maybe because that was natural, based on a tragedy Denise has never fully put behind her. This baby story is just generic soap melodrama, and the acting can't save it. Everything about Phil wandering off to be alone just so he can be reminded to come back is generic melodrama - there's no real reason to be sad because we knew it wouldn't last. There was no real reason to feel Sharon's anger, because we knew it wouldn't last, and we've seen her have this reaction 500 times before over everything from Phil helping to murder Dennis Sr. to Phil causing her to get beaten up to Phil hiring a con artist to play her father. She's not a wife, she's a mug. Lee desperately trying to hide from the man he stole from - more silliness in what used to be a good storyline. I just want this to be over. The scene where he met Michelle was supposed to be passing the torch, in a sense - the old is new, and the new will soon be old - but all I could think was I hope they give her better writing than they gave poor Lee. Other than being confused as to why Mick was happily singing and dancing right after comforting his devastated wife over her mother's stroke, the panto scenes were a nice enough diversion, with entertainingly bad performances and holiday warmth. The family scenes with the Fowlers were what I enjoyed most in the episode, from Martin and Stacey grossing everyone out with knowledge of their sex life to the quiet scenes with Jane and Ian and Martin and Stacey, to her hilarious freakout over the cat. To use another cliche, they're the future of the show, and I'm glad SOC knows this.Sharon's moving reaction when she saw Michelle at the end is what I want to see most for her, and felt so much more like her than the hoary old camp on display with her earlier in the episode. May that die with 2016 and may Michelle's return be the harbinger for better and better things for Sharon Watts.

It's so early - she doesn't look or sound much like Sue Tully, which is going to take time to get used to, but I'll give her a chance, as I think Michelle could add a lot to the show if written properly. I already ranted about the Phil stuff in this episode at Walford Web so I'll spare you reading it, but I just hate this story for Denise. And it's so damn boring too.

Thanks. That's lovely. Merry Christmas.

A December 1996 episode.

Thanks. I know someone who used to post here was a big fan of hers. I wish they could see it.

Not exactly holiday cheer, but it's an article on the plight of people who try to come to the US from Bangladesh. http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fg-immigration-trek-america-bangladesh/ This man and many others did come here illegally, so I understand the deportation, but so much else - the way he was treated - is just a classic example of how inhumane so many parts of our current system is.

Is this Ann Williams in the ad around 5:20? Or had she already passed away by this time? And is one of the other women Lesley Ann from GL?

Is this Granville van Dusen (boring Keith Dennison) in this last ad?

Crystal Gayle interview about her AW guest stint.

Thanks. That was interesting. I think what a lot of groups who try to contort themselves to pander to conservative white voters (in this case female voters) may not see is that a lot of those voters will never, ever support them, more than anything because of abortion. They won't throw that under the bus, obviously, but they seem to be willing to throw a lot of other people and causes.

No - I was taking it too seriously. The Berlin attack just rattled me. I don't mean to make anyone here feel bad for enjoying the reviews and humor.

I think DramatistDreamer just accidentally put your handle instead of mine.

For me it's a thin line joking and winking about the Holocaust and the runup to it, because it trivializes genocide and it gives huge amounts of space to make the people you're against seem better than they really are. I'm sure some of the reviews were hilarious and didn't do that type of thing, but the very first one I saw was going on about Berlin 1933, and it left a bad taste in my mouth. A lot of the Ivanka protests, while justifiable given that she played a major role in her father winning and will now continue to work for/with him while still shilling her products, have a self-sabotaging tone, because they try so hard to be cute that the point being made seems much less important. I was reading an article about the letters or notes people are leaving to Ivanka, and some of them are so honest and powerful, and then you have others that essentially say, "I don't like your father...or your clothing line." It makes the whole thing into a joke.

A bit on the far right gaining more power in Germany; the more interesting part is some of the quotes from the party's supporters, some of whom are eerily similar to complaints in the US (about issues like trade). http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/germanys-far-right-rises-again-214543 I felt a bit queasy when I read those smug Amazon reviews for Ivanka Trump's boots - lots of hee hee and ha ha about how they would be perfect for Berlin in 1933 (presumably this was written before the Berlin attacks), and other cutesiness that blithely references Nazis. I wonder how many of those people know about what's going on in Germany now. I'm wary of just how many out there on social media are more concerned with getting retweets, likes, shares, and upvotes to actually care about what's going on. It's easy to be precious and adorable, not so easy to actually deal with the policies that are going to cripple so many people who don't have the time to read your tee-hee commentary.

I keep hoping more will pop up. I will try to upload some of the 1983 I got... Did you watch yesterday's episode?

@SFK you might enjoy this. The way she says "bananas" made me laugh.

I agree. It's just unfortunate because this is the issue that is apparently determining the future of the party. I don't know what it is about the DNC that seems to lead to such constant problems.