EastEnders: Discussion Thread

[NothinButAttitude]

EE is doing their damn best to make sure that Danny Dyer is made a mainstay. I've never seen a soap promote someone so heavily in my life. I thought we did it bad over here, but it all pales in comparison to EE. Every event, talk show appearance, etc., Danny is in the forefront. Sometimes I ask is Danny doing all these events because Adam, Steve, Shane, Jake, or Nitin are turning them down? Because I'd go to them before Danny. Even on Graham Norton's talk show, Danny Dyer, who has only been on the show a year, was on the sofa instead of one of the other male leads.

[DRW50]

It's because Danny is seen as a "name," as he once had a film career, 15 years ago. (never mind that he was mostly known as a prat, which is one of the reasons he's now doing a TV soap) I imagine they also think he won't stay around long.

I agree it's annoying, and yes, it's sad the lack of respect shown to Nitin and Adam, among others. I feel like someone bumped into a wall and magically realized recently that Adam isn't just a Ken Barlow "he's been there from the start, pat him on the head," he actually has a great deal to contribute to the show, as we saw over and over this week.

Maybe they can kick themselves in the ass and realize the same about Nitin, who deserves far better than he gets from this show.

[BetterForgotten]

The whole purpose of the Backstage Live thing was to focus on the live episode. It was sloppily put together and produced, and there was tons of filler, so it was never going to be more beyond that. I had no expectations for it, so I wasn't disappointed nor I did I give one toss about it.

BBC 3 should have brought back the Reveled documentary series - I would have done one for the entire live week, and three focusing on the various decades of the show - 80's, 90's, and 00's.

[BetterForgotten]

I wonder if Adam Woodyatt now regrets this interview:

http://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/s2/eastenders/news/a203908/enders-ian-kathy-return-wouldnt-work.html

[BetterForgotten]

So, looks like DTC has been given a special contract with the BBC, which means there's probably no end in sight for him on this show. He'll probably end up being EP for longer than Santer was. I don't think that's a good thing for the show.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/eastenders-bobby-beale-away-sister-5207497

Edited February 23, 2015 by BetterForgotten

[DRW50]

I tend to wonder if it means doing other projects for the BBC, moving on from Eastenders. Both he and Santer left for that production company (whatever that was), so maybe they want him around so no one else will hire him, or they need him to help Casualty or Holby City.

I do think Eastenders is not well served by keeping one producer too long. The main problem is they just haven't had the right producers in recent years. I really think Kirkwood had some of the right ideas (and he was also right to try for a rougher, scaled-back atmosphere and to clear out dross like Minty), but the baby swap story killed it (not even getting into the other mistakes made after that point).

Edited February 23, 2015 by DRW50

[NothinButAttitude]

Well I didn't know Danny Dyer before EE and I am not impressed by him. He's flat as an actor and does not have a wide range.

I agree that someone is finally starting to see the light when it comes to Adam and they are finally giving him something to do. Also agree that Nitin needs more to do. It's criminal that a man of his caliber is reduced to nothing. I know that Zainab was the heart and soul of that family but without Masood, Zainab could've easily flopped.

[DRW50]

Dyer's mostly known for drugs and cheating on his partner, but it's this that makes me uneasy (and his repeatedly acting like it was a joke and he was the victim and it was the magazine's fault for printing it doesn't help matters).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/danny-dyer-i-said-a-really-stupid-thing-2278866.html

If you have the charisma and talent of a Leslie Grantham, then I can see why you get a chance with Eastenders, but the best I can say about Dyer is sometimes he's good at soulful glances and subtle lines. That's about it. He's not suited to be a patriarch or to be a face of the show. If Mick left tomorrow, no one in Walford would notice.

The Masoods - they weren't even all that popular until Masood arrived, because he helped balance Zainab out and Nitin was so easy in both comedy and drama. I remember the New Year's Day 2010 episode, where he and Nina gave such superb performances after she told him about his creepy brother trying to force her into sex, and Masood threw him out of the house. The Masoods carried much of the show in 2009 and 2010. That's why it depresses me that they're so marginalized now, even as DTC goes around bragging about how he doesn't do "box-ticking" (AKA writing for POC).

[NothinButAttitude]

Eww. He officially goes on my skeevy list for that quote. I didn't know he was a serial cheater/bad boy in real life. I notice that he's been with his partner since '95 and their relationship has been filled with scandal since. Their most recent being last year. She either has low self esteem or she is in it for the money. If he's supposed to the face of the show, I hope he does not screw it up anymore; however, given his history, I am sure he is bound to repeat his acts once again. I hope that if it does happen again, they'll do him like they did Shane Richie, who was once upon a time declared the face of EE, when his cheating scandal came out and shove into the back of the closet.

And IDK what they are going to do with Mick in the long haul. I get vibes that they are going to either take him the Phil route or Jack route, which are both very similar thinking about it. Both are 'alpha males.' Both are whores. Both of them spread their seed around the Square [Jack more than anyone]. Only difference is that Jack was typically on the right side of the law, and Phil isn't. This upcoming story about the whereabouts of Dean will determine what side Mick is on. Will he come clean or cover it up. I'm going with the latter....

Finally, DTC can go to hell for that "box-ticking" comment. I'm sorry but London is one of the most diverse cities in the world and I've seen it with my own two eyes. I lived it for 33 days. I saw more diversity there than I did a lifetime here in the US. So him refusing to write for POC is bull sh*t and not a true interpretation of London--something that EE always claims they are.

[DRW50]

I think Mick is probably supposed to be a decent guy pushed to the edge, but probably not a cheater. At least not for a while. I think Charlie is going to fill the Jack role.

There's generally an idea that EE has strong men compared to the other soaps, but I don't know if the male cast has ever been weaker than it is now.

[NothinButAttitude]

He's not a cheater yet. I'm giving DTC a few months before that happens.

And I think this has been the weakest the males on the cast have been. With the exception of homicidal Bobby aka Damien.

[BetterForgotten]

The 15th Anniversary episode probably had the strangest use of Julia's Theme ever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgcWfPT1FH0

But still, even though I can see some flaws in retrospect, the 1998-2002 era was really the last amazing era of the show (and along with with Corrie's 2002-2004 run, probably the last consistently good time for a British soap). Those years are the last time I remember the show being cultural, and not just during the anniversaries, this was the last era storylines from the show were headline news on UK papers and tabloids almost ever damn week.

I often wonder if adding that 4th weekly episode in 2001 was the beginning of some sort of downfall for the show. It worked in the beginning, but after a year or two, seemed to really take a strain on the show. Something snapped in 2003 that's never been the same again for whatever reason. The show can still be good for periods at a time, but nothing sustainable like it was in the 80's, for much of the 90's, and the early 00's.

Edited February 24, 2015 by BetterForgotten

[DRW50]

There used to be a poster at Digital Spy, a big Sharon fan, who would talk about the damage John Yorke did to the show during his tenure, both as producer and in the overseeing job (whatever the title was) after moving on as showrunner/producer. Constant OTT plots during his run, and things like that.

I do think the fourth episode is a big factor. I wish that during the show's prolonged ratings collapse they'd made the decision to prune an episode, and with it prune the cast. Now that the ratings have increased somewhat, they likely won't do it, but they had the excuse, and they don't rely on Eastenders the way that ITV is increasingly reliant on their soaps due to many of their other programs tanking in the ratings.

I remember a story about June Brown threatening to quit if they went to 5 episodes, as they were supposedly thinking of doing 10-15 years ago.

[BetterForgotten]

The storytelling Robinson and Yorke did was a little more sensationalized than what had been there before, but I do think they both "got" the show and you could tell they genuinely loved and cared for it.

I don't know if I've felt the producers since have felt the same way. Maybe Louise Berridge, her intentions may have been good, but executionally flawed.

Edited February 24, 2015 by BetterForgotten

[BetterForgotten]

Speaking of Matthew Robinson, he's started blogging for Walford Web!

http://walfordweb.com/blog/main/4047849/http://walfordweb.com/blog/main/4047849/