Jump to content

EastEnders: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Really loving all the focus on the Beales. Introducing the Knights were the shot in the arm that Beale family needed. 

Hope we get a fancy new cafe set. 

The show has done wonders in regards to Alfie's character, and him and Linda make great friends. I'm not completely sold *yet* on making them romantically involved. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

Up until now, I really haven't cared one way or another about Linda, but what a really shtty decision to have her say that she lied about Dean raping her!

I'm not enjoying the show as much as I was when I initially got back into it during the summer, but it's still easy to watch. I've been diving deep into classic episodes a lot over the last week or so, just watching random ep after random ep after random ep, mostly from the 1993-1997 period but also some 80s and early 00s. I feel like my appreciation for what EastEnders really is has gotten deeper, and it sucks bc with that comes a less impressed view of the current show, but it is what it is.

I never thought I'd love Pauline so much. It's not like this is my first time watching episode with her - I watched maybe the first 50 about ten years ago - but seeing her through her different eras really paints a fuller picture of her character. They really did do her (and Wendy) wrong by killing her off the way they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Is it not an obvious setup for him to be this dead body they've been hyping up all year? Since he's blackmailing her into claiming she lied?

The show seems so silly to me now. I can't imagine what the point is of giving Phil what has to be his sixth or seventh small kid, let alone the strange mirror universe we now live in where Phil and Kat have apparently been paired up for a year or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The current show is heartless - a shell. Stories like the one with Linda forced to lie that she wasn't raped (encouraged by her failed drag queen mother) are why I barely bother. 

The only way to be able to get through most of the last decade is to put a mental barrier between 1985 and the mid or late '00s and everything since. For me that would probably be the repulsive Archie storyline.

That is the point, yes. I've seen people go on about how "realistic" her actions are and how no one should complain because it's good drama, but it's not.

Phil already has a child with Denise that he never sees or mentions. This is the end result of so-called "legacy children" who are supposed to be important because of their last name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I've seen speculation that it could be Theo, too, which went away when it looked like Freddie killed him, but I guess since he survived, it could still be him. I think it's a safe bet that it's one or the other.

I think Albie is only Phil's 4th kid? Ben, Louise, the kid with Denise (whose name I don't know), and Albie. Still silly, though. Phil and Kat together is weird as hell, and it smacks of putting random characters together for the sake of NOT having them together with their definitive partner. What's the point of Kat being with Phil if she's still spending most of her time on screen with Alfie? And now Phil has a secret love child with Sharon. There's no reason to care about Phil and Kat as a couple of that's the way it's going to go.

I absolutely loathe Elaine, and yes, she gives drag queen. I'm not crazy about George, either - he's too comfortable in the Vic and the Square in general for someone who just showed up a few months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Taking a break from the show, as I was disgusted with the show playing fast and loose with Linda's rape. I'll probably tune in once Denise returns and we get more of the Jack/Sam/Denise/Ricky/Lily story, but the Linda/Dean story is losing me. Panesars story is as well. 

Still looking forward to Christmas though.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members

I saw lots of criticism for Linda denying her rape, but u found those scenes powerful. This recent arc with Dean has helped me become invested in her character. I feel like the writers were very clear that he did rape her and this is simply him further victimizing her. If anything, it just made me hate Dean more. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's the problem for me. I don't need to hate Dean more. The show spent a year and a half with him as a serial rapist. The show has done almost nothing with Linda all year, then bring back her rapist to traumatize her even more for the sake of a "whodunit." It's the type of shock value writing and misogyny that makes the show so empty for me now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I get that, but the reason I connected with this is because in real life this is likely what would happen. 
 

In real life it’s common for men to get off when accused of rape and since his family is in the same small community, it’s likely that she would have to deal with him again. Now I’ll admit you didn’t need this and could’ve settled on just the 5 other women for this story, but I like that they included her and dug into a past story to make it work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Or Megan is shot by mobsters as retaliation for Dave's unpaid gambling debts.
    • Finland seemed such an odd choice for a location shoot. ATWT went to Greece and later Spain while GL had Tenerife and there were others in that timeframe. But Finland not being a known tourist destination or offering the tropical/sunny atmosphere usually associated with location shoots seems off brand. Maybe they were negotiating a deal with a tourist association and it fell through.
    • I was talking about 1986, but the glimpses of 1982 are about the same. 
    • I skimmed some of the 1982 synopses; Steve was planning on an opening an office in Finland, and I think Jim went there as part of the preparation. That probably was a big issue; AW had already gone to San Diego that year, with Rachel/Steve/Mitch. And to upstate NY with Pete and Diana. I wonder if upstate was as expensive lol  AW in 1982 has always fascinated me, because of how messy it was 
    • That makes sense. What a messy time for the show. And any changes they made were mostly for the worse.
    • The transition from Neal to Adam was very abrupt, and to be honest my theory is that the character of Neal was designed so that we think he is super shady but then it turns out that he was on the side of good all along so Neal could have seamlessly become a hero of the BCPD with no need for Adam. I don't know whether Robert Lupone was hired on a short contract or if he was fired from a longer-term contract because they decided they wanted someone who was more of a leading man type, but I can imagine a scenario where Charles Grant did both the undercover Egyptian treasure/flirt with Victoria and the straighter-arrow day to day police investigation. But in my imagined scenario the MJ prostitution plotline probably doesn't exist and instead he probably continues a relationship with Victoria. The story seems very odd to me. I assume that David Canary would have been included only because a plotline where Steve is going to Finland in which only Rachel is seen in actual Finland seems unlikely. The synopses explicitly mention that Alice can't go with Steve but would whoever was playing Alice at that time have had the kind of clout to get the remote cancelled? It also strikes me as unlikely that production would have approved the expensive location shoot and *then* cancelled it only because of jealousy. It seems more likely that they rejected it because of the expense but then the jealousy part got added to the gossip speculatively, possibly because while it was being worked out they justified not including more castmembers because of the expense. 
    • My comment has nothing to do with cast resentment, but does relate to the Finland location shoot: It may be a coincidence, but Jim Matthews died in Finland in 1982.  Hugh Marlowe's final episode was in April 1982, but the character probably didn't die untll May or June. (I'm unable to find the character's date of death, only the date of Marlowe's final episode). SInce Jim and Rachel had very little interaction after around 1975, it is unlikely Jim's death in Finland had any connection to Rachel's potential visit, but the choice to have Jim die in that location at that time is a head-scratcher.  I'm sure the writers sent Jim on an extended trip (and off-screen) because of Marlowe's illness.  But Finland seems like a strange choice considering the (then) recently cancelled location shoot.  
    • I totally understand your sloths concern about it and I agree with you. Let’s hope the show plays it’s cards right.    Further comments about the last few episodes: - I liked that one of the attendees was filming the scene. That’s realistic. I wonder if the writers will follow up with that.  - Martin and Smitty trying to drag Leslie out was very heteronormative, so perfectly in line with them two as characters lol.    As for the future: it’s obvious the Duprees will come to accept Eva one way or another, but the rivalry with Kay should be here for the long term   On the topic of acting: the only bad actors I’m seeing are Ted and Derek. Tomas hasn’t proven to be either good or bad, so far, but he’s certainly mediocre and uncharismatic. He sucks the energy out of the scenes and I don’t see any couple of women ever vying for him. 
    • I’m trying to think which actors VW were working with at the time, and none of them had been there for a while. Even like Mac and Ada didn’t have that big of a part in Rachel’s storyline.  And Jamie was involved with all that movie stuff.
    • Brooke did ads before ATWT too. That probably helped get her the job. After ATWT she seemed to branch more into hosting, along with ads.  I think I saw Kelley in an ad or two, but you're right she wasn't on as much. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy