EastEnders: Discussion Thread

[jfung79]

Needs overhauling? Not according to the two people quoted by Sylph immediately above your post. Their comments jive with my feeling from reading the synopses that the show just needs some tweaking, not a big overhaul.

Ben, were you thinking of Kate Harwood maybe?

Edited November 3, 2009 by jfung79

[Y&RWorldTurner]

I meant in the way stories are crafted, the types of stories being told, and in the the way they're executed, which seems to be a big problem with EE these days.

Usually when a new producer comes in at one of the Brit soaps, there's always some overhauling though. I don't expect this transition to be any different, especially with Kirkwood.

Edited November 3, 2009 by Y&RWorldTurner

[jfung79]

Ah, I see. Yeah, execution (pacing, setup, interweaving/integration, physical affection shown) seems to be the main problem that is coming up in the disgruntled comments people are making in this thread. That's probably why I can't tell from just reading episode synopses - from a removed, summary level, the stories seem fine.

Oh wow, really? I never noticed before. EastEnders transitions of producers seemed to flow so smoothly when I was a regular viewer in the 90s-early 2000s. Then five years later, you could look back and go OMG half the cast has changed, but it was never jarring on screen. I hope this transition can be just as smooth. Edited November 3, 2009 by jfung79

[LondonScribe]

Seeing as my name was mentioned, and I've been looking for a reason to post after merely being a lurker for the best part of the year, I thought I would comment on this.

I think it goes without saying that I did NOT see this coming. If there was ever a show Bryan Kirkwood was 'destined' to write for, it was Coronation Street. Then again, Maria Arena Bell wasn't supposed to be the Big Bad Wolf, so nothing can be taken for granted.

This is possibly the biggest challenge of Bryan Kirkwood's producing career. With all due respect to Hollyoaks (which has, for the record, declined massively since Lucy Allan has taken the helm), Eastenders is a much bigger soap. Not only that, it is an institution, as much a part of the British psyche as The Queen, Wimbledon and the Teletubbies (I hope you can all appreciate how legendary the latter truly is).

It is also a machine, one that is not easy to mould or manipulate in the same way Hollyoaks was. Bryan Kirkwood will not be able to stylise the show, add music or incorporate the quirks he did with Hollyoaks. Musical scores are virtually non-existent and the tone of the show, whilst gritty is not dark in the same way Hollyoaks.

His success on Eastenders will depend almost soley on his storytelling. I've waxed lyrical since 2006 about his abilty to tell stories, and whilst the run-up to his departure didn't tally with the rest of his tenure, his time on Hollyoaks has shown his ability to craft stories and create interesting characters.

Obviously he will be working within stricter parameters and a firmer production frame, but if his creative ability has been refined and improved since he became an executive, then this gig should establish Bryan Kirkwood as a production heavyweight. One that will allow him to break free of the 'Hollyoaks Man' shackle he undoubtedly has.

[DRW50]

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.

[Sylph]

Who wants darkness?

[DRW50]

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.

[Sylph]

That might be true, but every time EastEnders went dark, they were simply - an awful soap. Every dark tale had tonnes of criticism and generally the viewership decreased.

[DRW50]

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.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

This is from the Mirror, so take it with a grain of salt...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2009/11/03/enders-boss-could-cheer-up-walford-115875-21793893/

[DRW50]

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.

Edited November 3, 2009 by CarlD2

[Sylph]

Someone at The Mirror invented it.

Based on reading some comment on some soap message board how Kirkwood's HO had humour. Or something.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Yeah, maybe they'll be more comedic situations, but I think Kirkwood will still be doing mostly hard-hitting dramatic storylines. The comedy will probably be more apparent, yet very low key.

I have faith he's smart enough to know that EastEnders isn't Hollyoaks or Corrie.

Edited November 3, 2009 by Y&RWorldTurner

[Sylph]

Edited November 3, 2009 by Sylph

[Ben]

ETA: Major storyline spoiler for Lucas/Denise/Owen.

So much for all that potential...

I realize I got confused between the three. It's been a while since I've read that blog (even though I posted it the other day).

Edited November 6, 2009 by Ben