EastEnders: Discussion Thread

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Simon Ashdown said it was being planned as much as 12 months ago, before Kirkwood even joined.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ktGFaIHuk?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ktGFaIHuk?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ktGFaIHuk?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[dannigold]

There is another video here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12126454

[All My Shadows]

They're acting as if the baby switch completely voids the cot death element of the story. There will still be a family dealing with the death of a newborn baby, and the show still has the opportunity to portray how traumatic it can be. The baby switch element doesn't take away any of that. I actually feels it adds so much more because while Kat, Alfie, and their people are dealing with Tommy's "death," we will also see Ronnie dealing with the monumental guilt and stress that comes along with what she did. Not to mention the aftermath, which should be nothing less than epic.

The scenes of Ronnie finding James dead felt just a little bit off to me, and I don't know why. Maybe it's because we didn't see him in the crib, but then again, I figured any young mother who finds her newborn in what looks like a dead state would immediately scream for help or call 999, not wander around the square.

[LondonScribe]

Does anyone here think this reaction and media storm- however justified or not- could actually result in Bryan Kirkwood being sacrificed?

There has been talk of changing/reducing the story, but it appears as if the proverbial 'shedding of blood' will need to be achieved before people are satisfied...

Edited January 6, 2011 by UK LAW

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Samantha Womack leaving probably meant it was always going to be cut short, despite the controversy, I think.

I don't know if they'll get rid of Kirkwood for this, as ratings are still high and this story was planned before he got there. Then again, he could have stopped it from happening, so who knows...

[DRW50]

Yes I do. Frankly, if he's still employed by the end of next week, I will be surprised.

You may remember that when the hiring was announced, I wasn't sure of Kirkwood, because I had a whole lot of issues with Hollyoaks in 2008. But I was willing to give him a chance, and I think he's done a good job - sometimes a big mess but sometimes brilliant. Many people seemed to write Kirkwood off from before he even started, blaming him for the teens, blaming him for Barbara Windsor leaving. And it has kept on since then. On DS for weeks and weeks you had the same few posters constantly starting threads about how he had ruined the show and was terrible and he had to go. Every decision at Eastenders, even those that probably had little to do with him, like Melissa Suffield's firing, was placed at his feet. There was even a tizzy when he didn't appear on a morning talk show.

There has been a feeding frenzy attitude towards Kirkwood all along and this has just blown the whole thing up.

I just cringe when I read the "Bring Santer back, he's a brilliant producer and that's what this show needs." Save Eastenders, Diedrick! and so on. Santer is a big reason the show had the very messy 2010 that it did and he also helped pave the way for the shock value stories that are only now suddenly generating controversy. He was also a big part of setting up the Ronnie pattern that the show is only now getting criticism for. Yet he is deified at every turn.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Do they have anyone to replace him, if they make a scapegoat for this controversy?

Maybe John Yorke will have to temporarily step in again, as he did briefly between Hutchinson and Harwood.

[LondonScribe]

If Bryan Kirkwood is scapegoated and a replacement is sought, I wouldn't be surprised if the BBC employed from within. I'm talking about someone like Oliver Kent from Casualty or Craig Myar-Brown (sp) who has done a heck of a job with Holby City or even moving over Belinda Campbell (EP of both of the aforementioned shows)...

At the time of his appointment, I said he is a good storyteller and on that basis, he should do well. I also made reference to Eastenders being a machine. A machine that Hollyoaks wasn't. Is the machine chewing Kirkwood up? Possibly... Is he sinking in the deep waters 'muddied' by Diederick Santer (as has been suggested)? Possibly...

Or is this a storm that can be weathered before a 'brilliant summer'?

How odd that only 3 or 4 months ago, there was (arguable) stability in UK soaps. Now Bryan Kirkwood is Lucifer, Paul Marquess is gone, some people bemoan Phil Collinson and Emmerdale has to be careful behind the scenes given recent events. Amazing.

Lastly, John Yorke stepping in would always be welcome by a large number of people, but he has much greater BBC Drama responsibilities than 2000-2002, so how much could he do to help? And I'm someone who looks back on that period with great fondness.

Oh boy, too much talking again.

[Y&RWorldTurner]

Belinda Campbell briefly worked as Series Producer under Louise Berridge (who was EP), I believe.

She was also a scrip editor during John Yorke's time as EP.

Edited January 6, 2011 by Y&RWorldTurner

[JamesF]

Perhaps I'm being naive but I really don't see Bryan Kirkwood going if the story wasn't his idea.

I've not seen anything in the national press or news items (and there are a lot!) that even references him. I think most people are looking to place blame higher - more generally with the BBC as a whole.

[DRW50]

I think Kirkwood will go. There's been a lot of anger towards him for a long time on some of the message boards, and if this controversy continues he will be seen as an easy choice. I don't think John Yorke will go too, as some are suggesting, but I'm sure he must be very bewildered by all of this. I'm still bewildered too. Far more offensive stories have never gotten protest. I just wonder what we will now see onscreen in place of this story. Is it going to be a return to last February and March when they had to fill gaps with crap like the stolen post?

I say just let a few characters like Kim take up half the episodes with some fun moments - let them improvise if they have to.

I think even last year had a fair amount of instability, but certainly the last few months have been crazy. I think Collinson is probably very safe, as much as I might complain about him - no one has criticized him and the ratings are good.

Edited January 7, 2011 by CarlD2

[Y&RWorldTurner]

The show is also been gaining viewers with this story. I don't know, will they fire him based on the controversy of this story, or keep him because of the stable/rising ratings?

[JamesF]

But I don't think the majority of those who object (and this is a major national news story this week) have any idea who Kirkwood even is so unless the BBC try to scapegoat him even though the story wasn't his idea, I don't know what it would achieve.

As for the controversy...I don't like the story and I do think it's offensive but only in the context of the paradigm that EE has set itself in over the years. It would be one thing for Emmerdale or US soaps to do the story which they both kind of have but EE has always prided itself on gritty realism - topical stories that can get families talking. This story doesn't fall into that category.

I saw this backlash coming a mile off for that reason. Value judgement aside, I am frankly amazed that the BBC didn't.

[BadBoy93]

Dont Think Kirkwood will go either. Its only been one storyline and besides, so far hes doing a really good job with the show. More Gritty, More Real and More Entertaining. Hopefully BBC wont be so stupid and give in to the fans demands. If they do, it will worsen the show.