Jump to content

EastEnders: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

<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>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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 by UK LAW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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 by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

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

    • I want that as well, but given how much I've been playing catch-up during some personal/family drama, it's been background music with very little to hold my interest. Then I saw a spoiler and rolled my eyes.   Very. I guess JG is hitting another of his low points. 
    • Well...unexpected wiggle room is still wiggle room.   I went back and finally rewatched Friday's episode (along with Thursday's). And God, how those episodes flowed. It did help that Zimmerman did the breakdowns for both so the plot threads were cohesive. I do wonder if she did it today as well. Martin and Tate also of course did good scripts. And I might have to take back my earlier comment about the crowd. While it was not like Nicole's Award Event where I felt there were more extras (and was in the minority on that), I felt this one did not have enough (also in the minority). But on a rewatch, I did like that Production actually did a fairly decent job of covering it up so kudos.    I also wanted to take the moment to say the majority of the week before last (and this past week) were full of cliffhangers. Perhaps not what is used to, but they were there. And I loved that since the majority of said cliffhangers were connected to Silk Press Sheila, it gave an intensity and build to the last week leading to this superb episode that gave us not only an old school soap reveal (complete with moments to let the scenes breathe, but annoyed in how other scenes which were also good did not compare...another sign of knowing when a reveal is great) but, THREE cliffhangers!!! Well-done, Cliffhanger Friday!!!   Ms. Mann and Ms. Michelle were clearly the stars. I've said it once someone mentioned it and I'll say it again...Ambyr just gives so much SMG's version of Kendall on AMC in Eva, and I love that. And that reveal on Silk Press Sheila...WOW. Great to have confirmation that BILL was the lawyer. Even better to see Silk Press interacting with all of the Duprees and not being a bit scared. And yes, I caught that she was preggers at the same time as Nicole. I also caught in the Martin vs Ted scene when he was talking about the timeline was another clue...since we discussed the timeline during Kat's birthday party episodes and how odd it was that Silk Press Sheila would celebrate Eva's birthday if the weeks were off. UNLESS...they're not. I just feel they would not be mentioning it unless SilkPress has a 90s DAYS Sami Trump card incoming. And 90s DAYS Sami Brady ALWAYS had a trump card. So...looking forward to today. lol.    I'm also going to be in the minority about the next thought. I thought Maurice did a good job as Ted in the reveal scenes. Though I do agree that compared to everyone else...even his FOINE doctor friend...he was the weak leak. DD was giving and she was in the background reacting. The Avengers...I mean...the Duprees closing ranks...was great and also showed how in sync the actors were. Naomi being sure Chels was not filming THIS time was a hoot. And I lived for Kat's shade among the mess. I'm happy that we are here at this reveal with OriginalTed since the rumor (marking preemptions) we are a little under two weeks to go before he's out.   I liked the layers. One thing that I like about this show. We usually mention something here and then the show writers have it mentioned either in episode or immediately in the next. The SilkPress/Eva picture last week. Where is Naomi/Vanessa this week of episodes. And they got to it. Well-played. I also like the reveal that Martin knew SilkPress as a kid, calling back to that weird scene with the brownie. I mentioned the Bill-as-Lawyer scene, calling back to Bill/Vernon's first alone scene. The reveal of all of SilkPress's many names. The fact that Andre and Dani continue to grow closer and closer and had a near-miss...something this show knows how to do extremely well for me. Their near-misses built up the drama and story, and I see how much I'm invested when we have them. The whole Silk Press Sheila story being the best example.    I see from a few of the comments some of you all are already thinking about those consequences toward Bill that I was thinking about on Friday.

      Please register in order to view this content

           And while I did not like the Vanessa/Doug scenes at first view...though I love they followed up on her food poisoning phone call on Thursday...I liked it on second watch. Partly because it gave another hint that Doug has some idea of what Vanessa is doing...if not who.  Partly because I had assumed that Doug got poisoned, too. Seeing it was just Vanessa confused me since I thought they were out at dinner pre-party. That said...I go back to my original thought in that moment. Has Vanessa being having all this sex without protection and we are going to get a WTD with Doug, Diego, and whoever else she has been with? Uh oh?    And I continue to also love how flashbacks are used. Rare do they show a flashback to a prior episode unless it's important so those are well done. And then you have the flashbacks like the one with Bill/Dani that informs the audience. And I loved that green dress. But tbf, I loved the feistiness of her red dress. Andre was not alone in taking her in.    And someone mentioned it the other day and I wanted to echo it. One thing I like about this show that I don't see much in the other soaps to this degree has been that several of the characters have their own personal style for sure, but the men's style really have stood out for me since its started. Ted being a clear example with his turtlenecks and general...for lack of better word at the moment manly...to him. I like that about the men where other men styles on other soaps just blend together.    Looking forward to Kat v Eva, Anita vs Silk Press Sheila, and Nicole vs Ted today.    Did I mention I was happy Clifton was back?  
    • I’ll take a pass on the lecture, because you've overestimated my concern with your feedback, but thanks for the enthusiasm. Your claims of not wanting to get into an argument over every post are unfortunately voided by your impulsive need to add into discussions that are none of your concern.  
    • I guess it's because the stories on "Hotel" tended to be very...melodramatic, lol?  I mean, it seems like every episode had long-lost lovers reuniting or people finding out someone they knew and/or loved was dying.  And then there was the time Anne Baxter was strung out on dope, lol. Brandon Stoddard must've envied what the other Brandon (Tartikoff) was doing at NBC.
    • Given some of the things that have been said I am going to quote the preface to an analysis I researched & posted about the desired demos when JFP was EP of AW. And, that is more than enough about that, from me.  
    • The thing that I am stuck on is that the in studio scenes in Egypt started airing in mid-October. It seems very strange that they would have planned to have a couple of weeks of studio scenes airing before they started showing location footage. Normally even though some scenes in a remote-infused storyline are in studio, they would start airing a mixture of studio and location footage at the same time. I suspect they had put Arizona in their back pocket well before the Achille Lauro (hence Hawk arriving in September) and possibly moved up the Egypt in-studio action so that the remote Arizona piece unfolded during November. The Achille Lauro may have been the final straw but I would bet it was not the first time they considered the risk. I have found one somewhat contemporaneous reference published on October 19th but pinned to an October 7th* "diary entry" mentioning that the location shoot in Egypt had been changed to Arizona. "International terrorism has its effect on daytime drama, too. Another World producers had scheduled an elaborate and expensive location shoot in Egypt this fall, But with the serious military attacks and hijackings going on, they decided to play it safe. They are going to Arizona instead. The cast members involved were disappointed but understood the decision." *Undated, but specified as the Monday before Melody Thomas's wedding to Ed Scott. But of course it's possible that the first draft referred to Egypt and was revised after October 7th to mention the cancellation before it went to press. But even making the decision the week of October 7th seems tight to get the Egypt scenes to air on the 17th/18th. I would love to find something from a daily news cycle that would be clearer about the dates.
    • So, Maxim, at this moment in time Evan is under the (mistaken) impression that, for no good reason, Rachel murdered his mother, in cold blood, and his ulterior motive for coming to Bay City is to get vengeance for this wrong that was done to his family & him.  Now, Rachel never murdered anyone. Janice had the knife on her & she pulled the knife on Rachel in the fight they were having. The reason they were fighting was because Janice had been poisoning Mac. So, this sets out the difference between the Frame family version of events & reality as the rest of us know it to be. Also no one in Bay City knows Evan is Janice's son. He goes by Evan Bates, not Frame.
    •      

      Please register in order to view this content

                        Janice Frame is Evan's mother. Janice & Mac were together. Janice was up to no good. Mitch was helping her. She was slowly, little by little, every day, POISONING Mac. She was almost successful. In St. Croix, Rachel & Janice began what was literally a physical fight. They fell into the resort swimming pool, continuing to fight each other. Somehow, I guess Janice had it on her, there was a knife in play but Rachel kept Janice from stabbing her & got it away from her & they continued to struggle until Rachel stabbed Janice, which was a death blow. Mitch did a 180 & helped Rachel get Mac to the hospital. He was so weakened by the poison he could not even stand unassisted. It took both of them together to walk him to the hospital but it did save his life.  The St. Croix remote was SO beautiful, but so dangerous & scary. Also action-packed. Hooray! Maxim's backSo, I just got home & this is what I found waiting for me. I wrote this several hours ago. I guess I neglected to hit send.
    • Thanks @skylark and @DRW50!
    •      Earlier I made a long reply but it doesn't exist. Crap.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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