Jump to content

EastEnders: Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Why is EastEnders doing this to one of their most talented leading men? I swear, soaps on both sides of the Atlantic are determined to self-destruct. There is nothing we fans can do to stop these producers and headwriters. I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and think that the actor is already planning to leave, but this feels like violence for violence sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think it's shock value. The show is willing to sacrifice characters for a ratings boost, or more press attention. Lucas could have been a long-term character, especially with his conflicts between religion and his more violent impulses, but instead they just make him a knockoff of Richard Hillman.

The woman who played Yolande Trueman complained about her firing, and how they dumped her as soon as they brought in several other black cast members, like they felt they'd filled their quota. Given the shoddy way they've treated Lucas, and the even worse way that his ex, Trina, and Bradley's girlfriend, Syd, were treated, I can see her point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrator

Oh cool, Bryan Kirkwood is the new EP??! Sweet! I will definitely tune in to see what he does with EE. I guess I should start watching now in anticipation of BK's arrival. Santer is stepping down in February, and I'm assuming that's off screen.....so when will Santer's material end/BK's material start?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

She certainly has a lot of power over her character.

I don't see the point of special stories or appearances once she's gone. I guess she could show up for weddings or whatever but none of the Mitchells who are left on the show seem likely to have interesting relationships or weddings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I guess it just comes down to for me, I can't see how it's ever pointless for a mother to visit her child, no matter how strained the relationship.

Aren't we always complaining on American soaps about how so-and-so's obscure mother (far less central a figure than Peggy Mitchell) didn't show up for their funeral, engagement, wedding, or when they were having a bad time?

Edited by jfung79
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The main difference here for me is that the Mitchells have just been so played out as characters, or I don't care about their relationships enough to where I need to see her return. Phil has been married four or five times, and all of those relationships have ended badly. His last wife abused his son and committed suicide on their wedding day! If Peggy skipped the next wedding, I'd understand.

Since Sam is gone, Peggy's only other relatives are Roxy, who is not worth bringing anyone back for, and Ronnie, who has such mental problems I can't see her settling down anytime soon. And Billy, but Peggy has never seen him as one of the family.

Eastenders hasn't had a problem keeping some characters away in the past (we see nothing of Sharon now, even though Tish Dean has said she wouldn't mind a return).

I don't see a point for Peggy, or most of the Mitchell family, now.

Keep Ronnie, dump the rest.

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
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.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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