EastEnders: Discussion Thread

[Sylph]

The Guardian has an article, too, of course.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Sylph

[Sylph]

The Mirror has an article about the stars who left Walford.

[DRW50]

I agree with all of this. I don't think the problem with Eastenders now is that it's too depressing as much as it's too empty. They use misery as a way to get around telling interesting stories. Like the absurdity of what they have done to Ronnie Mitchell -- a potentially fascinating character who has spent a year being about babies, babies, dead daughter, babies, babies. That's their solution for everything now. Baby obsession, mixed with yelling and stories that go nowhere. And the big returns which seem to be done for the flimsiest reason and often damage the characters involved, the most recent being Sam Mitchell.

I think the show was much better at comedy in some previous years than it is now. If you look at the earlier episodes, Ethel was a classic comedy character, and there were funny moments for many others. Later on, Nigel was a very funny character. The show now tends to be more likely to have people who are there specifically for comedy, and those characters are a burden (the worst being Minty and Heather).

The show was once so full of complex characters who could be good and bad, funny, sad, whereas now too much is caricature, and the show is too busy winking at itself. The Mitchell family, with their shrieking, their sense of entitlement, their recycled plotlines, have become the biggest symbol of what the show needs to improve. Roxy Mitchell is possibly the worst major character ever on the show.

Yet there is still so much good in the show. And certainly they have done something right to get viewers back over the past few years. I just don't agree with all the big overhype about how the show is its best ever or any of that.

[DRW50]

I think the show's own creative problems in 2003-2006 were more of a cause. When Pop Idol was on Eastenders had some of their highest ratings ever, and X Factor and Britain's Got Talent have not been serious threats to Eastenders.

I do agree that it's not likely new soaps will be created, which is a shame, because a lot of the reality shows over there are poorly put together and viewers are turning further and further away from them. The flop version of odious Nigel Lythgoe's dance show being the latest example.

[Sylph]

I think the grimness and gloom are part of its identity. They always have been. The writers often exaggerate, give shock value and ultimately hollow stunts the front row seats, which is when it becomes too much.

It would be nice to see this show change and really represent what's going on in East End, at least a bit, but you would have to be quite a master to pull it off. Once in a lifetime kind of talent. So that can be scratched, it just won't work. People expect that "grittiness" – although I every time I see that noun – and too much of a change would drive them away.

As you rightly point out, if only they put a little more heart and honesty, things would be much better.

But even at its absolute worst, I love this show. Some of the episodes in those dreary periods are just pure magic. When it's good, the magical episodes are a staple. The show always had a kind of tightness to it and some its writers know drama and what a good script is.

Corrie has been overrated for a long time now, I really hope it gets better soon, but in the meantime, EastEnders should really be no. 1.

Those 20m viewers peaks EE achieved, even though they happened in 2001, seem like a distant memory. Perhaps never again.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Sylph

[Sylph]

I don't know if someone posted it, but here is a spoiler:

Edited February 8, 2010 by Sylph

[DRW50]

It's not the grimness (compared to some earlier years it's not very grim) I mind as much as the laziness, repetition, lack of followthrough, poor plotting. So many stories of the past few years have had rushed starts and then long gaps where nothing happens. Syed/Christian, which should have been about a man caught between his faith and the man he loves, but instead comes across as a whiny brat throwing tantrums and making everyone miserable, all over some guy he has no believable connection with. Lucas as killer. I mean this story should be incredibly grim, yet instead it's just dull. Then you have stuff like Janine running Danielle over, which ended up with nothing more than Ronnie wanting babies and Janine being forgiven in about two episodes. When they have Janine joke about how she killed Danielle, it's supposed to show how wicked she is, but really just shows how poorly written her character has become. Or Danny Mitchell's arrival, where within a few days he was already close to Ronnie and Roxy and working at the pub. Why do they rush? They have so much time to fill up. Or stuff like Tanya burying Max alive and taking up with Jack, both of which damaged her character where she still hasn't recovered. It was supposed to all be a big shock, but if an event has no real meaning or impact, there's no shock. The same happened when Lauren ran over Max.

There are some moments where they are better, some individual episodes, and I think some of the stories, like Tony's abuse of Whitney, were strong, even if the aftermath hasn't been great.

If they could work on consistency, plotting, and not focusing so much on getting attention, I think the show would become even better.

[DRW50]

Guess who's coming back?

Please register in order to view this content

Edited February 9, 2010 by CarlD2

[Dion]

Thank the soap gods! While I always liked

[dannigold]

Deleted

Edited February 11, 2010 by dannigold

[Kylie]

I'm ready for Archie's killer to be revealed already. Ugh. I don't know why people aren't checking into Glenda and her sudden reapparence with Archie's long lost son. She has guilty written all over her.

[DRW50]

The police seem to just think arresting random people is the way to get results. That and aimlessly wandering around the Square. Like a lot of Santer stories, the scenes repeat and repeat.

[Kylie]

^I know. I'm starting to not even care. It better not have been an unfortunate accident, either. I want a real killer. LOL Who I still think is Glenda. Haha.

[jfung79]

OMG I am jumping for joy at that casting spoiler!

[Sylph]

Can someone confirm whether Sarah Phelps is no longer with EastEnders?