Jump to content

EastEnders: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

But they're both much-needed eye candy, BetterForgotten. And nowhere near as irritating as Callum and the Moon brothers.

Ah, well, it looks like Dean and Linda will happen. I am now awaiting DTC's call to join the writing staff!

http://m.digitalspy.com/soaps/news/a579776/eastenders-dean-wicks-flirts-with-linda-carter-spoiler-pictures.html?utm_source=twt&utm_medium=snets&utm_campaign=twitter#~oI7trStWUtGgUb

Edited by TimWil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 8.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

Really, DRW50? I don't think the Carters are all that disastrous. I agree about Phil and Shirley, though. What a toxic pairing. Linda Henry is a good actress but that character simply isn't worthy of being pushed front and center. She should always be on the fringes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I haven't even been keeping up with the show as of late because of the drawn out Lucy murder. I find it cliche (and tiresome) that they are waiting to reveal all at Christmas. I find this to be a detriment as people will tune out till then and only come back around Christmas time. Corrie played it smart by revealing the killer and just playing the beat till Rob's demise. Dare I say it but DTC, take note from Blackburn (even though I hate the dreck he puts out too).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most of them can't act and the characters feel generic. Most telling is that their material is about tearing other characters down (Mick exists mostly through this purpose) or isolating and neutralizing them because of lackluster audience response (Nancy, Linda, et al). I just don't like them and I feel like they stick out like a sore thumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I respectfully disagree. In tonight's episode Timothy West (Stan) and Kellie Bright (Linda) were wonderful.

Maddie Hill (Nancy) had a lovely bit-"Go on, Johnny! Be free, be gay!"

The stuff with Mick and Ian at the public swimming facility really worked my last nerve, though.

Edited by TimWil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Carl, I think a problem with the Carters is that they haven't really been integrated into the show all that well. They don't play support to other characters' storylines as they are constantly on the front burner with their own dramas. DTC has only really focused on Shirley, Mick, Johnny and Tina & Tosh (who are an unlikeable couple). They feel like they are in their own little story bubble sometimes, not really part of the main show. I think the Carters are there to prop Shirley, along with Dean, which I think is a shame, as he has a lot of potential away from Shirley and the Carters; I really want to see Dean interact with other characters, especially the ones he knew previously, like Shabnam - their scenes would write themselves.

I don't know why Nancy is sidelined and underdeveloped. They don't what to do with her. They also introduced Aunt Babe, who has be a disappointment, with little to no purpose so far; then there's Lee, who's another Carter who isn't needed. I don't think the Carters have been failures, but I don't think they are widely applauded offline, either.

They're waiting to reveal Lucy's killer in February, for the 30th anniversary. So even longer to wait. It's a flawed storyline so far that has lost a lot of momentum from the moment Jake was arrested and everyone automatically believed he was guilty.

Edited by Ben
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ben, I think the reveal will be at Christmas, where we know who the killer is but the characters don't yet. I think the story reaches its climax (killer apprehended, killed, etc.) in February.

I agree about the Carters. It's like the Ferreiras who were absolutely an island unto themselves, ironically only interacting with a character named Shirley.

Edited by TimWil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I thought DTC said that there would be twists and turns at Christmas that would change who people thought was the killer? I guess it makes sense to reveal the killer to the viewers at Christmas, then have the characters find out in February. Still, they'll have to do a lot to make me care, as so far, I don't care who the killer is.

Oh, the Ferreiras, and "original" Shirley, and her cat, and the random Australian chick, and the one who used to be in Family Affairs - a period best forgotten.

Shirley should have been rebooted by bringing Dean back alone, as their history is enough to generate story without the need to recreate her history in the shape of a big new family that never previously existed. The Carters should have been a new family completely unrelated to anyone on the show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think Dean and Shabnam would have been very interesting to watch. Both have changed a lot since they last saw each other in 2007 (or 2008), and it would have been interesting seeing them talk about these changes and develop a genuine friendship; something that could represent some light in Dean's life (outside of the dark, revenge thing he has going on). I think Dean and Linda are a bit predictable and only serves to isolate them even further. I can also see Dean sharing scenes with Stacey when she returns, and will probably be predictably paired up.

It's easy to forget about Shabnam as she hasn't appeared for ages. She's supposed to have a secret, but with DTC's dodgy pacing, we probably won't know what it is until Christmas 2015.

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

    • Randy (Doug's friend who works for Joey) -- Joey told Randy weeks ago that Joey's plan was to get Doug into so much debt that Doug would be forced to get Vanessa's real estate holding turned over to Joey, to use for money-laundering.  That's been the plan all along, which the viewers knew.  The only thing new is that Joey finally told Doug this. I think Joey is written badly.  I also think Jon Lindstrom is doing "Now I am going to act menacing".   But I don't really feel the menace.  It's too overdramatic and it doesn't feel like a real person.  Jon is a fine actor on GH, so I don't know what's happening here -- the entire BTG mobster premise is badly designed/written.  I don't know if Guza pushed for a mobster storyline?  Or did Jon?  (Jon wrote a novel about Hollywood mobsters). It just doesn't fit.  It feels (to me) like this storyline for Jon was just shoved onto the canvas but it doesn't fit all all. Monday's scene of Mona coming into the "casino" to check up on where Leslie supposedly lost money in the slot machines -- and Randy explaining to Mona that there are no slot machines, there is nothing but the card room.  I had to laugh because they had characters comment that it's just a card room and not a casino -- the show is now acknowledging that there's nothing there.  If they are going to do this, then have it make sense for Fairmont Crest residents to visit a high-end glamourous casino, and not a random room with one table. So what money is Joey laundering? A while back, Joey told Vanessa that he knows about her sexual philandering because owns the escort service that she'd been using. But I don't care...  I'd just prefer that the entire mobster storyline go away. 
    • I caught up this past weekend. The show is better written, but I have been bored with the show. I did notice it ranked in the top 5 again this week, so that's a good sign.
    • I can't take this show seriously. I truly miss WJB writing this show. Bradley didn't inherit his dad's talent.
    • Maybe if there had been a good close up or two
    • I haven't had a chance to view the interview, but I'm glad Mike didn't get the part of Derek.  Derek is a badly written character. Any Ben Gavin screenshot from yesterday's show?
    • Wait, what? So, Martin’s not running for President anymore? Just like that?  I didn’t expect this storyline to be long term but I would’ve liked to see it play out for a little while longer, or at least until Martin’s secret was revealed. And definitely not fade out with a whimper. Sort of like Naomi’s lawsuit against Bill’s firm; what was the point of it all if it was just gonna wrapped up so easily and (probably) forgotten about?  Eva is still the breakout character though. I’m looking forward to seeing where she goes from here with everyone, especially if the twist that we’re all suspecting turns out to be true.  And I did find the gambling storyline interesting finally, now that we know Joey’s endgame. I’d like to see it play out and to see what happens to everybody involved in it.  As for Derek/Ashley… I wonder how it would’ve played out if they actually had cast Mike Manning as Derek. Yeah, the writing isn’t there but I imagine that Derek would have more of a personality lol and I also imagine that it would’ve made Ron Carlivati’s head explode

      Please register in order to view this content

      Ben Gavin did look hot though 
    • Please register in order to view this content

       
    • That would've been a good pick! She was great on B&B and like you said, she's already in Atlanta.
    • Please register in order to view this content

    • Oooo. I like the current actress, but that's a pretty great choice.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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