I agree, BetterForgotten. He does have a great body and a cute face yet still doesn't project any sort of sexuality.

Rolling my eyes way back in my head at some spoilers. DTC strikes again.

I thought he'd done a good job with Ronnie this time around, and while Charlie doesn't do much for me, I did believe that he loved Ronnie and they have more chemistry than she ever did with woodentop Jack.

So reading that Roxy and Charlie will likely share a kiss because they find out Ronnie isn't doing well (I'm sure someone will say this is "soapy") is just pretty damn pathetic. Not only does this once again cheapen the Roxy/Ronnie relationship (which was already badly damaged by Jack/Roxy and took years to be repaired), it also makes a mockery of anything between Ronnie and Charlie. How long before Roxy is knocked up again and we don't know who the daddy is?

DTC is a lazy, regressive showrunner who will never take a risk or learn how to write proper drama.

Rolling my eyes way back in my head at some spoilers. DTC strikes again.

I thought he'd done a good job with Ronnie this time around, and while Charlie doesn't do much for me, I did believe that he loved Ronnie and they have more chemistry than she ever did with woodentop Jack.

So reading that Roxy and Charlie will likely share a kiss because they find out Ronnie isn't doing well (I'm sure someone will say this is "soapy") is just pretty damn pathetic. Not only does this once again cheapen the Roxy/Ronnie relationship (which was already badly damaged by Jack/Roxy and took years to be repaired), it also makes a mockery of anything between Ronnie and Charlie. How long before Roxy is knocked up again and we don't know who the daddy is?

DTC is a lazy, regressive showrunner who will never take a risk or learn how to write proper drama.

Can these writers come with a story that does not consist of Roxy kissing/f*cking someone else's man? Is that all she can offer? If so, Roxy needs to exit stage left. EE has a Square of young slags that could give Roxy a run for her money and they add more to the show.

I think she has only stayed this long because most of the other Mitchells were gone, and now because Ronnie is back. In terms of viability, that ship sailed around 2008. And this latest twist just sinks it.

Michelle Gayle (ex-Hattie) speaks up about DTC's bizarre back-patting over not "box-ticking." She was more polite than some would have been, considering how arrogant and smug he was about it. (if any other producer had framed it that way, the purity brigades would have torn them apart)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/eastenders-racism-row-michelle-gayle-5107426

Michelle Gayle (ex-Hattie) speaks up about DTC's bizarre back-patting over not "box-ticking." She was more polite than some would have been, considering how arrogant and smug he was about it. (if any other producer had framed it that way, the purity brigades would have torn them apart)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/eastenders-racism-row-michelle-gayle-5107426

At least the pole on that website was 82% for having a diverse cast. Positive thinking.

I think it was the other way around...?

I get the idea of EE not ever being that diverse. I wish it could be, and it has been more diverse in the past (Santer mostly just resorted to tokenism until his last year, and we're back there again), but I get it. The problem is when you go around making yourself a martyr for staying with a mostly-white cast. He was one breath away from saying "PC." He's so ridiculously smug.

I still can't get over how eveytime I catch an episode everything leads back to the f.ucking Carter family. I've never felt so sick of a shoehorned family in my life on a soap.

Have we become too pessimistic? I had no issues with the Slater domination in 2000-2003, which was definitely the show's last great gold era. Did I not mind a new dominant family back then because the show was very good overall or was it because the family was just better overall? It's strange how it didn't bother me back then as much as it does now.

Edited February 5, 201510 yr by BetterForgotten

I still can't get over how eveytime I catch an episode everything leads back to the f.ucking Carter family. I've never felt so sick of an shoehorned family in my life on a soap.

Have we become too pessimistic? I had no issues with the Slater domination in 2000-2003, which was definitely the show's last great gold era. Did I not mind a new dominant family back then because the show was very good overall or was it because the family was just better overall? It's strange how it didn't bother me back then as much as it does now.

It didn't feel like they were as dominant. They certainly were dominant, but they weren't a major part of stories like Who Shot Phil? or Sharon's return or everything with Steve Owen. There were also fewer of them, with more care taken to give each of them an individual personality.

The Carters are just misery hidden under jolly sing-songs. There's no sense of fun like there was early on with Kat, even though she had a very hard edge. Sour, bitter, unpleasant people, but worse than that, empty, uninteresting people. What can you tell me about any of them? Beyond what they wear or who they're involved with?

Add in that Danny Dyer is incapable of carrying major story even though he's supposed to be the head of the family, and the confusing, pointless retcons to make Shirley a part of the family (when every "twist" involving Shirley and Dean in this story has been a sensationalistic flop), and you're just left with nothing.

Then there are the "issues" thrown at them like rotten eggs. Did anyone get anything out of Johnny's coming out (dropped almost immediately to the point of driving the actor off the show)? Or the abuse story with Tina? Or the rape story? Or the euthanasia story? I'm sure we'll be getting the pill addiction story soon enough.

The relative isolation of the Slaters worked, because they bounced off each other. The relative isolation of the Carters just shows that, deep down, they're all the same character - one that deserves a fraction of the airtime they've received.

And there's always this weird guilt-tripping if you don't like them, because they "saved" the show and you just don't "get" them.

Edited February 5, 201510 yr by DRW50

I didn't mind them at first, but now whenever there is a Carter centric episode it's alwasy one that I struggle to get through. It's pretty sad that the only one I actually care about is Dean.

Letitia Dean interview:

http://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/s2/eastenders/news/a627777/eastenders-star-letitia-dean-sharon-and-phil-are-right-together.html#~p3QHyFXJwJRp5Z

Even though she mentions's Dennis's death, I'm guessing she wasn't a fan of the Shannis pairing and storyline as she never mentions it among her favorites.

Edited February 10, 201510 yr by BetterForgotten

Good God Jessie Wallace was horrific last night. I wanted Kat to be violently attacked, preferably by Stan who'll be dead soon, anyway.

I don’t expect anything from the current Eastenders producer, but considering that he created Roxy, I’d think he would remember that the one-nighter with her sister’s boyfriend was an extremely unpopular storyline that led many fans to hate the character, helped make many fans just see Jack as a manwhore who would work his way through every blonde Mitchell woman (at one point some of us were wondering when he would give Peggy the eye), and all but destroyed the relationship between Roxy and Ronnie.

Then you have Ronnie, who has had a loop of misery for years on end, to the point where Sam Womack eventually quit the show. It was important that she have some period of happiness, with a man who certainly wasn’t perfect, but who was faithful to her.

Then you have Charlie, one of the few popular new male characters from a show and a producer that has consistently failed to create popular new male characters in recent years. (Remember Calum? The Moon brothers? Joey? Leon? Lee?)

So what do we get?

Yet another affair storyline that is based solely on the soap cliche that of course a sibling has to have it off with the spouse of their sibling.

Getting a hard-on because you find out your wife might never wake up from a coma is pretty damn sick, stupid writing.

And this just makes Roxy look like trash.

Dominic Treadwell Collins still seems to think he can make Eastenders into another Dallas or Dynasty.

Those shows had terrible last years for a reason. And one of the reasons is because of inane plots like what we saw last night.

You are destroying the integrity of your characters for a “shocking” storyline NO ONE wants to see.

Edited February 11, 201510 yr by DRW50

Very well put, Carl. I can't help but wonder what the hell was DTC thinkng when he gave the greenlight to that.

Edited February 11, 201510 yr by TimWil

Looks like Kat's upcoming story has been dropped. Can't say I'm surprised, given the BBC's Saville issues.

http://www.eastendersultra.co.uk/news/news-stories/13427/exclusive-derek-martin-not-returning-to-eastenders