Members cassadine1991 Posted June 6, 2016 Members Share Posted June 6, 2016 I still don't get why they killed Lucy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Skylover Posted June 6, 2016 Members Share Posted June 6, 2016 (edited) I think Peter suffered as a character because Ben Hardy wasn't a very good actor. Don't get me wrong, he was hot, haha, but that's not everything, I just always felt he wasn't a very successful re-cast. I agree that Lucy was much better. In theory I understand why they chose Lucy to be the centre of the 30th anniversary storyline because she was such an important character and probably the most likely person to develop so many enemies. Having said that, it wasn't worth it because it has ruined the Beales. It's odd because they would never choose to kill off Ben or Louise Mitchell IMO because they put the Mitchells on such a pedestal. Edited June 6, 2016 by Edward Skylover 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NothinButAttitude Posted June 6, 2016 Members Share Posted June 6, 2016 ^ I strongly disagree. We'll never know the range Ben Hardy could've given on EE b/c they never allowed him to show it. DTC never had any long story for Peter. Most of the time he was back, he was in the background or walking around shirtless. They never utilized him like they should've. Sucks because Lucy AND Ben have been destroyed and tossed aside when they should be the young adults driving story and leading the pack for the next generation. Glad that Ben Hardy is finding success in Hollywood. I hope it continues. I hope that Hetti Bywater gets out there and finds success too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cassadine1991 Posted June 7, 2016 Members Share Posted June 7, 2016 Even Ben said in one of those interviews about being shirtless most of the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NothinButAttitude Posted June 7, 2016 Members Share Posted June 7, 2016 Exactly. How can you show range when you aren't given range in the writing? While romance with Lola could've so much more but DTC never invested in either character (Lola/Peter) and we see where they are now ... off the canvas. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TimWil Posted June 7, 2016 Members Share Posted June 7, 2016 (edited) Genuinely terrible episode tonight. Hard to believe Daran Little actually wrote this dreck. First of all 2005 wants its salsa class storyline back. I hated pretty much everything except for a sweet moment between Pam and Donna and Pam's impulsive method of chip disposal. This really doesn't bode well for the summer of 2016. Edited June 7, 2016 by TimWil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cassadine1991 Posted June 7, 2016 Members Share Posted June 7, 2016 DTC never invested in anyone not named Carter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 7, 2016 Members Share Posted June 7, 2016 I thought most of the Donna scenes in this episode were a good articulation of who she is and what she's feeling. I'm sorry that no one in her life is telling her that having a baby doesn't mean happiness, but then this is DTC-era Eastenders, so why would they? The scene with Pam was a nice example of their relationship and it was written true to them. The problem, beyond the laziness of another baby plot, is the Vincent "twist." I don't even really care that much about their being "brother" and "sister" as I do that it's obvious one of the main reasons they had her ask him was because they wanted us to be shocked due to them being "siblings." It's just lazy shock value. Beyond that, I just don't really care about the relationship between Vincent and Donna. Like most of Vincent's relationships, we hear about how close they are, but I don't feel it. I actually did laugh at one Kim scene - when she reminded none of the class to take any video of her. It was just so typical of her, but not in an overdone way, like the rest of the scenes unfortunately were. I thought Bonnie Langford did a pretty good job - she seems to know the way to play this type of material is straight. The scene with Ben and Paul was cute but also felt very contrived. If Paul wasn't leaving we would be getting none of this. Yet again the Pam and Les material was the bright spot of the episode, in spite of loathsome caricature Babe, who makes Dotty-era Nick Cotton seem like a masterpiece of creative writing. I loved how she threw Babe's food out, because there were no smirks or snappy comebacks for that - it was just the definitive way to show Babe how worthless she is. They've really cottoned onto something special with Pam this year, as part of the community and as her own person, and I hope we won't lose that just because she doesn't have the right last name. I do not believe Ronnie would encourage a relationship for Roxy and another man the way she's doing. If Ronnie thought Roxy needed to get away from a "bad" man, or from one of Ronnie's men, that would be one thing, but a vulnerable, alone Roxy is Ronnie's catnip. She'd never want to give that up. It's just too contrived. I will say I thought the scene with Andy and his father - which on paper should have been cringeworthy - was oddly moving. Jack Derges is a really strange actor in that sometimes I think he's poor and sometimes he can be startlingly good and effective in some way that is totally different to anything else on the show right now. It becomes more and more apparent with each episode that Kathy's return was to prop up the morally bankrupt, cretinous Jane and Ian. I have a feeling someone is patting themselves on the back that Kathy is just like Lou, or some other "matriarch," in banging on and on about family, to the point of badgering people over the phone for Jane to return and hold Ian's hand (oh wait - thanks to her beloved son she can't do that anymore). It's pretty disgusting, and even as I keep seeing it day after day, I'm still disgusted. I think more than anything I'm disgusted with the framing of the Kathy and Lauren scene and the Lauren material in general in this episode - they're already setting Max up as the bad guy here. Max cutting ties with Lauren and Abi, who just want to see their father (after letting him rot in prison for nearly a year). Kathy encouraging Lauren to remember that Jane and Ian were just trying to protect their family, and that she is now their family too (what a colossal joke that is). Anything Jane and Ian did is justified, because they protected their son (who went on to try to kill another boy, push his mother down the stairs, and nearly kill his mother, but how would they possibly know anything like that could happen...?), unlike Max, who doesn't care about his children. Kathy would never bleat and bleat and bleat this way. Kathy did not grow up with a loving family or home. Kathy knew that "family" was not enough to justify keeping a child that reminded her of her rape and that she was too young to be able to raise. Kathy never truly felt like she was part of the Beale family, as she often clashed with Lou, and fought hard to do what she - not Lou, not "family" - felt was best for Pete, herself, and Ian. Kathy had to cut all ties to Donna - "family" or not - when Donna's presence in her life brought back devastating memories and when she knew Donna was too far gone. Kathy was willing to break away on her own after Pete could not support her following her second rape. She was always willing to stand up to Pauline and she was always willing to stand up to Ian. Kathy was never someone who passively accepted, or even worse, actively encouraged the worst of family. Never. Never. Never. This is not Kathy Beale. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Skylover Posted June 7, 2016 Members Share Posted June 7, 2016 Maybe you're right. I think some good actors shine even with mediocre material. To be fair, I wasn't watching for the majority of his time so only had the odd episodes/moments here and there. But I did see him do some dramatic material which I wasn't that impressed with (must have been the 30th anniversary?) A lot of the lesser actors go on to be high profile. Certainly not the worst, Margot Robbie (Donna, Neighbours) but far from the best. Now a fairly well known actress in the US. The guy who plays Andy is shocking. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 10, 2016 Members Share Posted June 10, 2016 NBA, not sure if you're still on your EE break, but there's only one scene you'd need to see from tonight: If only he'd run over Abi's nasty ass. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NothinButAttitude Posted June 10, 2016 Members Share Posted June 10, 2016 (edited) @DRW50 Oh I watched and was gonna ask how you felt about Abi after tonight. I'm just over Abi. I'm over all the Brannings minus Dot and Max. Steven and Lauren gross me out for some odd reason. Jack is a d*ck. Abi is a whiny, hypocritical twat. I can do w/o this family. Donna going around asking for 'skeet-skeet' from Vincent is odd to me too. I hear she is (or has) gonna ask Kush and I hope she gets rejected on both accords. I'm over baby stories on this show.... Babe, Pam, and Les are the only interesting thing right now but I do wish that the Cokers would get the upper hand against Babe at this point. Edited June 10, 2016 by Nothin'ButAttitude 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted June 10, 2016 Members Share Posted June 10, 2016 (edited) I can't take Abi. Lorna's constant pouting and flouncing has hit my last nerves. Lauren is worse than Abi in a lot of ways, and Jacq Jossa isn't much of an actress herself, but we've had a year and a half break from her. Abi never goes away. And at least Lauren sometimes has self-awareness. Abi never ever does. Worst of all is that I just know they will stick Jay with her again. I will not watch that. Kush already turned Donna down. The whole story is just contrived and another example of a producer who thinks women are just baby machines. Kim is the only one whose reaction makes sense, which is odd to say. There was a scene where Sharon dragged Paul to his grandfather and berated Paul for humping with Ben in the back of a car at the garage, because Phil has already been through so much. SO so so awful. So awful. Sharon has lost all perspective and is now officially Phil's diaper-changer. Edited June 10, 2016 by DRW50 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NothinButAttitude Posted June 10, 2016 Members Share Posted June 10, 2016 Good. Glad Kush turned her down. His one child with Stacey is enough. He doesn't need another one. I am not here for Jay/Abi part 2.0 either. I want Jay's name to be cleared and for him to find a pretty, spunky young woman elsewhere. Abi ain't it. Never has. Never will be. Lola was the best thing for Jay IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cassadine1991 Posted June 10, 2016 Members Share Posted June 10, 2016 Lola, wasn't she the one who was briefly with Peter and had a baby with Ben, who was her third or fourth cousin? Lauren is really a piece of work, going from Peter to Steven, wasn't she with her cousin Joey for a brief time, did her and Joey have sex? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NothinButAttitude Posted June 10, 2016 Members Share Posted June 10, 2016 Yes, that's Lola. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.