Jump to content

Emmerdale: Discussion Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

@I Am A Swede, I am just messing with you. 

Please register in order to view this content

 I know you hate the Dingles but I just gotta poke you every now and then to see your reaction. It is one of my favorite things on this thread to read--your disdain for all things Dingles. But I agree that Dingles have swallowed this show for far too long. It is only 3 Dingles that I've truly cared for on this show. 

 

But if that specific Dingle ain't dead after that, I don't know what will kill them. In all seriousness, no one would survive that accident. Especially, in the middle of a storm. 

The scream of laughter I just let out over the truthfulness of this comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Only

Please register in order to view this content

I'm not counting Faith since she died of cancer before the storm.

So, I'd say that this storm has been a major letdown, and definitely not what I would call a worthy celebration of the 50th anniversary in any way. And the fact that Tracy, Aaron and Diane were the only characters returning just shows how little thought went into this. I'm bitterly disappointed with every aspect of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I have tried  to watch some of the week, but I am mostly thrown by how lacking in any real emotion or drive the show is. When Kim Tate is one of the only characters on the show who has any believable sense of grief (over someone she didn't even like),  something is wrong. I was especially appalled by the behavior of Chas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That's it? With a show that has a rich, 50 year history, they only brought back 3 characters? Jesus. That worries me. If I were EP or even worked for the neighborhood, I'd want to roll out the red carpet for this historic occasion. Anniversary episodes/specials, a plethora of old characters popping in, just something to celebrate the occasion. 

 

And stunts that kill off 2 people are boring at this point. If you ain't gonna slaughter half the cast at this point, I don't care. It is not shocking TV for 2 people dying. From reading updates that you and @DRW50post on here, they could've killed off at least 10-12 characters. 

 

I saddens me that soaps all around the world are running low on fumes and basically nearing their ends. And they don't have to near their ends if TPTB would stop being lazy and revert back to compelling, sensible stories. Streaming platform shows are basically making millions off of classic soap storytelling; meanwhile, soap themselves constantly try and recreate the wheel when it isn't necessary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I get that the show wants to depart from its pastoral past prior to the early 90s, but they need to come to terms and embrace that rich history. So many unblemished characters with stories could be brought back to richen the show. All the soaps need to revert back to their original identities b/c when they tend to stray from them, that's when they lose what captivated the audience originally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

It is indeed sad that they so completely squandered this moment. It's not that many shows in history that gets to celebrate a 50th anniversary and they really should have done more with it than they did.

I know that Emmerdale is addicted to disasters, and has been ever since the success of the plane crash, but was it really necessary to go back to that well once again for this occasion? Couldn't they have gone in a more positive direction...some kind of jubilee instead for example. There is always so much death and destruction going on and it is exhausting to watch misery all the time.

It has been stated repeatedly in this thread that Emmerdale has really done a number on its own history and it's moments like these when that really comes back to bite the show. They have so successfully removed almost all the ties to pre-plane crash Emmerdale that it's almost impossible to look back to those years. Killing off so many of the younger generation of the extended Sugden family has proved disastrous. Sam & Sally, Jackie and Mark all died without having children, not to mention Joe, and the ones who did have children like Sandie and Rachel have seemingly been erased from history. For all intents and purposes it seems that Emmerdale wants us to think that the show began in the mid 1990s. Anything that happened before (the show's golden years in my opinion) is obviously not important anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I think what they should have done, instead of the storm, is have it be an anniversary for The Woolpack. Maybe it could celebrate 100 or 150 years or something. That would have given them a reason to bring back some characters from the past with ties to The Woolpack for the festivities. Dolly, who was introduced to the show as a barmaid, Marian Wilks, whose father used to co-own it and Kathy, who also used to work there, are obvious choices. They could also remember that longtime customer Seth actually had two sons (Jimmy and Fred) and bring one or both of them back, with a family. Other possible visits could be Lynn and Louise. Maybe Sandie as well.

It would also have given them the opportunity to show some clips from the shows past and remember people and events from bygone years. Just like an anniversary celebration should do.

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

    • The air...is looooooooooong gone.  
    • From what I remeber reading, it seemed as if it all completely falls apart post-Labine and Mayer around a year later when Ben is sent to prison around June 1976. Ben's departure undoes one of the major story threads that had carried the show for many months. Without a catalyst of Ben's ilk in the wings, there wasn't much to carry either story for the two women (Betsy and Arlene). Arlene was briefly paired in a one-sided attraction with Ray before becoming involved with Ian Russell. I believe the Schneiders introduced Ian as a suave businessman interested in Arlene who was also considering a dalliance with Meg. That would have been delightful but Upton arrives and quickly shifts the narrative to Arlene as a kept woman / prostitute (though I only think she was sleeping with Ian, but maybe I'm wrong).  I think it is Upton who transitioned Ben from complicated heel with a romantic appeal to a tortured, brooding romantic lead with a complicated past. I'm not sure that was the smartest move. Upton must have believed that Ben's near rape was his redemption arc, but I don't think it was enough. There is something deliciously wicked about Ben becoming involved with Mia after the death of Mia's stepson Jim Marriott, who had confessed his love for Mia before racing off on his motorbike and being hit by Ben's car. I could see the appeal, but I don't think it completely worked.  There should have been an angle involving Betsy (who had been a reporter I think when she first appeared) investigating Jim Marriott's accident, possibly with Jamie Rolins who was I believe district attorney. Betsy and Ben growing closer as Betsy grows closer to the truth. Ben confiding in Mia as Andrew continues to make Ben his surrogate son setting in motion the same dramatic situation with Andew's second wife being in love with his son/surrogate son.  I think Betsy and Jamie Rollins were together while Ben was in prison, but I don't think they had much to do. I may be wrong. Meg should have gone after custody making it seem like Jamie and/or Betsy were unfit leading to a case with social services which would have brought Diana Lamont back into the mix causing emotional angst for Diana as she works with Jamie to provide him the child she couldn't.  The Felicia / Eddie / Charles stuff seems rather generic once you get to Charles' paralysis and sexual dysfunction. Felicia's pregnancy and her death seemed to bring an end to a story that really wasn't strong enough to be frontburner. The Lynn Henderson stuff always seems rather movie of the week rather than developed for an ongoing story.  In the past, I agreed that it might have been possible that the story had become so disjointed that they needed to freshen up and add new story elements as Upton did but others have suggested that the elements themselves should have just been considered.   For example, I'm not a huge proponent of Rick and Cal as a couple, but I do think there was some mileage of actually reintroducing Barbara into the mix trying to reconnect with Hank, carrying a torch for Rick, causing conflict in the Sterlings marriage with Bruce and Van taking sides over Barbara vs. Cal, and Barbara maneuvering her way into the Beaver Ridge Complex making her business partners with Rick and Meg, which would give her a new rival.  When Ben returned, there should have been a question of how true his redemption was rather than just jumping in head first to a new role.  I think the Schneiders might have been script writers for Ann Marcus on "Search for Tomorrow," but I may be wrong on that.  Upton introduced the Marriotts in Janaury, 1977. Christian Marlowe's Andy Marriott seemed to be in the mold of Ben. I don't know if the story was any good, but I think Upton towards the end hinted an Andrew / Meg / Andy storyline which I thought would have been interesting. I think Upton had some interesting concepts, but from my understand, the execution was awful. 
    • Is there a new drinking game I don't know about?
    • But... the air of mystery and intrigue as they say it...
    • Chelsea wore this Episode #39, April 21, 2025, to watch the family karaoke. https://wornontv.net/508945/ https://shopafrm.com/products/shailene-dress-pink-petal

      Please register in order to view this content

      Preview of the upcoming May 10, 2025 Saturday Night Live: Régine Chassagne of "Arcade Fire" will wear the  same pink petal sheer mesh print but a top instead of a dress (Editorialist link) or (Nordstrom link) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHUNjOYjBOg screengrab of youtube:
    • I didn't wanna "ruin" it for you if Raven hadn't left on her midnight trip to London yet.  But based on where she's going -- and who she'll be staying with -- you can assume there will be some drama when she returns! I believe she even says to Logan or Eliot Dorn before she leaves, "My stepfather, Ansel Scott, always had a 'thing' for me!" lol.  
    • Introducing Genoa City's hottest story in Daytime: April and May are going to be a LONG edit lol. If there's enough demand I'll compile "Abbott Communications" as well.

      Please register in order to view this content

       
    • Greg and Paige were an interesting choice for a couple.  I do think the lack of focusing on the generational differences hindered their long term potential. I think Laura had learned to keep her feelings close to her vest, especially after the hell she went through in her early years on the show.  The last scene of her trying to keep her tears inside as she drove away was the first time we had seen Laura really express what she was feeling after two or three seasons of her keeping her true self hidden from everyone.. even Greg.
    • I guess my hunch may be right about her. I'm still very split about it. My husband thinks she is a joke, doesn't like her acting and thinks she is over the top. At the beginning I liked her a lot... And I definitely don't agree with my husband about her acting... But still something just puts me off when Felicia is on screen. It's like they are pushing her to be this grand dame too much. It doesn't come off natural, but very staged and superficial. Wearing a head piece and a gown doesn't make you suddenly be that. In most cases it makes people look foolish... when they are still wearing a huge hat while sitting in someone's ugly kitchen talking about stuff. To me... the actress and character shine the most when she seems down to earth and talking through something troubling. When the fluff and glitz is less and the REAL is more. When they act like she is Joan Crawford that's when I start wondering what is going on. She isn't. And some of the wardrobe choices for her have been horrific.  Of course all of these impressions are personal ones and I don't claim to know what the character will become in the future or what it was when she started.  I'm only saying my natural response to her now.   Then I'll blame him too! Thank you for the compliment. I'm sorry to respond so late but that's the first time I'm reading these comments.   More like criticism to the show and the way they are portraying her. I still like the actress a lot.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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