Instead of a good storyline like that could have been we get him constantly displeasing Alice and then winning her round again :yawn:
Also a waste of a very good actor
yep its all cos of the complaints he got they brought in his children to soften him but he's now crap. they bigged that feud up and it was barely nothing.
You do realise he's just an actor in a soap don't you?
WHAT DO YOU MEAN?! Eastenders is live, the people are real!
Yes, of course I realise, It was a joke. Sarcasm is hard to get across through text, I think...
The Phil/Derek feud being consigned to the wayside is more down to inconsistent writing, than anything else.
Take two examples, of the writer's inconsistency, and you'll see.
Masood, for instance was supposed to be a TA at Walford Primary (or whatever it is called). Suddenly, this was forgotten. Michael, was supposed to be broke and thus due to Janine's wealth have a motive to con Jean - despite the fact he had income coming in from the Gym. Kat and MM had an ONS, but as recently as this summer it has been made out to be a special bond, a love affair - which is utter rubbish.
The Phil/Derek feud being consigned to the wayside is more down to inconsistent writing, than anything else.
Take two examples, of the writer's inconsistency, and you'll see.
Masood, for instance was supposed to be a TA at Walford Primary (or whatever it is called). Suddenly, this was forgotten. Michael, was supposed to be broke and thus due to Janine's wealth have a motive to con Jean - despite the fact he had income coming in from the Gym. Kat and MM had an ONS, but as recently as this summer it has been made out to be a special bond, a love affair - which is utter rubbish.
those are a bit different to two characters being bigged up when one arrived and then had no screentime together whatesover. it was meant to be a huge storyline but it was dropped shortly after the shirley stuff.
those are a bit different to two characters being bigged up when one arrived and then had no screentime together whatesover. it was meant to be a huge storyline but it was dropped shortly after the shirley stuff.
You're missing the point. I'm trying to say the writers have form regarding inconsistiency and not following through storylines, which is the case of the Phil/Derek situation.
those are a bit different to two characters being bigged up when one arrived and then had no screentime together whatesover. it was meant to be a huge storyline but it was dropped shortly after the shirley stuff.
Its because of BK's departure. If he'd stayed on, the feud would've been developed, LN obviously didn't like the storyline and dropped it
WHAT DO YOU MEAN?! Eastenders is live, the people are real!
Yes, of course I realise, It was a joke. Sarcasm is hard to get across through text, I think...
Sarcasm doesn't work in text full stop (and when done properly doesn't include the words "I'm not even joking").
You're missing the point. I'm trying to say the writers have form regarding inconsistiency and not following through storylines, which is the case of the Phil/Derek situation.
thats what i mean but its different to michael/kat having a ONS originally and changing it to an affair. its completely plausible that they ended up having an affair. that wasn't dropped as they still had screentime together.
people didnt like derek as a baddie. they brought in his children to soften him up
Its because of BK's departure. If he'd stayed on, the feud would've been developed, LN obviously didn't like the storyline and dropped it
I don't think it is.
Bryan Kirkwood storylines, regardless of Lorraine Newman's appointment would still be running, even up until now. We won't really see her work until early 2013, since storylines can be planned 18-12 months in advance.
Bryan Kirkwood storylines, regardless of Lorraine Newman's appointment would still be running, even up until now. We won't really see her work until early 2013, since storylines can be planned 18-12 months in advance.
i agree with the other poster. yes all of this work is still kath's work but it doesn't mean LN didn't want it changed.
Its because of BK's departure. If he'd stayed on, the feud would've been developed, LN obviously didn't like the storyline and dropped it
Kathleen Beedles said some of the storylines she and Kirkwood planned are still going on (i.e Lexi being taken away). It's hard now to decipher who's storyline is who's.
Kathleen Beedles said some of the storylines she and Kirkwood planned are still going on (i.e Lexi being taken away). It's hard now to decipher who's storyline is who's.
yeah we dont know which storylines belong to which producer. im pretty sure LN would've changed some storylines after BK left but of course kath was still story producer so its still her work.
Sarcasm doesn't work in text full stop (and doesn't include the words "I'm serious")
Okay, okay, jesus. I'm not a big fan of the character, so I thought I'd make a jokey comment, don't really see the problem with that. As if I would get the champagne out for a soap character's death, anyway, I thought it was clear I didn't actually mean it...
yeah we dont know which storylines belong to which producer. im pretty sure LN would've changed some storylines after BK left but of course kath was still story producer so its still her work.
I don't think they would be allowed to change things tbh. That costs money and spending is something BBC (and EastEnders) are cutting down on. But obviously things could have been changed slightly.
thats what i mean but its different to michael/kat having a ONS originally and changing it to an affair. its completely plausible that they ended up having an affair. that wasn't dropped as they still had screentime together.
people didnt like derek as a baddie. they brought in his children to soften him up
Not really. A ONS can't = sudden love affair. The ONS aspect was dropped from the entire thing, but anyway there were other examples I listed if you didn't agree with the Kat/MM one.
Derek's children being brought in would have likely been a long running decision, not based on audience reception. EastEnders writing team would have to have sat down, drawn up the character arcs of both Joey and Alice, and cast the actors to play them, which would take several months. Then, that actor/actress would need to come in a flim scenes which are flimed up to eight weeks in advance (so two months). Jasmine Banks would have started fliming for Alice, possibly as early March, and would have had to have gone through the audition and casting process months/weeks before that. The real negative commentry I noticed began around January on Derek, and by then it's likely the casting plans for Joey and Alice would have already been in a pipeline.
Kathleen Beedles said some of the storylines she and Kirkwood planned are still going on (i.e Lexi being taken away). It's hard now to decipher who's storyline is who's.
Comments
yep its all cos of the complaints he got they brought in his children to soften him but he's now crap. they bigged that feud up and it was barely nothing.
seems more about derek cos they brought in his children shortly after it was dropped
WHAT DO YOU MEAN?! Eastenders is live, the people are real!
Yes, of course I realise, It was a joke. Sarcasm is hard to get across through text, I think...
Take two examples, of the writer's inconsistency, and you'll see.
Masood, for instance was supposed to be a TA at Walford Primary (or whatever it is called). Suddenly, this was forgotten. Michael, was supposed to be broke and thus due to Janine's wealth have a motive to con Jean - despite the fact he had income coming in from the Gym. Kat and MM had an ONS, but as recently as this summer it has been made out to be a special bond, a love affair - which is utter rubbish.
those are a bit different to two characters being bigged up when one arrived and then had no screentime together whatesover. it was meant to be a huge storyline but it was dropped shortly after the shirley stuff.
Its because of BK's departure. If he'd stayed on, the feud would've been developed, LN obviously didn't like the storyline and dropped it
This all but verifies that he is the shagger.
Possible suspects:
Joey: Derek will hit the roof when he finds out about him and Lauren.
Lauren: Doesn't like her uncle, won't be happy if he keeps her & Joey apart.
Max: Derek might reveal his secret.
Tanya: hates him, will blame him for getting Max in trouble.
Alfie: When he finds out he's shagging Kat
Kat: He has violent streak and she could kill him in self defence
Lucy: He threatened her earlier this year.
Ian: Stole money from his businesses.
Alice: He promised he'd change, sick of him controlling her life.
Michael: their history could be revisited
Phil: he could find out his secret
Sharon: he tells Denny about Dennis
Jack: they fallout regularly
Lithuanian Mafia??
If it's a current character, my money is on Joey/Alice.
Sarcasm doesn't work in text full stop (and when done properly doesn't include the words "I'm not even joking").
thats what i mean but its different to michael/kat having a ONS originally and changing it to an affair. its completely plausible that they ended up having an affair. that wasn't dropped as they still had screentime together.
people didnt like derek as a baddie. they brought in his children to soften him up
Plus Michael doesn't do violence (forgetting the Fatboy thing...)
Bryan Kirkwood storylines, regardless of Lorraine Newman's appointment would still be running, even up until now. We won't really see her work until early 2013, since storylines can be planned 18-12 months in advance.
Kathleen Beedles said some of the storylines she and Kirkwood planned are still going on (i.e Lexi being taken away). It's hard now to decipher who's storyline is who's.
yeah we dont know which storylines belong to which producer. im pretty sure LN would've changed some storylines after BK left but of course kath was still story producer so its still her work.
Okay, okay, jesus. I'm not a big fan of the character, so I thought I'd make a jokey comment, don't really see the problem with that. As if I would get the champagne out for a soap character's death, anyway, I thought it was clear I didn't actually mean it...
I don't think they would be allowed to change things tbh. That costs money and spending is something BBC (and EastEnders) are cutting down on. But obviously things could have been changed slightly.
Not really. A ONS can't = sudden love affair. The ONS aspect was dropped from the entire thing, but anyway there were other examples I listed if you didn't agree with the Kat/MM one.
Derek's children being brought in would have likely been a long running decision, not based on audience reception. EastEnders writing team would have to have sat down, drawn up the character arcs of both Joey and Alice, and cast the actors to play them, which would take several months. Then, that actor/actress would need to come in a flim scenes which are flimed up to eight weeks in advance (so two months). Jasmine Banks would have started fliming for Alice, possibly as early March, and would have had to have gone through the audition and casting process months/weeks before that. The real negative commentry I noticed began around January on Derek, and by then it's likely the casting plans for Joey and Alice would have already been in a pipeline.
This.