Why I've stopped watching Eastenders (Merged)
ChuckyBlackhart
Posts: 2,468 Forum Member
✭✭✭
I am a life long fan of Eastenders. However I have recently stopped watching due to the recasts. The recasts of Lauren, Ben and Lucy are completely unnecessary. Even as a life long fan of Eastenders the recast of Lauren has taken me right out of the programme. And isn’t that the opposite effect an ongoing drama is supposed to have? I know recasts have happened before and I think recasts should be left in the past as an embarrassing part of soap history. Lauren was already being played by an actress. There was no need to recast her. Recasts are insulting to the performer, insulting to the programme and insulting to the viewer. What is the point in an ongoing drama if actors who portray characters are suddenly going to be changed? If actors want to leave or have been fired then the programme should build that in to the story. When Madeline Duggen left the programme it could have been worked in to Eastenders by showing Max and Tanya struggling with the absence of their daughter.
To me, when an actor has left, their character has went with them. And their replacement is an embarrassing impostor , ruining the credibility of the show. When a recast happens it doesn’t just effect that particular character, it effects every character they interact with. For example, when Lauren talks to Max I think “Max, what are you doing, that’s not your daughter”. As such Jake Wood’s acting talent is going to waste. Again, when “Lauren is interacting with Stacey I think Stacey “what are you doing, that’s not Lauren”. Watching Eastenders should be like dropping in on a community. But it can’t possibly be like that if characters are going to be replaced with “new heads.” The look of the show is what draws you in as a viewer. How something looks is the first thing people take in. And as such make their mind up if they are going to be open to the storylines. How realistic something looks dictates ones openness to accept it. Why should viewers have to make their selves struggle to accept a “recast”. What is the point in an ongoing drama if the makers are going to say “you know that character you’ve been watching for the past four years? Well she’s now a different person”. When a recast character is onscreen I can’t help but be reminded of how patronising it is to the viewer and how much little respect producers must have for the viewer and the integrity and credibility of the programme.
Recasts are possibly the ultimate insult to the viewer. I can’t imagine anything more patronising and condescending. It go’s to show in the world of soap nothing is credible and nothing is safe. What is the point in being a loyal viewer if a character your invested in is suddenly and pointlessly replaced. As if they never existed. It means a character someone is invested in could suddenly change. So what’s the point in investing any time on the show at all? I watched Eastenders when I was a wee boy and throughout my teens. But Eastenders has now lost me as a viewer. The introduction of the “new Lauren” was the last episode for me.
To me, when an actor has left, their character has went with them. And their replacement is an embarrassing impostor , ruining the credibility of the show. When a recast happens it doesn’t just effect that particular character, it effects every character they interact with. For example, when Lauren talks to Max I think “Max, what are you doing, that’s not your daughter”. As such Jake Wood’s acting talent is going to waste. Again, when “Lauren is interacting with Stacey I think Stacey “what are you doing, that’s not Lauren”. Watching Eastenders should be like dropping in on a community. But it can’t possibly be like that if characters are going to be replaced with “new heads.” The look of the show is what draws you in as a viewer. How something looks is the first thing people take in. And as such make their mind up if they are going to be open to the storylines. How realistic something looks dictates ones openness to accept it. Why should viewers have to make their selves struggle to accept a “recast”. What is the point in an ongoing drama if the makers are going to say “you know that character you’ve been watching for the past four years? Well she’s now a different person”. When a recast character is onscreen I can’t help but be reminded of how patronising it is to the viewer and how much little respect producers must have for the viewer and the integrity and credibility of the programme.
Recasts are possibly the ultimate insult to the viewer. I can’t imagine anything more patronising and condescending. It go’s to show in the world of soap nothing is credible and nothing is safe. What is the point in being a loyal viewer if a character your invested in is suddenly and pointlessly replaced. As if they never existed. It means a character someone is invested in could suddenly change. So what’s the point in investing any time on the show at all? I watched Eastenders when I was a wee boy and throughout my teens. But Eastenders has now lost me as a viewer. The introduction of the “new Lauren” was the last episode for me.
0
Comments
When they axed the Lucy actress because of her behaviour, I thought okay she's young but fine whatever. But why is it that Steve Mcfadden who's done something even worse, a guy who's over 50, gets away with it yet again? Just awful hypocrisy.
Because his been with the show longer, his character is more established and properly has a better ranking than Melissa plus he gets paid more his more of higher value to the show than Melissa.
Seriously though, Melissa is the daughter of the longest serving character on the show. She became popular in her recent storylines, especially amoungst young viewers. Not many people would give a damn about what she does in real life, that's her business. But what's surprising to me is her character does much more extreme stuff like running away, getting pregnant etc. and we know some people can become extreme with certain characters, so it just defies all logic on why she would get sacked for having fun, where as Steve gets away with it again and again after having serious offences.
Anyway EE isn't that bad at the minute, Glenda and and Carol are good. Although tbh EE doesn't have any s/ls coming up that I've heard of that make me think that I can't wait to watch that. Hollyoaks has (the murder s/l) Corro has the 50th and Emmerdale has Chas and Carl reveal but EE ??
Of course its not okay but you must see the difference on why Steve is given so much leeway compare to Melissa it doesn't matter if her character is the daughter of who ever, SF character is part of EE history and has or is popular with viewers and has been part of the biggest storylines to feature on the show no one else could play Phil his established this character as he own wherever his become shit or not, the problem with Melissa/Lucy is the fact she more expendable even though she has played her since she was a child, she easier to replace because the character hasn't come in her own, she isn't as well established even if she had a few storylines.
Who knows Steve might have lot of clout behind the scenes which is a possible explanation on why they give him so much freedom and still keep him on the show but it is really pointless comparing the two because Melissa is replaceable on the show why actors such as Steve/Phil, June/Dot or Adam/Ian are not, just how it is.
I know what you mean!
The reason I created a thread about this in particular is because I was thinking about sending the first post as a letter to the BBC. And I thought I'd get some feed back about it here first.
Thats true! I never thought about that. Steve Mcfadden was in the tabloids about that whole dogging thing and he wasn't fired. Nor should he have been. Actors should be allowed personal lives. I don't care what they get up to. Melissa shouldn't have been sacked. And even if they do fire an actor the character shouldn't be recast. Melissa Suffield was Lucy.
And (for those still soldiering on) there’s two more recasts to go!
You know who does need recast? Brian Kirkwood!
Secondly, I hate how storylines are now being sidelined such as Whitneys prostitution.
Then there is rubbish like the baby swap. Then we have annoying characters in our faces every episode e.g. Alfie Moon, Kat Moon etc. Then we've got Tanya who has turned into a stuck up little bitch. Then we have actresses quitting because of crap storylines.
It's a vicious circle.
Then we have the destruction of the sets e.g. the cafe. Then we have teens that nobody can relate to anymore, however under Diederick Santer we had a lot of good teens that people could actually relate to e.g. Zsa Zsa, Leon, Peter, Lucy, Billie.
Fatboy & Mercy have also changed and I do not like them as much anymore.
We also had good storylines. Now there is just no hope.
The writing is shite, characters have changed, characters that I once like, I now can't stand. :mad:
Awful, awful, awful.
The idiot needs firing ASAP.
The new Lauren and Ben are far better actors with much more stage presense than previously. I couldnt imagine old Ben having those scenes with Jay this week, they work so much better plus Charlie Jones got so much stick on this forum and everyone kept saying he needed to be recast. And if i recall Janine, Peggy and Mark were three characters that all got recasted and are three of the most successful Eastenders characters of all time. If you want to look at dodgy recasts then look no further than Nick Tisley in Corrie.
How have Fatboy and Mercy changed? I know they're on abit more but I wouldn't say they've changed.
do you just try and find every place possible to moan about EastEnders? I think everyone's realised by now that you don't like it...
She's been taken away from the Square by someone who is technically acting like a pimp. It's back at the forefront of the show this week. It's only been off screen for two weeks.
Quoted for truth - I agree with the above post. I too have noticed you do seem very keen to jump ino every anti-Eastenders thread you find on the board. It's gertting a little repetetive now.
I think there has to be a big gap between one actor and another for a recast to have a hope of working. When I say a big gap, I mean months and months.
The re-casts of Lucy, Summer and Darren on Neighbours worked...why? There were years between the actors portraying them. The re-cast of Declan hasn't worked at all because the actors portraying him changed over night. Disaster. That is what has gone wrong with Ben and Lauren to. Established actors almost changed over night. It will be the same for Lucy and Peter to. Disaster. An insult to loyal viewers. It would be better to write the characters out.
To be fair, Janine was a minor character back in the day.
Would a re-cast of Janine work if there was only a gap of three months between Charlie and whoever else? Probably not. Janine would need to be written out for years to allow viewers to forget Charlie because Janine is such a big character. Same for Malissa playing Lucy and Thomas playing Peter.
No excuse. It is precisely because he gets paid more that Steve's behaviour is even more serious. His huge salary is paid for by the tax payer lets not forget that.
If you have a code of conduct for behaviour, it should be applied across the board otherwise it isn't fair. I suspect, I don't know, but Thomas's leaving could be linked to Melissa's sacking.;)
But surely the message that`s giving is that its OK to behave atrociously if your character is established
I agree with all that...but I never liked Fatso or Mercy from the get-go...and now we have that drip...Jodie...dear God...:rolleyes:
IMO agree with you about Lauren - but disagree totally about the new Ben actor. It might have worked if they had employed an actor who, at least, looked a bit like the old Ben and whose character had not changed so much as to be totally unbelievable.
The new Lauren and Ben are dreadful. Ben is now mini-Phil...:yawn: