Marlon reminds me of Ste Hay of 'Oaks. He will never leave because he has it to cushy and isn't talented or confident to leave his over indulged bubble. Oh and yes I mean the actors.
Near enough in Emmerdale, no character like him since except Nathan Wylde who didn't stay long enough.
Another thing SB has done, he changed Noah Tate to Noah Sharma... yeah wipe out the most legendary Dales family why don't you. Idiot man.
Bib - Hasn't Jai now officially adopted Noah? If so then it's only natural that his surname changes from Tate to Sharma.
Oh yeah I get that but when Noah was brought back the then producer even stated the fact he is a Tate and HOLDS the name was very important to the show.
Oh yeah I get that but when Noah was brought back the then producer even stated the fact he is a Tate and HOLDS the name was very important to the show.
Sentimental nonsense. Again, the Tate name is gone.
I don't want to trample all over fond memories here honestly, but I just feel some people need to accept the fact that the Tates and Sugdens are over and that is that. There is no point dwelling in the past. The past is gone!
Victoria Sugden would be no loss. The Sugdens are over anyway.
Sentimental nonsense. Again, the Tate name is gone.
I don't want to trample all over fond memories here honestly, but I just feel some people need to accept the fact that the Tates and Sugdens are over and that is that. There is no point dwelling in the past. The past is gone!
Of course, and I wholeheartedly understand that. But the past only matters if it's connected to the present, and in this case it isn't. The Tates and the Sugdens are gone forever; they have no relevance to anything in the present or in the future. Their bridges have been irrevocably burned. I'm not saying that is right, but it is fact.
If the producers had any sense or imagination, Robert Sugden would be back by now, running Butler's Farm with his new family! Maybe Joseph Tate as well somehow. But that is never going to happen, and that is my point.
The only Tate with any clout left is Zoe and Leah Bracknell will never come back. Neither will Robert Sugden. It's all very fragmented.
I must be watching a different emmerdale lonesome of you as I don't think it's been to bad? I actually prefer it this way, leave all the big stunts to Hollyoaks. X
If the producers had any sense or imagination, Robert Sugden would be back by now, running Butler's Farm with his new family! Maybe Joseph Tate as well somehow. But that is never going to happen, and that is my point.
(
Robert was never interested in farming... so he wouldn't be running a farm.
I'm not convinced that bringing people back for its own sake is ever the way to go (it certainly hasn't done anything for the London soap, and Bet Lynch's comeback wasn't great for Wetherfield - nor Jim McDonald's farcical return plot.)
Charity's return has worked well for me because she's been involved in some good storylines and Emma Atkins is an excellent actress. The character also still had ties to the village, so there was a credibility to her saying around.
For me, Nathan Wylde was only ever a cartoon charicature of a Chris Tate. He no longer has any reason to be around Emmerdale - no friends or family there, so his return would not be credible.
I still watch every episode but have to say that Emmerdale has really gone downhill.
It is a bit of a ritual to watch the 7pm episode while we are having tea(sorry!) but my husband has now got to the stage where he won't watch the show as it has deteriorated so much in his opinion, so how much longer I will be watching it I do not know (have watched since the very beginning (Emmerdale Farm)
Robert was never interested in farming... so he wouldn't be running a farm.
But they were a farming family, yet neither Victoria or Robert were interested in farming. Seems unrealistic! Robert was a nutter and Victoria just a gormless bimbo.
But they were a farming family, yet neither Victoria or Robert were interested in farming. Seems unrealistic! Robert was a nutter and Victoria just a gormless bimbo.
Sadly I don't think it's at all unrealistic and is in fact the very reason that independent farms are well on the way to becoming a thing of the past.
Thanks to the EU's CAP, coupled with the sheer greed of the supermarkets, there is simply no money to be made in farming any more. Why would Robert or Victoria have any interest in flogging their guts out for nothing, (note I resisted saying 'flogging a dead horse') :D
Sadly I don't think it's at all unrealistic and is in fact the very reason that independent farms are well on the way to becoming a thing of the past.
Thanks to the EU's CAP, coupled with the sheer greed of the supermarkets, there is simply no money to be made in farming any more. Why would Robert or Victoria have any interest in flogging their guts out for nothing, (note I resisted saying 'flogging a dead horse') :D
A point off for using 'flogging' though!
Yes, I suppose you're right. I do wonder what the point of Emmerdale is then if farming is no longer at its heart!
Victoria Sugden would be no loss. The Sugdens are over anyway.
Sentimental nonsense. Again, the Tate name is gone.
I don't want to trample all over fond memories here honestly, but I just feel some people need to accept the fact that the Tates and Sugdens are over and that is that. There is no point dwelling in the past. The past is gone!
Soaps are unique for having a rich deep history.
How can the Tates be over when there are technically loads left that could come back. Better then obsessing over The Spencers.
How can the Tates be over when there are technically loads left that could come back.
Loads? Like who? Leah Bracknell will never come back, and she would have to if the comeback of any other Tates (only two that I can think of) i.e. Jean and Joseph were to have any credibility. They have no reason to come back.
Zoe Tate
Noah Tate
Joesph Tate
James Tate
Jean Tate
Kim Tate
Nathan Wylde loves the whole small village he can control, take over and terrorise. Friends or not he is better enough to be lonely in the big house. Fed up of Cain Dingle.
Am I the only one who found Nathan Wylde really irritating? To me, he wasn't much better than Robbie, as a character. He was cowardly, hid behind his parent's money, smarmy, snobbish and utterly without any kind of conscience. At least he stuck by his mother, loyalty was his only redeeming feature. Horrible, spoilt brat of a character.
Zoe Tate
Noah Tate
Joesph Tate
James Tate
Jean Tate
Kim Tate
Nathan Wylde loves the whole small village he can control, take over and terrorise. Friends or not he is better enough to be lonely in the big house. Fed up of Cain Dingle.
If I'm right in thinking, James Tate was Kim's son; was Joseph Tate Rachael's son - thus making him Noah's half brother?
Joseph must be well old enough to make a return now. Or maybe in a couple of years, another nice Tate.... and he could bring back James and Kim...
Am I the only one who found Nathan Wylde really irritating? To me, he wasn't much better than Robbie, as a character. He was cowardly, hid behind his parent's money, smarmy, snobbish and utterly without any kind of conscience. At least he stuck by his mother, loyalty was his only redeeming feature. Horrible, spoilt brat of a character.
Yes, he was. But unlike the likes of the Maceys, he was entertaining to watch:D
Am I the only one who found Nathan Wylde really irritating? To me, he wasn't much better than Robbie, as a character. He was cowardly, hid behind his parent's money, smarmy, snobbish and utterly without any kind of conscience. At least he stuck by his mother, loyalty was his only redeeming feature. Horrible, spoilt brat of a character.
I loved Nathan. He was a spoilt brat but it made sense because his family had money which gave him a sense of entitlement. His love for his family and especially his siblings gave the character some much needed depth.
Nathan was a villain who was treated like a villain. On the top of my head the people who slapped, punched or threw him out are - Cain, Maisie, Natasha, Faye, Ryan, Will, Leila, David, Declan, Carl and probably other characters. Nathan was mean but watching him was not frustrating because people did not put up with his attitude.
I loved Nathan. He was a spoilt brat but it made sense because his family had money which gave him a sense of entitlement. His love for his family and especially his siblings gave the character some much needed depth.
Nathan was a villain who was treated like a villain. On the top of my head the people who slapped, punched or threw him out are - Cain, Maisie, Natasha, Faye, Ryan, Will, Leila, David, Declan, Carl and probably other characters. Nathan was mean but watching him was not frustrating because people did not put up with his attitude.
I HATED Nathan at first - thinking he was just a 2D panto villain, but he grew on me during his brief stint in Emmerdale, and by the end he'd developed into a good, strong character.
Comments
Bib - Hasn't Jai now officially adopted Noah? If so then it's only natural that his surname changes from Tate to Sharma.
It is almost like losing Victoria Sugden.
Bib - It's what they wanted and it does happen in real life. In fact one of my cousins married a widow with 2 kids and he adopted the kids.
Victoria Sugden would be no loss. The Sugdens are over anyway.
Sentimental nonsense. Again, the Tate name is gone.
I don't want to trample all over fond memories here honestly, but I just feel some people need to accept the fact that the Tates and Sugdens are over and that is that. There is no point dwelling in the past. The past is gone!
The "past" of a soap is part of it's integrety.
It's like Dallas without the Ewings and Barnes'.
Of course, and I wholeheartedly understand that. But the past only matters if it's connected to the present, and in this case it isn't. The Tates and the Sugdens are gone forever; they have no relevance to anything in the present or in the future. Their bridges have been irrevocably burned. I'm not saying that is right, but it is fact.
If the producers had any sense or imagination, Robert Sugden would be back by now, running Butler's Farm with his new family! Maybe Joseph Tate as well somehow. But that is never going to happen, and that is my point.
The only Tate with any clout left is Zoe and Leah Bracknell will never come back. Neither will Robert Sugden. It's all very fragmented.
Robert was never interested in farming... so he wouldn't be running a farm.
Charity's return has worked well for me because she's been involved in some good storylines and Emma Atkins is an excellent actress. The character also still had ties to the village, so there was a credibility to her saying around.
For me, Nathan Wylde was only ever a cartoon charicature of a Chris Tate. He no longer has any reason to be around Emmerdale - no friends or family there, so his return would not be credible.
It is a bit of a ritual to watch the 7pm episode while we are having tea(sorry!) but my husband has now got to the stage where he won't watch the show as it has deteriorated so much in his opinion, so how much longer I will be watching it I do not know (have watched since the very beginning (Emmerdale Farm)
But they were a farming family, yet neither Victoria or Robert were interested in farming. Seems unrealistic! Robert was a nutter and Victoria just a gormless bimbo.
Sadly I don't think it's at all unrealistic and is in fact the very reason that independent farms are well on the way to becoming a thing of the past.
Thanks to the EU's CAP, coupled with the sheer greed of the supermarkets, there is simply no money to be made in farming any more. Why would Robert or Victoria have any interest in flogging their guts out for nothing, (note I resisted saying 'flogging a dead horse')
A point off for using 'flogging' though!
Yes, I suppose you're right. I do wonder what the point of Emmerdale is then if farming is no longer at its heart!
Soaps are unique for having a rich deep history.
How can the Tates be over when there are technically loads left that could come back. Better then obsessing over The Spencers.
Loads? Like who? Leah Bracknell will never come back, and she would have to if the comeback of any other Tates (only two that I can think of) i.e. Jean and Joseph were to have any credibility. They have no reason to come back.
Still sounds like vacuous sentimentality to me.
Noah Tate
Joesph Tate
James Tate
Jean Tate
Kim Tate
Nathan Wylde loves the whole small village he can control, take over and terrorise. Friends or not he is better enough to be lonely in the big house. Fed up of Cain Dingle.
Whats wrong with Leah Bracknell?
Er, nothing.
If I'm right in thinking, James Tate was Kim's son; was Joseph Tate Rachael's son - thus making him Noah's half brother?
Joseph must be well old enough to make a return now. Or maybe in a couple of years, another nice Tate.... and he could bring back James and Kim...
Yes, he was. But unlike the likes of the Maceys, he was entertaining to watch:D
I loved Nathan. He was a spoilt brat but it made sense because his family had money which gave him a sense of entitlement. His love for his family and especially his siblings gave the character some much needed depth.
Nathan was a villain who was treated like a villain. On the top of my head the people who slapped, punched or threw him out are - Cain, Maisie, Natasha, Faye, Ryan, Will, Leila, David, Declan, Carl and probably other characters. Nathan was mean but watching him was not frustrating because people did not put up with his attitude.
I HATED Nathan at first - thinking he was just a 2D panto villain, but he grew on me during his brief stint in Emmerdale, and by the end he'd developed into a good, strong character.