Absolutely not. This is a silly statement as any comments made have been very specific, and there are many people who don't like this.
I think its a fair assement in regards to some and I'm sure there are many who agree with me. Some are coming across rather bitter that EE has been given glowing reviews for a very hard hitting and dark storyline.
But why? I don't want to offend you or anything because I've read about you losing a child (which I'm sorry to hear about btw ). If there had only been a baby swap, no cot death, it wouldn't make sense to viewers. The death of Ronnie's baby is about her struggle, she's had this happen before with Danielle and the baby she lost, so I really think if they wanted to do a swap, the baby dying is the only way it could happen. It's a sad storyline, but so are most plots on EE and a lot of people can be affected by them.
I understand the whole Ronnie tragedy thing.
I think there should be no swap - I've no issue with a well thought out and acted SIDS storyline. The swap is offensive to me.
I think its a fair assement in regards to some and I'm sure there are many who agree with me. Some are coming across rather bitter that EE has been given glowing reviews for a very hard hitting and dark storyline.
I havent read glowing reviews - Ive read that it's hard hitting and destressing.
I think some are determined to defend the indefensible.
I've said what my problem is and I stand by it. Snide intimations will not change that.
I will not be watching the episode featuring the death of baby James.
I posted this in the other thread but thought it was also appropriate for this thread as well.
While I know this will be a very sad and emotional storyline to watch with heart-breaking scenes I think the baby-swapping aspect is taking it too far. It's interesting that they will be tackling the devastating issue of cot death / SIDS but I was sickened when I read about the baby-swap aspect.
A storyline too far and even as a fan of EE from the very beginning, this is what will make me switch off. Is this storyline really lasting for two years? I'm not a mother and I haven't experienced such a tragedy but it is a horrible and insensitive storyline.
I posted this in the other thread but thought it was also appropriate for this thread as well.
While I know this will be a very sad and emotional storyline to watch with heart-breaking scenes I think the baby-swapping aspect is taking it too far. It's interesting that they will be tackling the devastating issue of cot death / SIDS but I was sickened when I read about the baby-swap aspect.
A storyline too far and even as a fan of EE from the very beginning, this is what will make me switch off. Is this storyline really lasting for two years? I'm not a mother and I haven't experienced such a tragedy but it is a horrible and insensitive storyline.
I doubt they are going to handle this insensitively.
I doubt they are going to handle this insensitively.
On the contrary, the fact they are featuring the baby-swap aspect and that it's rumoured to run for a possible two years is handling it insensitive IMO.
That is a very insensitive comment. Who are you to say that people who are unhappy with this are wrong.
As a person who has lost a child to SIDS I find that utterly insulting.
Also, from experience, I can tell you the post mortem results, 6 weeks after death would proove the child was not related to the mother - they take blood from the mother to cross reference to see if the mother passed any infection such as syphilis or any other condition... this swap story is not possible!
Fiction doesn't hurt anyone? That is just wrong! Of course it does and can.
No the blood tests would be much more detailed screening than merely blood type. In our case there was genetic screening done where blood was taken from both of us to compare. It didn't give us answers, but it would have shown if either of was not a natural parent.
It makes me laugh that people defend EE by saying "It's not real"... then they'll see EE is the most realistic and gritty... not for many years.
If Danielle came back and said she pretended to be dead people would dismiss it as ridiculous... this swap is equally ridiculous... the idea that staff wouldn't listen to Kat say it isn't her child is not believable either
I didn't say anything about the quality of the story. I didn't say Eastenders isn't absurd right now. Eastenders is so dreadful under Kirkwood I've stopped watching. The story could well be absurd. I stopped watching the moment that hack got the job.
The point is adults are allowed to make the creativity they want to make. And adults are allowed to watch any fiction they want to watch. Ofcoarse things should have age ratings and be shown at a proper time so kids aren't damaged. (I can't believe I'm saying this, it's Eastenders, a pre-watershed soap opera, for crying out loud, not I Spit On Your Grave) But adults can choose what they want to see. Censorship is repugnant.
Once things start getting censored you go down a very scary route. Everyone has things that offend them. If everyone's wish to get something banned or censored was given in to, we'd live in a world with nothing!
On the contrary, the fact they are featuring the baby-swap aspect and that it's rumoured to run for a possible two years is handling it insensitive IMO.
:eek: Good god I hope Kirkwood is gone by then.
I couldn't stand him for two minutes.
Go away Kirkwood. Take your recasts with you. And don't let the door hit you on the way out.
The storyline could easily run two years IMO - there's a lot of different ways they could go with it etc.
I agree - but I son't think it's right they even go down the route. Airing a cot death, however emotional and hard to watch, should be fine as it's exploring something which, sadly, happens regularly and it may increase parents awareness. But what the hell is the point of the swap?! It wouldn't even be so bad if she did it but Kat found out practically straight away (or saw her do it and confronted her) and Ronnie was sectioned, but as they're going to string it out for as long as possible...it's horrible and IMO unneccessary.
I'm not going to comment on the episode as it hasn't been aired yet. But sadly these sort of things do happen, did anyone see a recent episode of Snapped? (on one of the crime/investigation channels) That was a true life story of a woman who apparently had a miscarriage (not her first) and went over to a neighbour's house, slashed her throat and stole her baby.
I'm not saying a baby swap or showing a dead baby on tv before the watershed is okay (as I said I will wait until I see the episode before I make any comment on it), but to anyone who says the storyline is unrealistic, unfortunately this is not the case.
The truth is this story is not even 1% believable after all thats happened .Its just groundhog day for Ronnie's misery again .I cant even watch this farce of a show anymore.
The SIDS aspect is a plot device to enable the swap. The mental health issue could be explored as a result of the SIDS. The swap is offensive to me because it is using SIDS for sensationalism.
Mind awards are not relevant to that.
I have no faith in this storyline. From personal experience I think it's inappropriate and I think it shows an EP who is more interested in creating controversy than anything else.
I find this deeply offensive.
I know from your personal experiance you will find this quite sensitive but you have to realise that not everyone, even in real life "react" the way you "normally" would. In this instance Ronnie should be wailing and crying but something so painful takes over she does something very horrifying.
Mind awards are quite relevant I feel because it shows that certain organisations who know about all types of certain mental illnesses praise the show for it's good work. It means EE are consistant with their research and quality of work.
I didn't say anything about the quality of the story. I didn't say Eastenders isn't absurd right now. Eastenders is so dreadful under Kirkwood I've stopped watching. The story could well be absurd. I stopped watching the moment that hack got the job.
The point is adults are allowed to make the creativity they want to make. And adults are allowed to watch any fiction they want to watch. Ofcoarse things should have age ratings and be shown at a proper time so kids aren't damaged. (I can't believe I'm saying this, it's Eastenders, a pre-watershed soap opera, for crying out loud, not I Spit On Your Grave) But adults can choose what they want to see. Censorship is repugnant.
Once things start getting censored you go down a very scary route. Everyone has things that offend them. If everyone's wish to get something banned or censored was given in to, we'd live in a world with nothing!
I don't understand. So do you like the show or not? Anyway it was a shame for a few scenes to be edited but like Kirkwood said it will not damage the storylines overall performance.
What concerns me about the SIDS s/l is that it happens to such a young baby. Usually cot death happens to a baby with no health problems and for no reason that can be found. With such a young baby who has no health history there could be something wrong that caused the baby`s death.
I object to cot death being used just so Ronnie can swap the babies whilst they are young enough for her to get away with it.
The death which must be unbelievably devastating for the parents who have been through it, will be over shadowed by the swap. That to me is what is wrong with s/l.
I don't understand. So do you like the show or not? Anyway it was a shame for a few scenes to be edited but like Kirkwood said it will not damage the storylines overall performance.
It was one of my favourite programmes. Until Kirkwood took over. Santers final year was rubbish. But atleast to a certain extent it still felt like Eastenders. (albeit EE going through a bad patch.) Under Bryan Kirkwood it doesn't even feel like EE. It just feels like a bad soap hijacked by an ex hollyoaks producer.
It was one of my favourite programmes. Until Kirkwood took over. Santers final year was rubbish. But atleast to a certain extent it still felt like Eastenders. (albeit EE going through a bad patch.) Under Bryan Kirkwood it doesn't even feel like EE. It just feels like a bad soap hijacked by an ex hollyoaks producer.
I totally agree with you. Kirkwood has ruined one of my favourite shows.
I actually haven't seen EE since the 21st so can't comment on the Ronnie story. I made a conscious decision not to view it.
What concerns me about the SIDS s/l is that it happens to such a young baby. Usually cot death happens to a baby with no health problems and for no reason that can be found. With such a young baby who has no health history there could be something wrong that caused the baby`s death.
I object to cot death being used just so Ronnie can swap the babies whilst they are young enough for her to get away with it.
The death which must be unbelievably devastating for the parents who have been through it, will be over shadowed by the swap. That to me is what is wrong with s/l.
Is it an actual fact that cot death must occur within a certain period before or after though? I've been to the cemetery (ironically, the one where they actually filmed the Kat and Alfie's babies funeral a few weeks back) and on many baby gravestones (so sad ) they have things like '2 Days', '1 Week', '2 Weeks' etc. So surely it would just vary depending on child - depending on anybody in fact.
Comments
I think its a fair assement in regards to some and I'm sure there are many who agree with me. Some are coming across rather bitter that EE has been given glowing reviews for a very hard hitting and dark storyline.
I understand the whole Ronnie tragedy thing.
I think there should be no swap - I've no issue with a well thought out and acted SIDS storyline. The swap is offensive to me.
I havent read glowing reviews - Ive read that it's hard hitting and destressing.
I think some are determined to defend the indefensible.
I've said what my problem is and I stand by it. Snide intimations will not change that.
I will not be watching the episode featuring the death of baby James.
While I know this will be a very sad and emotional storyline to watch with heart-breaking scenes I think the baby-swapping aspect is taking it too far. It's interesting that they will be tackling the devastating issue of cot death / SIDS but I was sickened when I read about the baby-swap aspect.
A storyline too far and even as a fan of EE from the very beginning, this is what will make me switch off. Is this storyline really lasting for two years? I'm not a mother and I haven't experienced such a tragedy but it is a horrible and insensitive storyline.
I doubt they are going to handle this insensitively.
On the contrary, the fact they are featuring the baby-swap aspect and that it's rumoured to run for a possible two years is handling it insensitive IMO.
I didn't say anything about the quality of the story. I didn't say Eastenders isn't absurd right now. Eastenders is so dreadful under Kirkwood I've stopped watching. The story could well be absurd. I stopped watching the moment that hack got the job.
The point is adults are allowed to make the creativity they want to make. And adults are allowed to watch any fiction they want to watch. Ofcoarse things should have age ratings and be shown at a proper time so kids aren't damaged. (I can't believe I'm saying this, it's Eastenders, a pre-watershed soap opera, for crying out loud, not I Spit On Your Grave) But adults can choose what they want to see. Censorship is repugnant.
Once things start getting censored you go down a very scary route. Everyone has things that offend them. If everyone's wish to get something banned or censored was given in to, we'd live in a world with nothing!
:eek: Good god I hope Kirkwood is gone by then.
I couldn't stand him for two minutes.
Go away Kirkwood. Take your recasts with you. And don't let the door hit you on the way out.
I agree - but I son't think it's right they even go down the route. Airing a cot death, however emotional and hard to watch, should be fine as it's exploring something which, sadly, happens regularly and it may increase parents awareness. But what the hell is the point of the swap?! It wouldn't even be so bad if she did it but Kat found out practically straight away (or saw her do it and confronted her) and Ronnie was sectioned, but as they're going to string it out for as long as possible...it's horrible and IMO unneccessary.
I'm not saying a baby swap or showing a dead baby on tv before the watershed is okay (as I said I will wait until I see the episode before I make any comment on it), but to anyone who says the storyline is unrealistic, unfortunately this is not the case.
Good ridance.
I know from your personal experiance you will find this quite sensitive but you have to realise that not everyone, even in real life "react" the way you "normally" would. In this instance Ronnie should be wailing and crying but something so painful takes over she does something very horrifying.
Mind awards are quite relevant I feel because it shows that certain organisations who know about all types of certain mental illnesses praise the show for it's good work. It means EE are consistant with their research and quality of work.
I don't understand. So do you like the show or not? Anyway it was a shame for a few scenes to be edited but like Kirkwood said it will not damage the storylines overall performance.
I object to cot death being used just so Ronnie can swap the babies whilst they are young enough for her to get away with it.
The death which must be unbelievably devastating for the parents who have been through it, will be over shadowed by the swap. That to me is what is wrong with s/l.
It was one of my favourite programmes. Until Kirkwood took over. Santers final year was rubbish. But atleast to a certain extent it still felt like Eastenders. (albeit EE going through a bad patch.) Under Bryan Kirkwood it doesn't even feel like EE. It just feels like a bad soap hijacked by an ex hollyoaks producer.
I totally agree with you. Kirkwood has ruined one of my favourite shows.
I actually haven't seen EE since the 21st so can't comment on the Ronnie story. I made a conscious decision not to view it.