Is it too late to create new 'iconic' or 'classic' characters?

big danbig dan Posts: 7,878
Forum Member
In many discussions regarding EE and their lack of old 'classic' characters, I notice that people seem to think this is an issue as when the remaining ones are gone, that's basically it.

I often find myself agreeing with this to be honest. There are some great, compelling newer characters in all the soaps (Max, Tanya -EE, Carla- Corrie being some of my favourites), however I can't see any of them ever becoming 'icons'.

I don't think it helps when TPTB are blatantly trying to create new classic characters by re-using tried and tested formulas to recreate old magic. Any thoughts on this?

Comments

  • MrJamesMrJames Posts: 8,127
    Forum Member
    The current characters that I consider iconic in Eastenders are: Ian, Dot, Pat, Bianca and Phil. And I think perhaps the youngest and most recent proper 'icons' that we have in Eastenders are Janine and Kat. And I would certainly say that they are at iconic status as they are both instantly recognisable to that role and not just 'classic' characters. So I think there is still potential to produce iconic characters, and I think that Max and Tanya, for example, are on the right tracks to achieveing this.
  • thejoyof_patthejoyof_pat Posts: 30,674
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think icons ad legends are down to the each and every person, I still don't think it's too late for characters to be considered those things.
  • Zack06Zack06 Posts: 28,304
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would say Stacey is an example of a recent iconic character. I think this is why she got the exit she did...I can definitely see her returning to the Square in the future.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 823
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think it's less about the characters than the storylines/state of the show when they're in it. If EE suddenly got really good and compulsive viewing that 'everyone's talking about' then the characters who were in it would stand a chance of being considered 'classic' characters.

    It is also about hanging around/not being axed for a long time!

    I mean, for example, the Kennedy's in Neighbours didn't arrive until 1995 when the shows glory days were over, but they're clearly classic characters
  • Stranded1012345Stranded1012345 Posts: 877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yeah, icons come and go with everything. Think of music as an example!

    Obviously the only old school true EastEnders legends left are Ian, Dot, Phil, Bianca and for a few more days Pat but there are other brilliant characters such as Carol, Tanya, Max, Kat, Denise and so on that all have potential to be if they continue to be on the show for many years to come. Imagine if Denise, Tanya, Jane, Shirley and Zainab are still in the show in their 60's/70's, they'll be considered icons then.
  • dazza89dazza89 Posts: 13,909
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I agree, we have some great old school EE legends left-Dot, Ian, Phil, Carol & Bianca and of course Pat for a few more days. We then have some modern greats like Kat, Janine, Max, Tanya, Zainab & Masood.
  • dazza89dazza89 Posts: 13,909
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Yeah, icons come and go with everything. Think of music as an example!

    Obviously the only old school true EastEnders legends left are Ian, Dot, Phil, Bianca and for a few more days Pat but there are other brilliant characters such as Carol, Tanya, Max, Kat, Denise and so on that all have potential to be if they continue to be on the show for many years to come. Imagine if Denise, Tanya, Jane, Shirley and Zainab are still in the show in their 60's/70's, they'll be considered icons then.

    I would absolutely love that to happen.
  • rayofsunshinerayofsunshine Posts: 5,310
    Forum Member
    I think the problem is nowadays all the storylines are so sensationalistic and shocking that the characters go through too much in too short a space of time and the actors then feel the characters have run their course, as often do the audience

    If we take Becky or Carla from Corrie for example, both characters have been through a ridiculous amount of heartbreak in the six or so years they have been around to the point that the radio times questioned whether Carla was being persecuted. These characters go through so much trauma that plausibly they cannot remain in the soap for too long as there is nothing left for them or they are too emotionally broken etc so they have to move on. Years ago when huge storylines or events did not happen to characters every month or so there was more development time for the characters which allowed them to grow into legends a their duration in the soap was more plausible.
  • Sinbazro_05Sinbazro_05 Posts: 923
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It’s worth remembering that Pat was introduced with an extremely rich backstory, giving her strong links to the three main families of the day (Watts/Beale/Fowler). Pat was Pete Beale’s ex-wife, Pauline Fowlers ex-sister-in-law, Simon Wicks’ mother, Angie Watts’ best friend, Den Watts’ old flame, Kenny Beale’s former lover, Lou Beale’s nemesis, and the love of her life, Frank Butcher, was introduced with his large family soon after. Never has a character been introduced with so many connections to existing characters (they have tried to do this with the likes of Derek to an extent (his spat with Pat/relationships with Michael/Rainie) but it feels very contrived).
  • AliceyAlicey Posts: 5,294
    Forum Member
    They have trouble hanging onto characters for more than 5 minutes nowadays. Nobody is ever around long enough- either the writers do nothing with a character and then axe them for "running their course" aka not having the imagination or talent to think of any sotrylines for them...or the actor gets a bit delusional about what awaits them after their soap stint and ends up quitting and ending up on Strictly Come Dancing and a one episode stint in Doctors before disappearing.
  • The Queen VicThe Queen Vic Posts: 5,775
    Forum Member
    It's funny how we're all choosing our icons/legends based on their longevity on the show, is that right? If you think that someone like Patrick has been im the show for ten years, is he considered iconic over a character like Max who joined in 2006?

    I think it's based on stories. Mo Harris might not be an icon, yet Kat is considered one and technically Mo has been in the show longer, without a break. I think EastEnders has killed off too many legends; Angie and Den Watts, Pauline Fowler, Cindy Beale, Kathy Beale and soon Pat Butcher - all characters that would fit so well now.

    If you brought back Sharon, Grant, Peggy and Stacey, would that be considered wise?
  • Pete CallanPete Callan Posts: 24,382
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Character burn out faster these days because the stories are so fast paced and ever-increasingly dramatic. Iconic characters can be made in a short time frame, the likes of Kat Slater have proved the theory, but I think recapturing the legendary status of Ken, or Pat, or even Kevin Webster, is going to be a tough prospect.
  • MsWilder11MsWilder11 Posts: 13,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Alicey wrote: »
    They have trouble hanging onto characters for more than 5 minutes nowadays. Nobody is ever around long enough- either the writers do nothing with a character and then axe them for "running their course" aka not having the imagination or talent to think of any sotrylines for them...or the actor gets a bit delusional about what awaits them after their soap stint and ends up quitting and ending up on Strictly Come Dancing and a one episode stint in Doctors before disappearing.

    I agree with that. I've heard many of them say after a short while " I don't want to be typecast" or "I've loved my time here, but I'm excited to try new things".
  • coffee_monstercoffee_monster Posts: 226
    Forum Member
    It’s worth remembering that Pat was introduced with an extremely rich backstory, giving her strong links to the three main families of the day (Watts/Beale/Fowler). Pat was Pete Beale’s ex-wife, Pauline Fowlers ex-sister-in-law, Simon Wicks’ mother, Angie Watts’ best friend, Den Watts’ old flame, Kenny Beale’s former lover, Lou Beale’s nemesis, and the love of her life, Frank Butcher, was introduced with his large family soon after. Never has a character been introduced with so many connections to existing characters (they have tried to do this with the likes of Derek to an extent (his spat with Pat/relationships with Michael/Rainie) but it feels very contrived).

    I think this is an excellent point. These days, Eastenders doesn't really focus on creating rich back stories for new characters. The Moons are a great example of this. Nana, Spencer, and Alfie are the original Moons, but then more Moons crawled out of the woodwork with one of them being childhood friends with Jack Branning. It all just feels very contrived. The writers need to start thinking in the longterm with new characters. When the writers created Tyler and Anthony, it feels like they weren't in the drawing room for very long, and just rushed them out half-baked and full of inconsistencies.

    I'd like to think that Pat was probably in the works long before the show aired alongside the likes of Den, etc.
  • EastEndFan05EastEndFan05 Posts: 4,778
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    In the strictest sense of the word an icon has a religious meaning. I'm sure none of us worships any soap characters lol so I'd be more inclined to go with the word ''legendary'' to describe them.

    The precise definition of the word ''legendary'' is ''Extremely well known; famous or renowned''. In these times where tv isn't the main form of every day entertainment it once was, can you honestly see any of the newer, current characters becoming legends? The soaps don't have the exposure they once had in order for a new generation of soap legends to be born. Those days are sadly over.
  • mandead88mandead88 Posts: 2,591
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It's almost impossible in the current writing/storyline climate because the focus is on high-impact characters who stick around for 9 - 12 months and end up either killing or being killed. Not long ago we had Archie Mitchell, and we've just had Yusef Khan. I don't think the writers really care about carefully crafting believable characters anymore, and if they do I can't cite much evidence of this. Mo and Patrick (who are both good/plausible, if underused) are the most recent characters I can think of who've been around for about ten years. Roy and Barry were both great (very believable father and son) and again were kept for about ten years. Roy's heart attack was a pretty good storyline, but killing off Barry out of spite in a ****ing ludicrous storyline involving Janine was... well, ludicrous.

    It's easy to say EastEnder isn't what it is, but it really isn't. It used to be the case that characters were brought in and crafted, and given sensible storylines which revolved around their personalities and didn't always involve drugs or double murders - but apparently that is no longer acceptable.

    Larry Lamb was one of the best actors to have appeared in EastEnders for years, but why didn't they let his character develop over a few years? Why do we have to get someone and then they turn out to be evil, get involved in a 'whodunnit?' murder storyline and then go? We all know this is what's going to happen with Derek, and it'll happen again next year. It's depressingly predictable, and it's just one (albeit major) aspect of why the show is pretty shit compared to what it was.
  • DODS11DODS11 Posts: 2,023
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Not impossible. The trouble is less actors stay in these roles for a long time.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 197
    Forum Member
    Characters that I would deem iconic or legendary are those who have been around for a very very long time... in EE we have Dot, Pat... had Pauline, Peggy etc... Corrie were Jack and Vera Duckworth, Betty... and are Deidre, Ken, Emily, Rita, Emmerdale had Seth Armstrong... I know i'm only mentioning the oldies really BUT... my point is, these actors/actresses who portrayed these characters took on the roles and played them out.

    Nowadays we aren't getting this from actors... They are cast but soon want to move on to try new things. We lose characters far to quickly...

    I doubt very much that any character in any of our soaps will go on to be iconic and legendary. The youngsters of today are to quick to want to move on...

    Just my opinion.
  • Sez_babeSez_babe Posts: 133,998
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    DODS11 wrote: »
    Not impossible. The trouble is less actors stay in these roles for a long time.

    Yeh there aren't many that stay for the lengths that many of the 80s characters did. Although Corrie have a few - Steve, Roy, Hayley...
  • kessukikessuki Posts: 451
    Forum Member
    i believe max will go onto become an iconic character as the actor stated he is committed to eastenders for the long term. as far as i know there are still enough iconic characters and a few classic characters remaining in eastenders. i think iconic characters are made from great storylines whereas classic characters are those that have been present in the soap for a long amount of years.

    I feel Eastenders is not in too bad shape as peggy, stacey and pat's exits make room for carol, bianca, kat and derek, max, janine, denise to get pushed to the top.
  • Sez_babeSez_babe Posts: 133,998
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    and Michael :D
  • kessukikessuki Posts: 451
    Forum Member
    Sez_babe wrote: »
    and Michael :D

    and michael too. i never liked him to begin with (the actor) but janine is making him turn more human and that i like. :D
  • rocketsaladrocketsalad Posts: 1,073
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The two soaps I watch the most, Hollyoaks and Home and Away, are two soaps I think will really have this trouble. Home and Away has those characters everyone knows like Alf, Marilyn and Irene, but they can't seem to keep a cast member for more than five years. Miles, the character who may have had the most longevity, has just left. Leah's been around for ages, but I don't think she's particularly memorable even years down the line, except for being notoriously bad in relationships.

    With the other characters they have now, I just don't see any of them going down as iconic. A lot of them just seem the same personality-wise, especially amongst the teenagers. You don't have anyone like a Cheryl on Hollyoaks, or any young person who gives any comedy. In the young cast, there's no-one - except possibly Indi - who really stands out as a potential icon.

    With Hollyoaks, I think the McQueens are the poster family for the soap and they'll never let go of Myra as long as there are unknown cousins to be found. Jacqui I think could be considered iconic, and Cheryl if she stays long enough. Again, with the high turnover rate in this cast, it's very difficult.

    I think that's where the older soaps such as Eastenders and Corrie have their advantages - they have all the characters that everyone knows of and has known of, and they want to check in with them once and a while (I know I'll be watching EE on New Years) - and that's something that Hollyoaks especially doesn't have.
Sign In or Register to comment.