I have to agree, it was a poor set of episodes last night. I really don't care for Tina and can't understand why she seems so popular.
Michelle Keegan is in the public eye a lot so I can understand why she has fans or "followers" but if Tina left now I doubt most viewers would miss her. I don't think she's as popular as some people say.
I have to agree, it was a poor set of episodes last night. I really don't care for Tina and can't understand why she seems so popular.
I agree. Disappointing episodes with the promise of more of the same quality to come. The mistake being made is seemingly shoe-horning Tina into every storyline. What next, will she have an affair with Todd when he returns and "turn" him? Yes that is ridiculous, but the producers are in danger of treating the viewers as idiots. Affairs and violence do not entertainment make when the are unbelievable and gratuitous.
I like Tina, I like her fiery, feisty no nonsense and mostly moral attitude and personality. But I don't like how she's been shoved into every storyline to the point everyone is sick of the sight and sound of her, just like Becky was. Its like TPTB realise she's popular, so put her in as much as possible to draw in viewers, but familiarity breeds contempt, and like the DFS sofa ads, people get sick to the back teeth of seeing the same one over and over and they then loose their appeal completely. Tina is like the new Stella ( Tina Week thread anyone?:D), there for everyone, advising everyone, in everyone's story's, she should rent the back room off Liz:D.
As for Tracy, I did like her, but she is behaving like a seriously aggressive jack russell that flies at anything and anyone it comes across for no real purpose. Just being nasty for the sake of it, no reason, no logic, nothing, just 'Tracy, whoever's passing by say a nasty comment to'. There's no impact whatsoever as there's no difference. It's as if she's swallowed a book full of insulting words and quotes and she's spouting them out one after the other as soon as she opens her big gob.
Tina's approach to her is all wrong, Tracy's the sort that if you try and ask to stop doing something, she'll laugh in your face and do it even more. There's no reasoning whatsoever with her. If you then insult her she'd be delighted to have found someone to spar with, and would just keep coming back with more insults and smart arse comments until the sun dries up, because its giving her some attention and stroking her own pathetic little ego. Tina's best approach would be to ignore the comments and completely blank her, which is admittedly easier said than done, she wouldn't have a clue what to do then. If someone insults you you can say something back, but you can't react to complete silence, and being ignored would drive someone like Tracy, who thrives off verbal sparring, absolutely nuts.
Isn't this just going the same way as with Becky? Becky became omnipresent and became insufferable, smashing up the Barlows living room etc. Expect Tina to be crow-barred into everything from now until her exit.
This seems to be Corrie's trademark way of writing characters out...make them plain annoying or bittersweet.
Tina is a loose cannon who in reality would not still be working in the bar, if indeed anywhere.
You're right she wouldn't last a minute behind the bar with such a stroppy attitude. I still don't know what Tommy saw in her. I thought Tina was more suited to the aggressive personality of Gary. She has some very good people like Rita rooting for her. She is also lucky that Liz has decided to keep her on and before that Stella kept her on when she took over.
As if I would imply that anyone was a bad person based on their opinion of a soap character? Really? I'm not here to try and judge anyone Kitkat, only the fictional ones! I think I'm only generalising about the other posters prevailing attitudes, I wasn't thinking of anyone in particular,honest.
I just think it's sad that people don't recognise Tina's good qualities and her courage to not be afraid to stand up to the mob and the bullies. And honestly can you say if you had someone like Tracey constantly tormenting you that you wouldn't feel like retaliating at some point?
I think she's a really nice girl with a genuine caring nature who wants to help others.
That counts for a lot more than the way she goes about things or what comes across as aggression. It's not aggression, it's passion! The bigger picture.
Were those who participated in 2011's countrywide riots and then gloated about it on social networking sites just "passionate" too? Because that is what Tina, regardless of her reasons, has done, caused damage to someone's shop that another person lives above and then gloated about it afterwards to anyone who would listen. I think we get into dangerous territory when we excuse violent, criminal behavior and label it as "passionate", that's all.
Were those who participated in 2011's countrywide riots and then gloated about it on social networking sites just "passionate" too? Because that is what Tina, regardless of her reasons, has done, caused damage to someone's shop that another person lives above and then gloated about it afterwards to anyone who would listen. I think we get into dangerous territory when we excuse violent, criminal behavior and label it as "passionate", that's all.
I don't think you can draw parallels between these two things. What has Tina performing a single act out of revenge got to do with rioters? It wasn't just anyone's shop Tina attacked either, it was the shop of someone who has been continually harassing and acting out of malice towards her, someone who is trying to make her life a misery.
If the law was is to be called you'll find Tina has a strong case against Tracey for provocation.
Why are you making it all sound so one sided?
[QUOTE=AndreaMC;69414129]You certainly did misinterpreted me because I categorically at no point said anything about people finding reasons to not like Tina said something about their overall character that was not good, or implied they were bad people. I was talking about how opinions, not people.
I never said any such thing and nor would I attack anyone personally on the strength of their opinion.
I have to go through life like anyone else disagreeing with others, even my nearest and dearest and even though they might hold opinions that make me critical or even upset I think no less of them for it. After all I may once have thought the same thing myself once. But I allow myself to change my mind and I extend the same courtesy to others as well. For the simple reason it's the right thing to do.:)[/QUOTE]
Re BIB I am copying your post which made me think that you were saying that people were finding reasons to dislike Tina and questioning as to why
No it's not irrelevant at all, Tina has tried to help out so many people and got little thanks in return. They all seem to mistake her kindness for stupidity.
It's funny how so many posters bend over backwards and move mountains to find some reason to hate her when she's like a rose standing beside Tracey Barlow the triffid.
Very strange,,, says a lot,,,,and not a lot to feel good aboot:([/QUOTE]
I don't want to get into arguments because (believe it or not) I do respect everybody's right to a view and to air it and specifically respect you as I've read your posts for a long time and find them intelligent and insightful - even if I haven't agreed. But you are saying you haven't said something about viewers finding reasons to dislike Tina when clearly from what is quoted above, you did and you wondered at the reasons for it. By challenging the reasoning behind opinions (conditioned by society etc) you are questioning the person that holds the opinion in my view.
I don't think you can draw parallels between these two things. What has Tina performing a single act out of revenge got to do with rioters? It wasn't just anyone's shop Tina attacked either, it was the shop of someone who has been continually harassing and acting out of malice towards her, someone who is trying to make her life a misery.
If the law was is to be called you'll find Tina has a strong case against Tracey for provocation.
Why are you making it all sound so one sided?
The law does not recognise provocation in the way you are describing and it hasn't been prolonged + it's been a couple of days. Tracy) I can not believe i'm defending her because I think she is vile but there you go). Tracy bought a ring from Someone who was willing to pawn it. Tracy did not put a gun to his head. Did she spell out the fees for holding getting it back - no and i'm not defending that but basically Dennis knew what he was doing pawning it.
Tina bought it back (at extreme interest I agree! UT that is howbthese shops make their money and again no-one made Dennis put the ring in) and Tracy was a bitch but Tina has kept giving it back.
Why did Tina go into the shop in the first place on Friday ep 1? Seemed to be to find out if her stirring (planting knickers) had worked in spoiling Tracy and Robs lunch and maybe even split them up. When she found it hadn't she got into a war of words and when Tracy palyed dirty by refs Joe, Tina responded by throwing stones at the window.
You ask why someone is being so one sided in referencing the riots. I could ask the same thing? Why are you so one sided in excusing everything Tina does even when it hurts other people? A glass window pane could have hurt people inside with flying glass (a school friend was blinded in one eye by a shred of glass) and lots of people walk along that street - kids, oaps they could trip and fall on the glass.
I don't by the way liken Tina to the rioters as I don't she is a wonten vandal doing it only for fun but I see what the poster was trying to say. Same as I was with the marriage murder 'crime of passion' scenario.
Every situation is different but excusing anti social behaviour as it was a demonstration of a strong, passionate belief is a slippery slope in my view.
No it's not irrelevant at all, Tina has tried to help out so many people and got little thanks in return. They all seem to mistake her kindness for stupidity.
It's funny how so many posters bend over backwards and move mountains to find some reason to hate her when she's like a rose standing beside Tracey Barlow the triffid.
Very strange,,, says a lot,,,,and not a lot to feel good aboot:([/QUOTE]
I don't want to get into arguments because (believe it or not) I do respect everybody's right to a view and to air it and specifically respect you as I've read your posts for a long time and find them intelligent and insightful - even if I haven't agreed. But you are saying you haven't said something about viewers finding reasons to dislike Tina when clearly from what is quoted above, you did and you wondered at the reasons for it. By challenging the reasoning behind opinions (conditioned by society etc) you are questioning the person that holds the opinion in my view.
I was asking what the reasons for people not liking Tina were Kitkat and what was happening to make viewers see her in a bad light and whether or not the writers realised that where they were taking the character may be counterproductive and whether we are being compelled to turn against Tina for some whim of the show to develop her as another senseless bad girl with no redeeming features. And part of that is making her act like a hooligan which society will condemn her for often when the reason behind those same actions is obscured. I think I'm just throwing out ideas. I haven't as yet made my mind up one way or another,
Yes I wonder why people want to go along with the general hostility and dislike the character but I don't hold it against anyone, why the heck would I?. It's just a soap opera at the end of the day and we all have our favs e.t.c,It would be incredibly boring if we had nothing to argue about I was suggesting that the program makers can make or break the character and often if it is someone like Tina who has always been so straight and dependable they will inevitably make go off the rails. And people are then quick to turn against the character who they might have previously thought well of. Maybe there are some shallow reasons for not liking Tina as well, like her permatan or her earrings or whatever but I can't personally see what she does or says that could cause someone to hate or loathe her.
If as I say I am questioning 'the person' who holds the opinion that they don't like Tina because of her actions? then you tell me what am I thinking? That it makes someone foolish or bad or niave not to like Tina? Would that make me a sensible person?
Admittedly what I wrote is a bit ambiguous but that doesn't entitle anyone other than me to apply some nefarious meaning to what I said to suit their own ends.
Questioning people's opinions is not offensive,nor is questioning why they have formed those opinions, but I can't think badly of them for it as I am human too and am quite capable of having plenty of my own silly notions as well I question my own opinions all the time, and I change my mind continually and I do assume other people do the same.
I think also you are mistaking me for someone who is a lot more serious than I actually am.
The law does not recognise provocation in the way you are describing and it hasn't been prolonged + it's been a couple of days. Tracy) I can not believe i'm defending her because I think she is vile but there you go). Tracy bought a ring from Someone who was willing to pawn it. Tracy did not put a gun to his head. Did she spell out the fees for holding getting it back - no and i'm not defending that but basically Dennis knew what he was doing pawning it.
Tina bought it back (at extreme interest I agree! UT that is howbthese shops make their money and again no-one made Dennis put the ring in) and Tracy was a bitch but Tina has kept giving it back.
Why did Tina go into the shop in the first place on Friday ep 1? Seemed to be to find out if her stirring (planting knickers) had worked in spoiling Tracy and Robs lunch and maybe even split them up. When she found it hadn't she got into a war of words and when Tracy palyed dirty by refs Joe, Tina responded by throwing stones at the window.
You ask why someone is being so one sided in referencing the riots. I could ask the same thing? Why are you so one sided in excusing everything Tina does even when it hurts other people? A glass window pane could have hurt people inside with flying glass (a school friend was blinded in one eye by a shred of glass) and lots of people walk along that street - kids, oaps they could trip and fall on the glass.
I don't by the way liken Tina to the rioters as I don't she is a wonten vandal doing it only for fun but I see what the poster was trying to say. Same as I was with the marriage murder 'crime of passion' scenario.
Every situation is different but excusing anti social behaviour as it was a demonstration of a strong, passionate belief is a slippery slope in my view.
I already said i didn't condone the violence, you are being unfair saying that I'm excusing everything Tina does. But I'm sort of expecting that now:(
What Tina did smashing the window was I'd assume a one off, I don't think it flags up a slippery slope at all. She isn't going to make a habit of it, I'd guess,:D I think she'd be taunted to the point were something just in her mind just blew.
While not excusing her behaviour I have overall compassion for her. Because I just do.
I don't buy the loud mouthed, "ballsy" Tina, she isn't even a great character or actress, I really don't get the obsession with pushing her into every story line and over doing her "dramatic" scenes. They did the same with loud mouth becky's exit and it ruins the show even more.
i cant stand the way shes taken to speaking to all and sundry like she thinks theyre all idiots. every line is delivered with a huff, an eye roll, and a tone of impatience.
It looks as though C.S, due to unforeseen reasons, has swapped and changed the storyline with regards to the on going feud.
I remember reading a while ago, the feud was supposed to be between Rob & Peter, and was one of the biggest storylines, with character Ken Barlow, featuring heavily in these scenes.
However, in light of change, with regards to Kens character, C.S looks like they have now swapped and changed with now Tina and Tracy fronting the feud, with both Peter now supporting Tina & Rob supporting Tracy, which leads to the Tina and peter affair.
Tina's smug little smile after she smashed the shop window was very annoying. :mad:
Perhaps she's upsetting Tyrone/Rita and all so she can be poor misunderstood Tina who's all alone, then Peter will 'be there for her' leading to their affair.
I think the way the writers have shoved in loads of Tina/Peter scenes, after they've barely been on nodding terms, just to pave the way for the affair is seriously cheap and insults our intelligence
Perhaps she's upsetting Tyrone/Rita and all so she can be poor misunderstood Tina who's all alone, then Peter will 'be there for her' leading to their affair.
Ah yes, the dreaded Being There For You...aka That's What Mates Are For... you've spotted this noxious piece of humbug a mile off sam_gee.
Peter has previous in this regard of course, having Been There for Carla in the biblical sense when she was suffering with the nasty Scottish bloke. Brace yourselves for a shedload of vigorous Being There in the run-up to Christmas...
Comments
Michelle Keegan is in the public eye a lot so I can understand why she has fans or "followers" but if Tina left now I doubt most viewers would miss her. I don't think she's as popular as some people say.
Shes won the sexiest female award so many times thats why Corrie push her as the top girl on the show
I agree. Disappointing episodes with the promise of more of the same quality to come. The mistake being made is seemingly shoe-horning Tina into every storyline. What next, will she have an affair with Todd when he returns and "turn" him? Yes that is ridiculous, but the producers are in danger of treating the viewers as idiots. Affairs and violence do not entertainment make when the are unbelievable and gratuitous.
As for Tracy, I did like her, but she is behaving like a seriously aggressive jack russell that flies at anything and anyone it comes across for no real purpose. Just being nasty for the sake of it, no reason, no logic, nothing, just 'Tracy, whoever's passing by say a nasty comment to'. There's no impact whatsoever as there's no difference. It's as if she's swallowed a book full of insulting words and quotes and she's spouting them out one after the other as soon as she opens her big gob.
Tina's approach to her is all wrong, Tracy's the sort that if you try and ask to stop doing something, she'll laugh in your face and do it even more. There's no reasoning whatsoever with her. If you then insult her she'd be delighted to have found someone to spar with, and would just keep coming back with more insults and smart arse comments until the sun dries up, because its giving her some attention and stroking her own pathetic little ego. Tina's best approach would be to ignore the comments and completely blank her, which is admittedly easier said than done, she wouldn't have a clue what to do then. If someone insults you you can say something back, but you can't react to complete silence, and being ignored would drive someone like Tracy, who thrives off verbal sparring, absolutely nuts.
This seems to be Corrie's trademark way of writing characters out...make them plain annoying or bittersweet.
You're right she wouldn't last a minute behind the bar with such a stroppy attitude. I still don't know what Tommy saw in her. I thought Tina was more suited to the aggressive personality of Gary. She has some very good people like Rita rooting for her. She is also lucky that Liz has decided to keep her on and before that Stella kept her on when she took over.
Were those who participated in 2011's countrywide riots and then gloated about it on social networking sites just "passionate" too? Because that is what Tina, regardless of her reasons, has done, caused damage to someone's shop that another person lives above and then gloated about it afterwards to anyone who would listen. I think we get into dangerous territory when we excuse violent, criminal behavior and label it as "passionate", that's all.
I don't think you can draw parallels between these two things. What has Tina performing a single act out of revenge got to do with rioters? It wasn't just anyone's shop Tina attacked either, it was the shop of someone who has been continually harassing and acting out of malice towards her, someone who is trying to make her life a misery.
If the law was is to be called you'll find Tina has a strong case against Tracey for provocation.
Why are you making it all sound so one sided?
I never said any such thing and nor would I attack anyone personally on the strength of their opinion.
I have to go through life like anyone else disagreeing with others, even my nearest and dearest and even though they might hold opinions that make me critical or even upset I think no less of them for it. After all I may once have thought the same thing myself once. But I allow myself to change my mind and I extend the same courtesy to others as well. For the simple reason it's the right thing to do.:)[/QUOTE]
Re BIB I am copying your post which made me think that you were saying that people were finding reasons to dislike Tina and questioning as to why
Did you see in last weeks TV times on page 1. She looked very hot.
The law does not recognise provocation in the way you are describing and it hasn't been prolonged + it's been a couple of days. Tracy) I can not believe i'm defending her because I think she is vile but there you go). Tracy bought a ring from Someone who was willing to pawn it. Tracy did not put a gun to his head. Did she spell out the fees for holding getting it back - no and i'm not defending that but basically Dennis knew what he was doing pawning it.
Tina bought it back (at extreme interest I agree! UT that is howbthese shops make their money and again no-one made Dennis put the ring in) and Tracy was a bitch but Tina has kept giving it back.
Why did Tina go into the shop in the first place on Friday ep 1? Seemed to be to find out if her stirring (planting knickers) had worked in spoiling Tracy and Robs lunch and maybe even split them up. When she found it hadn't she got into a war of words and when Tracy palyed dirty by refs Joe, Tina responded by throwing stones at the window.
You ask why someone is being so one sided in referencing the riots. I could ask the same thing? Why are you so one sided in excusing everything Tina does even when it hurts other people? A glass window pane could have hurt people inside with flying glass (a school friend was blinded in one eye by a shred of glass) and lots of people walk along that street - kids, oaps they could trip and fall on the glass.
I don't by the way liken Tina to the rioters as I don't she is a wonten vandal doing it only for fun but I see what the poster was trying to say. Same as I was with the marriage murder 'crime of passion' scenario.
Every situation is different but excusing anti social behaviour as it was a demonstration of a strong, passionate belief is a slippery slope in my view.
I already said i didn't condone the violence, you are being unfair saying that I'm excusing everything Tina does. But I'm sort of expecting that now:(
What Tina did smashing the window was I'd assume a one off, I don't think it flags up a slippery slope at all. She isn't going to make a habit of it, I'd guess,:D I think she'd be taunted to the point were something just in her mind just blew.
While not excusing her behaviour I have overall compassion for her. Because I just do.
I remember reading a while ago, the feud was supposed to be between Rob & Peter, and was one of the biggest storylines, with character Ken Barlow, featuring heavily in these scenes.
However, in light of change, with regards to Kens character, C.S looks like they have now swapped and changed with now Tina and Tracy fronting the feud, with both Peter now supporting Tina & Rob supporting Tracy, which leads to the Tina and peter affair.
Perhaps she's upsetting Tyrone/Rita and all so she can be poor misunderstood Tina who's all alone, then Peter will 'be there for her' leading to their affair.
I think the way the writers have shoved in loads of Tina/Peter scenes, after they've barely been on nodding terms, just to pave the way for the affair is seriously cheap and insults our intelligence
Gloating about getting someone banned isn't very nice
What are you talking about?????
I made a joke in response to your post....
I've never got anybody banned from DS
Now please don't PM me with silly accusations.
Ah yes, the dreaded Being There For You...aka That's What Mates Are For... you've spotted this noxious piece of humbug a mile off sam_gee.
Peter has previous in this regard of course, having Been There for Carla in the biblical sense when she was suffering with the nasty Scottish bloke. Brace yourselves for a shedload of vigorous Being There in the run-up to Christmas...