We have to remember how AWFUL the show was this time last year. Come on, it was shocking. Nothing interesting was happening, most storylines revolved around Lauren/Lucy/Whitney shagging Joey/Tyler etc, Sharon was possibly the most hated character in the place and we had the sodding Harmans.
Every tiny bit of potential was squandered for the most boring, predictable, tween girl pleasing way. For instance, I always feel Lauren going off the rails should have led to Tyler's death. This would have done wonders for Whitney, wonders for Lauren, and led to Tanya's leaving line (I can't remember who even left first, Tanya or Tyler). Instead... they were shagging each other again.
The show pandered so much the the "Ex on the Beach" audience that it was losing its core audience fast, and rightly so. It desperately tried to get people watching, by bringing back Peggy (pointlessly, for one episode), Ronnie (a character ridiculously spent, who's return called for frankly stupid writing) and David (the only return that, for me, really worked).
On the whole, I think DTC's done a good job. It's nowhere near as bad as last year. The storylines are interesting, there's stuff happening... even the least likable characters (Lauren) have become more watchable because of the storylines.
The Carters, I think, have been a big success. But EE never does things by halves, it's greatest asset and weakness. We really don't need Tina. We really, really, really don't need Tosh (who was supposed to be this violent domestic abuser but is now just... I don't even know). Babe is pointless (and has been forgotten about by the look of it). The core family dynamic, of Mick, Linda, Johnny and Nancy would have been more than enough, with Lee as a potential introduction somewhere down the line. On the subject of Lee, though, if this was a Newman casting you just know she'd have scoured Next Magazines for the most attractive model. At least the guy they've got here can actually act. Chuck in Stan, Shirley, Dean (for some development for Shirl) and maybe Sylvie at some point and that's enough. But it looks like there's going to be more introduced soon. I do love the Carters, but you seriously can't have too much of a good thing.
DTC does have a habit of doing, frankly, stupid storylines. Stacey's return was just awful. And it absolutely didn't need to be. I said at the start she was a spent character, who they randomly made into a killer for no sodding reason last time. The whole storyline brought out the worst in every single character it involved. It was terrible. And I'm seriously not looking forward to her full time return.
The Lucy thing I'm very torn with. Sometimes it interests me, other times I just feel a little frustrated that it's going to drag on so long. Like the Den one before it, it could ultimately be the driving force behind the vast majority of storylines. It's just... Lucy was so uninteresting, and they've had to work ridiculously hard here to make this storyline have any chance of working. It does say alot, though, that the only time anything they've done with Lucy has actually been good has involved killing her off.
And I do think they are making up the Nick storyline as they go along.
I dunno what else it can do. It's had a lull, no doubt about it. It's still recovering. It's generating hype, and on occasions has been really good. For me, Stacey Slater can stay gone, Tina and Tosh can sod off, the Carters can stop growing... and I think it's in a very healthy situation. I just hope the BBC don't see low ratings as a sign that DTC's vision is wrong and axe him in favor of another Newman, who feels pandering to teenaged girls is the way to go.
We have to remember how AWFUL the show was this time last year. Come on, it was shocking. Nothing interesting was happening, most storylines revolved around Lauren/Lucy/Whitney shagging Joey/Tyler etc, Sharon was possibly the most hated character in the place and we had the sodding Harmans.
Every tiny bit of potential was squandered for the most boring, predictable, tween girl pleasing way. For instance, I always feel Lauren going off the rails should have led to Tyler's death. This would have done wonders for Whitney, wonders for Lauren, and led to Tanya's leaving line (I can't remember who even left first, Tanya or Tyler). Instead... they were shagging each other again.
The show pandered so much the the "Ex on the Beach" audience that it was losing its core audience fast, and rightly so. It desperately tried to get people watching, by bringing back Peggy (pointlessly, for one episode), Ronnie (a character ridiculously spent, who's return called for frankly stupid writing) and David (the only return that, for me, really worked).
On the whole, I think DTC's done a good job. It's nowhere near as bad as last year. The storylines are interesting, there's stuff happening... even the least likable characters (Lauren) have become more watchable because of the storylines.
The Carters, I think, have been a big success. But EE never does things by halves, it's greatest asset and weakness. We really don't need Tina. We really, really, really don't need Tosh (who was supposed to be this violent domestic abuser but is now just... I don't even know). Babe is pointless (and has been forgotten about by the look of it). The core family dynamic, of Mick, Linda, Johnny and Nancy would have been more than enough, with Lee as a potential introduction somewhere down the line. On the subject of Lee, though, if this was a Newman casting you just know she'd have scoured Next Magazines for the most attractive model. At least the guy they've got here can actually act. Chuck in Stan, Shirley, Dean (for some development for Shirl) and maybe Sylvie at some point and that's enough. But it looks like there's going to be more introduced soon. I do love the Carters, but you seriously can't have too much of a good thing.
DTC does have a habit of doing, frankly, stupid storylines. Stacey's return was just awful. And it absolutely didn't need to be. I said at the start she was a spent character, who they randomly made into a killer for no sodding reason last time. The whole storyline brought out the worst in every single character it involved. It was terrible. And I'm seriously not looking forward to her full time return.
The Lucy thing I'm very torn with. Sometimes it interests me, other times I just feel a little frustrated that it's going to drag on so long. Like the Den one before it, it could ultimately be the driving force behind the vast majority of storylines. It's just... Lucy was so uninteresting, and they've had to work ridiculously hard here to make this storyline have any chance of working. It does say alot, though, that the only time anything they've done with Lucy has actually been good has involved killing her off.
And I do think they are making up the Nick storyline as they go along.
I dunno what else it can do. It's had a lull, no doubt about it. It's still recovering. It's generating hype, and on occasions has been really good. For me, Stacey Slater can stay gone, Tina and Tosh can sod off, the Carters can stop growing... and I think it's in a very healthy situation. I just hope the BBC don't see low ratings as a sign that DTC's vision is wrong and axe him in favor of another Newman, who feels pandering to teenaged girls is the way to go.
I bloody hope.
What a brilliantly executed post. I agree on Stacey and the Carters. I thought Lee was a weak actor. I think Tina and Tosh if they were not connected to The Carters would be ok as they would seen as another s/l
Stop trying so hard it's making you look desperate. If you show people your making a show for them to watch they will naturally be inquisitive & that's how you hook an audience.
The big problem I have with EastEnders is that the majority of the characters are unlikeable and hard to invest in. I'll take the big 3 storylines DTC is pushing to prove my point.
Lucy's Murder - She was a bitch and I'm glad she's gone. Her family are some of the most stuck up and unlikeable characters on the square. Dragging in the Brannings to prop up the storyline only makes me care about it less. I love Sharon but I don't love her with Phil who is well past it and should keep his beak out of this storyline.
Carol's Cancer - A truly awful harridan of a woman who is surrounded by shrieking banshee Bianca and her dull children, Sonia the judgmental cow and her bitch of a daughter and Whitney the slapper. What Carol did to David has put me off her for life and I couldn't care less whether she lives or dies.
The Carters - The big storyline centres around Shirley, truly the most awful piece of garbage ever to crawl out of the gutter, being the secret mother of Mick, a character who is increasingly becoming as superfluous as his wife and kids. Stan aside, the other major Carter is Tina who is one of the most annoyingly childish characters ever created. All the Carters I was interested in when they first arrived - Mick, Linda, Johnny and Nancy - have been pushed aside so Shirley and Tina can appear non stop.
I agree the Charlie Cotton storyline is a good one but it isn't seen often enough to maintain interest long term. I also think the mystery of Lucy's death is decent enough even if I don't care for her or those involved in the story. Those are the positives but there are other negatives such as the unnecessary return of Stacey on the horizon. She near enough killed the show stone dead when she came back for a few weeks. What will she do to the show when she's back full time? I'm not really enjoying the way there seems to be a move towards resetting the series back to the Santer era, an era I didn't particularly enjoy, with all these returns from that time either.
Carol is indeed unlikeable to the point we don't really care about her or her brood. I also can't get past her treatment of David but I suppose it was that or his death to cause a sudden exit as per French's contract.
I disagree with Shirley there's scope there. She needs to soften/thaw a bit. The only time she does this is with Phil. Sharon indeed needs a network support. She is still on the periphery despite owning the Albert.
The big problem I have with EastEnders is that the majority of the characters are unlikeable and hard to invest in. I'll take the big 3 storylines DTC is pushing to prove my point.
Lucy's Murder - She was a bitch and I'm glad she's gone. Her family are some of the most stuck up and unlikeable characters on the square. Dragging in the Brannings to prop up the storyline only makes me care about it less. I love Sharon but I don't love her with Phil who is well past it and should keep his beak out of this storyline.
Carol's Cancer - A truly awful harridan of a woman who is surrounded by shrieking banshee Bianca and her dull children, Sonia the judgmental cow and her bitch of a daughter and Whitney the slapper. What Carol did to David has put me off her for life and I couldn't care less whether she lives or dies.
The Carters - The big storyline centres around Shirley, truly the most awful piece of garbage ever to crawl out of the gutter, being the secret mother of Mick, a character who is increasingly becoming as superfluous as his wife and kids. Stan aside, the other major Carter is Tina who is one of the most annoyingly childish characters ever created. All the Carters I was interested in when they first arrived - Mick, Linda, Johnny and Nancy - have been pushed aside so Shirley and Tina can appear non stop.
I agree the Charlie Cotton storyline is a good one but it isn't seen often enough to maintain interest long term. I also think the mystery of Lucy's death is decent enough even if I don't care for her or those involved in the story. Those are the positives but there are other negatives such as the unnecessary return of Stacey on the horizon. She near enough killed the show stone dead when she came back for a few weeks. What will she do to the show when she's back full time? I'm not really enjoying the way there seems to be a move towards resetting the series back to the Santer era, an era I didn't particularly enjoy, with all these returns from that time either.
The Carters, (well Stan, Mick, Linda, Lee, Nancy and Johnny) really should of been a stand alone family. I'll never understand why the writers decided to throw a character that tends to polarize viewers into the heart of that family.
We were promised a new family which we did get. But the irony is the Carter family only seems to evolve around the character that has already been there seven years.
Carol is indeed unlikeable to the point we don't really care about her or her brood. I also can't get past her treatment of David but I suppose it was that or his death to cause a sudden exit as per French's contract.
I disagree with Shirley there's scope there. She needs to soften/thaw a bit. The only time she does this is with Phil. Sharon indeed needs a network support. She is still on the periphery despite owning the Albert.
Carol and David shouldn't have been put back together in the first place in my opinion. French came back primarily to aid Janine's exit. Putting him with Carol ruined his return. He did everything for her and she still wasn't happy. I'd have liked his relationships with Bianca and Ian explored in more detail and to see him interact with other characters.
Shirley needs to be softened a lot. As in she needs a complete personality change. I can't bear her. She's obnoxiously vile to everyone - especially poor Linda. She and Phil deserve each other. Sharon is being written better for now but all it takes is a brief scene with Shirley to drag her back down. Why the writers insist on this stupid feud over Phil Mitchell of all people is beyond me.
The Carters, (well Stan, Mick, Linda, Lee, Nancy and Johnny) really should of been a stand alone family. I'll never understand why the writers decided to throw a character that tends to polarize viewers into the heart of that family.
We were promised a new family which we did get. But the irony is the Carter family only seems to evolve around the character that has already been there seven years.
I agree. The Carters first few weeks where Shirley and Tina were in the background showed they didn't need ties to other characters to be successful.
Shirley has her fans but I doubt she has enough fans to warrant all this attention she's been given. I can't believe Tina has many fans at all but I'm willing to be proven wrong.
Carol is worse than Pauline. At least Pauline occasionally had a laugh with Dot and genuinely wanted to be happy. It was only when the actress quit they butchered the character and made her evil. Carol has always been a misery.
You never hear about it because it goes against the ''EE is in crisis''/''viewers are turning off'' claims so many love to make!
The fact its been above Corrie in the officials is an achievement in itself and its a big shame its gone unnoticed.
EastEnders is the only soap this year to have increased its audience share on 2013. Another fact that isn't ever mentioned. EastEnders is now probably in its most healthiest position since early 2011. Everything DTC is doing is working.
If you look at it from a logical point of few I not surprised its had more of these headlines than any other soap as to be honest it has indeed had more major downfalls with viewers than any soap. Look at when it only got 3 million viewers like 8 years ago no other soap out of the top3 when they have a lull hit as hard as easterners. Shows its not as loved through good and bad times as Ed or corrie
EE may well be on some kinda high at the moment but in the last 10 years more lows than highs with viewership than the others, tbh.
If you look at it from a logical point of few I not surprised its had more of these headlines than any other soap as to be honest it has indeed had more major downfalls with viewers than any soap. Look at when it only got 3 million viewers like 8 years ago no other soap out of the top3 when they have a lull hit as hard as easterners. Shows its not as loved through good and bad times as Ed or corrie
EE may well be on some kinda high at the moment but in the last 10 years more lows than highs with viewership than the others, tbh.
The reason EE gets more headlines in its bad periods is because of the licence fee and its usually only the Murdoch press that report it. For all people write about 2006 being a bad year for EE, It win every major award going during this period.
The 3.9 million episode actually only happened because it was a massive Emmerdale episode which had a 30 minute lead in. I can't remember if it was Cain's exit or the River House explosion. It may have even been something else. The episode after it was back at normal levels and if I'm not mistaken the BBC Three repeat for that episode is one of the best in BBC Three's history. Corrie has had its own record low ratings. It hit 4 million once a couple of years back. While Emmerdale has been as low as 4 million itself many times. Its not exclusive to EE.
From 2008 to 2010 - EastEnders actually increased its audience (mainly helped by ITV ditching the weekly hour long Emmerdale's), In 2010 it was very close to overtaking Corrie on a consistent day to day bases for the first time in its history and some how summer 2011 was the shows best share performance since 2004. EE has had way more highs these past decade than it has lows. Even this year EE is the only soap that is up on 2013. That can't be spun as bad.
Corrie has had its own fair share of bad press though. Michelle Collins and the whole ''too many gays'' thing was blamed for ratings dropping by almost 4 million a few years back. Most of that was led by the Daily Mail. I don't think I need to explain their agenda.
New exec producer with media savvy skills- check
Whodunnit storyline involving the longest serving cast member- check
Boost in advertising campaign and promotion -check
Install a new family (recruit Danny Dyer) at the helm of the Vic with dark secrets -check
Attempt character driven episodes with more cast interaction, story blocking and pace - check
Still the ratings are not increasing over a sustained period of time. Yes it has overtaken Emmerdale for the No 2 spot. However, despite Coronation Street being pretty atrocious bar the last two weeks it hasn't come close to gaining its No1 crown.
ITV have played a blinder in scuppering any chance of EE consolidating any gains!! With hour-long Emmerdale clashes, BGT etc.
Maybe the demos for EE should be analysed by the powers that be as Hollyoaks seems to have taken younger audiences and Corrie perhaps with the recruitment of more poster girls.
As an aside Coronation Street's biggest asset is Alison King she is single handedly carrying the show a bit like Lacey Turner in her original stint on EE.
I never understand this argument. Out of the seven returns this year, six of them were story related. Only Stacey came back with no real reason to return. All the other returning characters have aided plot lines. Lucy's death would never have been believable had Jane, Christian and Libby not featured. Likewise with the Carol story. Sonia had to be there.
Four official returns, the others only appeared in guest stints. Compare that to the 15 new characters we have had. So the show has invested in new characters more so than the returning characters but I suppose if you haven't watched since Christmas you didn't know this.
I think the returns - except possibly Stacey - have been great for a sense of realism. I don't like Christian or Dean(o) but it makes sense and doesn't suggest a lack of ideas to me.
I'm not sure on some of the new characters though. There has been so much focus on the brilliant Carter family that the Cokers, Aleks and Donna have been sidelined a little. But that is probably deliberate so I shall wait and see.
I find myself enjoying the programme again, rather than watching out of habit.
EastEnders has just killed off/axed too many decent characters over the years - Tiffany, Cindy, Kathy, Steve, Glenda, Ryan etc. and it has quite rightly paid the price.
One of EE great strengths in the past was it's ability to find very talented unknowns or little knowns. That gave it a sense of normality and reality as the actors were good but they didn't feel overfamiliar to the audience. Even Babs Windsor (who of course wasn't an unknown ;-)) hadn't done anything for donkey's years before she arrived in Albert Square.
The likes of Johnny and Tosh just don't compare to a Stacey or a Bianca.
Another issue is that it has mistaken or blurred grit for sensationalism. Ronnie is the absolute most awful character, and her killing Carl and it's subsequent aftermath has to go down as one of the all-time worst stories of soap. Much as the baby swap did - see a pattern forming here? She is a silly, sensationalist character who should be at the top of that axe list.
The Carters - they have gone WAY overboard with them. For a start, there are far too many of them, they are parochial and too much has happened with them in too little time. They've had two years worth of material in six months and they are massively overexposed - I for one am sick to death of them already.
Have all these comebacks worked? Well, that's a bit more ambiguous. On the one hand, it does give a sense of familiarity that perhaps was lost. But on the other hand, it also gives a sense of a show that can't move on and can't find suitable talent to replace its lost stars. Corrie can get away with it because they have humour but they also have mundanity - EastEnders can't do mundanity; everything ever has to be dramatic and that, in my opinion, is its biggest weakness.
Fair play to EastEnders for getting back a lot of lost audience, but in my view it still has a very long way to go - perhaps too far.
I agree 100% with this, but would add Dirty Den to the list of should never have been axed! And Roxy along with Ronnie must be the most useless characters in soap ever!
He's let 3 fairly big profile characters have time off at the same time in Kat, Ronnie & Stacey.
Stacey should have just returned when Lacey was finished with everything, at least Jean is back for a bit!
I'm not sure when Ronnie/Kat are back but not for a while yet although I know there's a brief bit of Ronnie this week.
It just makes stories loses momentum IMO. The Lucy story needs to take a bit of a backseat, let other stories come through although after this week, it seems like it might for a bit.
With ratings, the show has started to recover just as lighter nights & summer sport begins, ratings naturally decrease. The autumn will be the true test of the figures after it's been shunted to BBC2 for the Commonwealth Games (which will knock it's recovery).
It's still a work in progress, I'm sure there's characters DTC wants to maybe shed but it takes time. I presume we won't see much of Dexter/Fatboy from now on, I reckon they'll go.
If you look at it from a logical point of few I not surprised its had more of these headlines than any other soap as to be honest it has indeed had more major downfalls with viewers than any soap. Look at when it only got 3 million viewers like 8 years ago no other soap out of the top3 when they have a lull hit as hard as easterners. Shows its not as loved through good and bad times as Ed or corrie
EE may well be on some kinda high at the moment but in the last 10 years more lows than highs with viewership than the others, tbh.
Agreed. Good point. People love to hate it and vice versa it seems. See post below.
The reason EE gets more headlines in its bad periods is because of the licence fee and its usually only the Murdoch press that report it. For all people write about 2006 being a bad year for EE, It win every major award going during this period.
The 3.9 million episode actually only happened because it was a massive Emmerdale episode which had a 30 minute lead in. I can't remember if it was Cain's exit or the River House explosion. It may have even been something else. The episode after it was back at normal levels and if I'm not mistaken the BBC Three repeat for that episode is one of the best in BBC Three's history. Corrie has had its own record low ratings. It hit 4 million once a couple of years back. While Emmerdale has been as low as 4 million itself many times. Its not exclusive to EE.
From 2008 to 2010 - EastEnders actually increased its audience (mainly helped by ITV ditching the weekly hour long Emmerdale's), In 2010 it was very close to overtaking Corrie on a consistent day to day bases for the first time in its history and some how summer 2011 was the shows best share performance since 2004. EE has had way more highs these past decade than it has lows. Even this year EE is the only soap that is up on 2013. That can't be spun as bad.
Corrie has had its own fair share of bad press though. Michelle Collins and the whole ''too many gays'' thing was blamed for ratings dropping by almost 4 million a few years back. Most of that was led by the Daily Mail. I don't think I need to explain their agenda.
Due to it being on the BBC, EE is more accountable to its viewers/media it seems.
I agree 100% with this, but would add Dirty Den to the list of should never have been axed! And Roxy along with Ronnie must be the most useless characters in soap ever!
What purpose does Roxy serve anymore? She's not even depicted as a single mum really
.
He's let 3 fairly big profile characters have time off at the same time in Kat, Ronnie & Stacey.
Stacey should have just returned when Lacey was finished with everything, at least Jean is back for a bit!
I'm not sure when Ronnie/Kat are back but not for a while yet although I know there's a brief bit of Ronnie this week.
It just makes stories loses momentum IMO. The Lucy story needs to take a bit of a backseat, let other stories come through although after this week, it seems like it might for a bit.
With ratings, the show has started to recover just as lighter nights & summer sport begins, ratings naturally decrease. The autumn will be the true test of the figures after it's been shunted to BBC2 for the Commonwealth Games (which will knock it's recovery).
It's still a work in progress, I'm sure there's characters DTC wants to maybe shed but it takes time. I presume we won't see much of Dexter/Fatboy from now on, I reckon they'll go.
I'm in the minority, I don't mind Dexter and Fat boy... Am I mad?
Comments
One episode is better than nothing!
Every tiny bit of potential was squandered for the most boring, predictable, tween girl pleasing way. For instance, I always feel Lauren going off the rails should have led to Tyler's death. This would have done wonders for Whitney, wonders for Lauren, and led to Tanya's leaving line (I can't remember who even left first, Tanya or Tyler). Instead... they were shagging each other again.
The show pandered so much the the "Ex on the Beach" audience that it was losing its core audience fast, and rightly so. It desperately tried to get people watching, by bringing back Peggy (pointlessly, for one episode), Ronnie (a character ridiculously spent, who's return called for frankly stupid writing) and David (the only return that, for me, really worked).
On the whole, I think DTC's done a good job. It's nowhere near as bad as last year. The storylines are interesting, there's stuff happening... even the least likable characters (Lauren) have become more watchable because of the storylines.
The Carters, I think, have been a big success. But EE never does things by halves, it's greatest asset and weakness. We really don't need Tina. We really, really, really don't need Tosh (who was supposed to be this violent domestic abuser but is now just... I don't even know). Babe is pointless (and has been forgotten about by the look of it). The core family dynamic, of Mick, Linda, Johnny and Nancy would have been more than enough, with Lee as a potential introduction somewhere down the line. On the subject of Lee, though, if this was a Newman casting you just know she'd have scoured Next Magazines for the most attractive model. At least the guy they've got here can actually act. Chuck in Stan, Shirley, Dean (for some development for Shirl) and maybe Sylvie at some point and that's enough. But it looks like there's going to be more introduced soon. I do love the Carters, but you seriously can't have too much of a good thing.
DTC does have a habit of doing, frankly, stupid storylines. Stacey's return was just awful. And it absolutely didn't need to be. I said at the start she was a spent character, who they randomly made into a killer for no sodding reason last time. The whole storyline brought out the worst in every single character it involved. It was terrible. And I'm seriously not looking forward to her full time return.
The Lucy thing I'm very torn with. Sometimes it interests me, other times I just feel a little frustrated that it's going to drag on so long. Like the Den one before it, it could ultimately be the driving force behind the vast majority of storylines. It's just... Lucy was so uninteresting, and they've had to work ridiculously hard here to make this storyline have any chance of working. It does say alot, though, that the only time anything they've done with Lucy has actually been good has involved killing her off.
And I do think they are making up the Nick storyline as they go along.
I dunno what else it can do. It's had a lull, no doubt about it. It's still recovering. It's generating hype, and on occasions has been really good. For me, Stacey Slater can stay gone, Tina and Tosh can sod off, the Carters can stop growing... and I think it's in a very healthy situation. I just hope the BBC don't see low ratings as a sign that DTC's vision is wrong and axe him in favor of another Newman, who feels pandering to teenaged girls is the way to go.
I bloody hope.
What a brilliantly executed post. I agree on Stacey and the Carters. I thought Lee was a weak actor. I think Tina and Tosh if they were not connected to The Carters would be ok as they would seen as another s/l
Lucy's Murder - She was a bitch and I'm glad she's gone. Her family are some of the most stuck up and unlikeable characters on the square. Dragging in the Brannings to prop up the storyline only makes me care about it less. I love Sharon but I don't love her with Phil who is well past it and should keep his beak out of this storyline.
Carol's Cancer - A truly awful harridan of a woman who is surrounded by shrieking banshee Bianca and her dull children, Sonia the judgmental cow and her bitch of a daughter and Whitney the slapper. What Carol did to David has put me off her for life and I couldn't care less whether she lives or dies.
The Carters - The big storyline centres around Shirley, truly the most awful piece of garbage ever to crawl out of the gutter, being the secret mother of Mick, a character who is increasingly becoming as superfluous as his wife and kids. Stan aside, the other major Carter is Tina who is one of the most annoyingly childish characters ever created. All the Carters I was interested in when they first arrived - Mick, Linda, Johnny and Nancy - have been pushed aside so Shirley and Tina can appear non stop.
I agree the Charlie Cotton storyline is a good one but it isn't seen often enough to maintain interest long term. I also think the mystery of Lucy's death is decent enough even if I don't care for her or those involved in the story. Those are the positives but there are other negatives such as the unnecessary return of Stacey on the horizon. She near enough killed the show stone dead when she came back for a few weeks. What will she do to the show when she's back full time? I'm not really enjoying the way there seems to be a move towards resetting the series back to the Santer era, an era I didn't particularly enjoy, with all these returns from that time either.
Carol is indeed unlikeable to the point we don't really care about her or her brood. I also can't get past her treatment of David but I suppose it was that or his death to cause a sudden exit as per French's contract.
I disagree with Shirley there's scope there. She needs to soften/thaw a bit. The only time she does this is with Phil. Sharon indeed needs a network support. She is still on the periphery despite owning the Albert.
The Carters, (well Stan, Mick, Linda, Lee, Nancy and Johnny) really should of been a stand alone family. I'll never understand why the writers decided to throw a character that tends to polarize viewers into the heart of that family.
We were promised a new family which we did get. But the irony is the Carter family only seems to evolve around the character that has already been there seven years.
Carol and David shouldn't have been put back together in the first place in my opinion. French came back primarily to aid Janine's exit. Putting him with Carol ruined his return. He did everything for her and she still wasn't happy. I'd have liked his relationships with Bianca and Ian explored in more detail and to see him interact with other characters.
Shirley needs to be softened a lot. As in she needs a complete personality change. I can't bear her. She's obnoxiously vile to everyone - especially poor Linda. She and Phil deserve each other. Sharon is being written better for now but all it takes is a brief scene with Shirley to drag her back down. Why the writers insist on this stupid feud over Phil Mitchell of all people is beyond me.
I hated Pauline towards the end.
I agree. The Carters first few weeks where Shirley and Tina were in the background showed they didn't need ties to other characters to be successful.
Shirley has her fans but I doubt she has enough fans to warrant all this attention she's been given. I can't believe Tina has many fans at all but I'm willing to be proven wrong.
Carol is worse than Pauline. At least Pauline occasionally had a laugh with Dot and genuinely wanted to be happy. It was only when the actress quit they butchered the character and made her evil. Carol has always been a misery.
If you look at it from a logical point of few I not surprised its had more of these headlines than any other soap as to be honest it has indeed had more major downfalls with viewers than any soap. Look at when it only got 3 million viewers like 8 years ago no other soap out of the top3 when they have a lull hit as hard as easterners. Shows its not as loved through good and bad times as Ed or corrie
EE may well be on some kinda high at the moment but in the last 10 years more lows than highs with viewership than the others, tbh.
The reason EE gets more headlines in its bad periods is because of the licence fee and its usually only the Murdoch press that report it. For all people write about 2006 being a bad year for EE, It win every major award going during this period.
The 3.9 million episode actually only happened because it was a massive Emmerdale episode which had a 30 minute lead in. I can't remember if it was Cain's exit or the River House explosion. It may have even been something else. The episode after it was back at normal levels and if I'm not mistaken the BBC Three repeat for that episode is one of the best in BBC Three's history. Corrie has had its own record low ratings. It hit 4 million once a couple of years back. While Emmerdale has been as low as 4 million itself many times. Its not exclusive to EE.
From 2008 to 2010 - EastEnders actually increased its audience (mainly helped by ITV ditching the weekly hour long Emmerdale's), In 2010 it was very close to overtaking Corrie on a consistent day to day bases for the first time in its history and some how summer 2011 was the shows best share performance since 2004. EE has had way more highs these past decade than it has lows. Even this year EE is the only soap that is up on 2013. That can't be spun as bad.
Corrie has had its own fair share of bad press though. Michelle Collins and the whole ''too many gays'' thing was blamed for ratings dropping by almost 4 million a few years back. Most of that was led by the Daily Mail. I don't think I need to explain their agenda.
What more can EastEnders do ?
End.
I think the returns - except possibly Stacey - have been great for a sense of realism. I don't like Christian or Dean(o) but it makes sense and doesn't suggest a lack of ideas to me.
I'm not sure on some of the new characters though. There has been so much focus on the brilliant Carter family that the Cokers, Aleks and Donna have been sidelined a little. But that is probably deliberate so I shall wait and see.
I find myself enjoying the programme again, rather than watching out of habit.
I agree.
I agree 100% with this, but would add Dirty Den to the list of should never have been axed! And Roxy along with Ronnie must be the most useless characters in soap ever!
Stacey should have just returned when Lacey was finished with everything, at least Jean is back for a bit!
I'm not sure when Ronnie/Kat are back but not for a while yet although I know there's a brief bit of Ronnie this week.
It just makes stories loses momentum IMO. The Lucy story needs to take a bit of a backseat, let other stories come through although after this week, it seems like it might for a bit.
With ratings, the show has started to recover just as lighter nights & summer sport begins, ratings naturally decrease. The autumn will be the true test of the figures after it's been shunted to BBC2 for the Commonwealth Games (which will knock it's recovery).
It's still a work in progress, I'm sure there's characters DTC wants to maybe shed but it takes time. I presume we won't see much of Dexter/Fatboy from now on, I reckon they'll go.
Agreed. Good point. People love to hate it and vice versa it seems. See post below.
Due to it being on the BBC, EE is more accountable to its viewers/media it seems.
What purpose does Roxy serve anymore? She's not even depicted as a single mum really
.
I'm in the minority, I don't mind Dexter and Fat boy... Am I mad?
Wow, how original.
Alright sorcha?
All good SW? you?
Long time no thread off topic!
All good here interesting discussions.